Dauren Koptleuov
Recent Korean missiles launch as well as nuclear weapon testing escalated huge concerns in the international community. The United States responded with sending naval missile cruisers to the sea territories near Korean peninsula (Mirror, 2017). At the same time, Russia is witnessed to reinforce the border security with the North Korea, as the global unrest upsurges (Mirror, 2017). According to the Mirror (2017), Russia is taking precautious measures, because the consequences of US target attack on Korean nuclear storages may reach the territory of Russian Federation. While Russia is trying to alleviate the situation by calling sides for responsibility, the escalation of conflict may lead to unexpected and extremely destructive outcomes.
While the United States are not directly threatening, North Korea responds that US naval deployment is a severe “act of aggression” that certainly makes American side responsible in any “catastrophic consequences” that may take place as a result of conflict escalation (CNN, 2017). It is safe to assume that if the United States eventually decides to commit a missile stroke, North Korea will answer with all their nuclear might. Considering the personalities of leaders from both sides, who actually have an access to nuclear launch, the likelihood of nuclear conflict can only increase. As North Korean nuclear tests are considered as violating the international law (Reuters, 2016), the United States, as every rational member-state of international community, expectedly wants to make it stop. However, despite the visible difficulty of situation, there are some means of resolving other than preventive strikes or any other manifestation of violence.
As a political leader, Kim Jong Un is one of the most discussed ones in the modern days. He is known for extremely repressing behavior, fully totalitarian outlook, non-compliance with international norms and regulations and the haircut, of course. The United States are not likely to make diplomatic deals with such dictator, but Blair (2013) in his work about coup attempts does not propose to make deals with tyrants. The author advices the US military leaders to influence military leaders from authoritarian regimes so that they would raise the army against the despotic leader (Blair, 2013, Chapter 6). Of course, the example of Philippines by Blair (2013) does not resemble the North Korean one by several reasons. First, the military leader of North Korea is Kim Jong Un himself. Secondly, there is no protests that can escalate the armed conflict between civilians and ruling power. However, citizens would most probably hate (even if they do not openly demonstrate it) such leader that promotes the politics of oppression, constant violation of human rights and free will. Moreover, there are probably a decent amount of such people among the political and military elites, considering the barbaric repression methods of Jong Un. Therefore, the United States should certainly seek to try the method described by Blair, either with the help of its intelligence or entrism. Finally, there is a little possibility of elite rejecting the coup proposition on the threshold of mutually assured destruction.
_____________
Links and references:
Blair, Dennis C. 2013. Military Engagement: Influencing Armed Forces Worldwide to Support
Democratic Transitions. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/vladimir-putin-boosts-military-firepower-10259767
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/10/politics/us-aircraft-carrier-carl-vinson-north-korea-strike-capabilities/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-russia-idUSKBN0UK14Y20160106
Recent Korean missiles launch as well as nuclear weapon testing escalated huge concerns in the international community. The United States responded with sending naval missile cruisers to the sea territories near Korean peninsula (Mirror, 2017). At the same time, Russia is witnessed to reinforce the border security with the North Korea, as the global unrest upsurges (Mirror, 2017). According to the Mirror (2017), Russia is taking precautious measures, because the consequences of US target attack on Korean nuclear storages may reach the territory of Russian Federation. While Russia is trying to alleviate the situation by calling sides for responsibility, the escalation of conflict may lead to unexpected and extremely destructive outcomes.
While the United States are not directly threatening, North Korea responds that US naval deployment is a severe “act of aggression” that certainly makes American side responsible in any “catastrophic consequences” that may take place as a result of conflict escalation (CNN, 2017). It is safe to assume that if the United States eventually decides to commit a missile stroke, North Korea will answer with all their nuclear might. Considering the personalities of leaders from both sides, who actually have an access to nuclear launch, the likelihood of nuclear conflict can only increase. As North Korean nuclear tests are considered as violating the international law (Reuters, 2016), the United States, as every rational member-state of international community, expectedly wants to make it stop. However, despite the visible difficulty of situation, there are some means of resolving other than preventive strikes or any other manifestation of violence.
As a political leader, Kim Jong Un is one of the most discussed ones in the modern days. He is known for extremely repressing behavior, fully totalitarian outlook, non-compliance with international norms and regulations and the haircut, of course. The United States are not likely to make diplomatic deals with such dictator, but Blair (2013) in his work about coup attempts does not propose to make deals with tyrants. The author advices the US military leaders to influence military leaders from authoritarian regimes so that they would raise the army against the despotic leader (Blair, 2013, Chapter 6). Of course, the example of Philippines by Blair (2013) does not resemble the North Korean one by several reasons. First, the military leader of North Korea is Kim Jong Un himself. Secondly, there is no protests that can escalate the armed conflict between civilians and ruling power. However, citizens would most probably hate (even if they do not openly demonstrate it) such leader that promotes the politics of oppression, constant violation of human rights and free will. Moreover, there are probably a decent amount of such people among the political and military elites, considering the barbaric repression methods of Jong Un. Therefore, the United States should certainly seek to try the method described by Blair, either with the help of its intelligence or entrism. Finally, there is a little possibility of elite rejecting the coup proposition on the threshold of mutually assured destruction.
_____________
Links and references:
Blair, Dennis C. 2013. Military Engagement: Influencing Armed Forces Worldwide to Support
Democratic Transitions. Washington, D.C: Brookings Institution Press.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/vladimir-putin-boosts-military-firepower-10259767
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/10/politics/us-aircraft-carrier-carl-vinson-north-korea-strike-capabilities/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-russia-idUSKBN0UK14Y20160106
No comments:
Post a Comment