The Rational Irrationalism of North Korea

North Korea keeps ratcheting up the threat index with pronouncements that they're going to unleash nuclear annihilation against the US and South Korea. The threats are definitely crazy, but I think they've been acting as rational irrationalists. What do I mean by this? It means that they're crazy like a fox and have a definite strategy here. They know from past history that crazy gets the goods. Kim Il Song got the West to give humanitarian aid. Kim Jong Il threatened nuclear war and got aid. Now? Kim Jong Un threatens apocalypse and the endgame is to get aid.

Everyone knows the North Korean economy is in shambles. We know it. South Korea knows it. Even the North Koreans know it. They sacked their Prime Minister and replaced him with a guy who was previously sacked for not getting the economy going. The North wouldn't do that unless things were dire.

About the only thing going for the North right now is that they've got nuclear tech and some intermediate range missiles that might work but aren't necessarily accurate. It's enough of a threat though to be taken seriously, which is why the US, South Koreans, and Japanese are moving in theater missile defense systems and orienting their defensive capabilities accordingly. At the same time, the US/SK/Japanese are moving in assets that could deter what could be the next phase of North Korean saber rattling - a small scale provocation such as sinking a South Korean boat, shelling disputed South Korean islands, or threatening South Korean fishermen.

The North has been thoroughly indoctrinated by the Kim clan to consider the US to be equivalent of the Soviets in Red Dawn. Evil that must be thwarted from worldwide supremacy and to protect the honor of the homeland. All that changes is instead of shouting Wolverines!, the North is shouting Juche!

What we take to be defensive action, like moving in assets to the region in response to North claims of nuclear Armageddon is considered a further threat that North Korean leadership considers is justification for their earlier claims.

Now, are the North really so crazy as to light the Korean peninsula aflame, let alone carry out their nuclear threats? If the North doesn't get what it is demanding, would it be really willing to attack the South?

I definitely see the North restarting their shuttered nuclear program, and it also is a bargaining chip that the North could use in essentially shaking down the west for more aid (which the North will spin as winning and tribute to North Korean success).

I don't think they are willing to launch a full scale conflict, but can the South really take that risk? It's places like Seoul that will be on the front line of a North Korean attack given its proximity to the DMZ. The North might be convinced that they could manage the element of surprise and get in a devastating first blow, but it would only be a matter of time before Western technological superiority demolishes the military the North has (and which is largely stuck in the 1960s both with ground and air assets).

Moreover, the Chinese would probably step in to moderate the North's bellicosity before things go wrong for the North. The Chinese don't want a refugee crisis on their border, which is exactly what would happen if the North goes to war. China has trading relations with the South, and an economic hit to the region would hurt the global economy as well.

Is North Korea Contemplating New Nuclear Test As It Readies Missile For Launch

North Korea has been quite busy in the past couple of days with pronouncements about preparing for a test of a new long rang missile. Now, South Korea is warning of possible preparations by the North to conduct a new underground nuclear weapons test. All this comes just months after Kim Jong Un assumed the role of national leader following the death of his father Kim Jong Il. The missile test and potential nuclear test are another sign that Jong Un is following the path laid down by his father - to use nuclear blackmail to obtain still more concessions on humanitarian aid to help feed the nation:

The South Korean intelligence report says it is highly probable that after the long-range rocket launch, North Korea will use the ensuing international condemnation as an excuse to go ahead with the nuclear test in Punggye-ri, the site in the country's northeast where the other two tests were conducted in 2006 and 2009.

The report, which said such a test would be considered a grave provocation, includes satellite images that it claims were filmed recently and show the final stages of a tunnel being dug at the site.

The photos show an unusual pile of earth and sand near the opening of the tunnel, and the report says this pile has been slowly increasing since March.

North Korean state media have not made an announcement regarding plans for a new nuclear test. Two senior U.S. officials said the United States also had reason to believe that the North was planning such an action.

"Once again this shows ...they know how to manipulate the world," said Andrei Lankov of Seoul's Kookmin University.

"If they do a missile launch and in few months a successful nuclear test, especially a uranium based nuclear device, it will send a very strong message to the world. The same message they always want to deliver -- we are here, we are dangerous, unpredictable and it's better to deal with us by giving us monetary and food concessions."

Japan is readying missile defense systems ahead of the North Korean test launch. The North continues to claim that it is a test of a civilian missile system and experts who have seen the missile note that it is configured for civilian purposes, but the missile would provide the North with critical data for use and incorporation in the North's long range missile program. The North has repeated given and/or sold technical data on missile technologies to countries such as Pakistan and Iran, and the North has also been a source of worry about nuclear proliferation.

The missile test is timed to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il Sung, Jong Un's grandfather and founder of the North Korean regime.

Putting Iran's Elections Into Context

Iran's carrying out elections and the results wont really shed all that much light on who wields power in the country. Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei basically picks and chooses who runs through the Guardian Council. There are hardliner factions, including those who have backed Khamenei's previous chosen one - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (who is term-limited and can't run for a third term as President).

The election basically pits what media outlets refer to as Ahmadinejad's faction versus Khamenei's faction.

Iran's supreme leader urged Iranians to vote in large numbers as the country held parliamentary elections Friday, saying a high turnout would send a strong message to the enemies of the nation in the nuclear standoff with the West.

The balloting for the 290-member parliament is the first major voting since the disputed re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in June 2009 and the mass protests and crackdowns that followed.

It is unlikely to change Iran's course over major policies — including its controversial nuclear program — regardless of who wins, but it may shape the political landscape for a successor to Ahmadinejad in 2013.

That's not really accurate.

While Ahmadinejad has tried to expand his power, Khamenei slapped him down. There was an incident where Ahmadinejad attempted to sack a minister, but Khamenei restored the minister to that post within days. That's a reminder of where power really lies in the country and should be a message that media outlets really take away from the kabuki play of elections.

Iran's mullahs get to pick and choose who runs for office, and they do so with the blessing of the Supreme Leader. If the mullahs don't like the candidate - they don't even get on the ballot.

Opposition leaders, including Mirhussein Mousavi, are under house arrest. Mousavi had run against Ahmadinejad in the disputed elections and lost. Massive protests erupted across Iran and it was violently suppressed, leaving the opposition groups under arrest and the watchful gaze of the Iranian security forces loyal to Ahmadinejad and Khamenei.

Taken as a whole, the elections really don't indicate who runs the country or whether the Iranian regime is shifting policies since the power is dictated from the same person - Supreme Leader Khamenei.

Even opposition groups in Iran recognize this - that the statements coming from Khamenei about voting in the election as a poke in the eye of the West (US) is just propaganda to prop up canddiates that have been selected to run by the same cabal that has run the country since the 1979 revolution. It's not change - it's rearranging deck chairs.

Iran's economic situation remains dire and Khamenei is using all manner of tactics to ensure that his power is preserved. At the same time, Iran's political and religious leaders are invoking the crisis with the West over Iran's nuclear program as a way to get out the vote, even though most Iranians are far more concerned over their economic situation.

North Korea Agrees To Moratorium on Nuclear Weapons, Missile Development

This is being hailed as a significant breakthrough, and it should be. However, we need to be vigilant that North Korea isn't double dealing - saying one thing to the US all while engaging in clandestine operations or proliferation activities.

The United States said Wednesday North Korea has agreed to suspend nuclear activities and accept a moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile tests, in a breakthrough in negotiations with the secretive communist nation.

The announcement comes little more than two months after the death of longtime ruler Kim Jong Il, and suggests North Korea has met the key U.S. preconditions for restarting multi-nation disarmament-for-aid talks that the North withdrew from in 2009.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the North has agreed to allow International Atomic Energy inspectors to verify and monitor the moratorium on uranium enrichment and confirm disablement of its nuclear reactor at Yongbyon.

Her statement says the US will meet with North Korea to finalize details for a proposed package of 240,000 metric tons of food aid.

North Korea issued a similar, although differently worded statement released simultaneously in Pyongyang.

An unidentified spokesman from North Korea's Foreign Ministry said in its statement carried by the state-run news agency that the North agreed to the nuclear moratoriums and the allowance of U.N. inspectors "with a view to maintaining positive atmosphere" for the U.S.-North Korea talks.

The announcement follows talks in Beijing last week between U.S. and North Korean negotiators, the first since negotiations were suspended after Kim's death in December from a heart attack.

Before his death, the U.S. and North Korea were close to such an agreement, which appears to meets U.S. preconditions for restarting the six-nation talks suspended three years ago.

Allowing inspectors to review operations at known nuclear facilities is an improvement, and may mean that the regime under Kim Jong Un is moving away from the militaristic tone set by his father. It may also mean that the regime recognizes just how bad its socio-economic conditions are and that the need for food aid is finally driving the regime to curtail its military programs. The agricultural situation in the country may be even worse than the regime is letting on.

That may be wishful thinking - but if the regime has to begin focusing on improving its agricultural resources so that the nation doesn't starve while curtailing the nuclear and missile programs, then that's a significant accomplishment of the sanctions regime in place.

Ranking Nuclear Security By Country

The Nuclear Threat Initiative, which is headed by former US Senator Sam Nunn, has released a study of 32 nations that have nuclear capabilities - both nuclear weapons and civilian nuclear programs - that ranks each country by taking into account on-site security, political stability, economic conditions, security and safety, international commitments (such as nuclear nonproliferation), and other factors.

The 122-page report is titled the “Nuclear Materials Security Index” and its accompanying Web site is www.ntiindex.org. Australia came out on top, the report says, because it has reduced its holdings of weapon-useable materials to “a small amount” and did well on the overall indicators. It received 94 out of 100 possible points.

Among the nine countries known to possess nuclear arms, Britain came out on top with a score of 79. The report credits its high status to concrete security measures as well as “its commitment to and follow-through on international obligations.”

The United States scored 78 — a fairly good ranking, the evaluators said, considering its possession of a sprawling nuclear complex that dates to the earliest days of the atomic era.

Japan received a score of 68 because of its vast stores of plutonium, its relatively poor measures with security personnel and its lack of an independent regulatory agency.

A surprise nation on the list is Iran. It claims no ambitions for making bomb fuel even while global leaders worry that its growing atomic program seeks just that capability. The study team said that Iran was included in the analysis because of its possession of highly enriched uranium for a research reactor in Tehran.

Iran received an overall score of 46, its standing undercut by what the report judged to be corruption, political instability, and poor procedures for nuclear control and accounting. Of 32 nations, it ranked 30th.

Pakistan, with a security score of 41 and a nuclear complex that is undergoing rapid growth, ranked 31st.

North Korea came in last with a score of 37. The report cited a total of 10 indicators that came in below the global average, including site and transportation security as well as political stability.

The full report is here.

The index is based on information that is widely available and doesn't require special intelligence gathering means. Israel's ranking is based on the fact that the country refuses to divulge information about its program - refusing to confirm or deny its nuclear program. Thus, security protocols are rated low, even though its believed to be quite secure.

It's an issue repeated with China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea.

As for international treaties and agreements, more than 70% of countries without nuclear materials have ratified the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism (ICSANT), but several countries with weapons-usable nuclear materials have signed but not ratified the agreement: Argentina, Australia, Canada, France, Israel, Italy, Norway, Sweden, and the United States. Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, and Vietnam haven't signed the convention.

Ultimately, the goal is reducing the chances of nuclear weapons proliferation, and exposing the public to the dangers of weapons materials falling into the wrong hands.