Blog

 
Last week North Korea conducted a nuclear test and fired at least five short-range missiles. This week the rogue nation may conduct a long-range missile test. Collective criticism against North Korea’s actions have been somewhat understated, which no doubt will embolden the country to continue testing and launching.

Last week U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said there is no crisis. Today he said “there were some signs” that North Korea will launch a Taepodong-2, which reportedly has a range of 6,200 miles. (Source) In 2006, North Korea test-launched a Taepodong-3 missile, which failed.

The Christian Science Monitor reports that Israel is concerned that North Korea’s defiance will encourage fellow rogue nation Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. Gerald Steinberg, a political science professor at Bar Ilan University, told the paper that if “the Americans can’t show credibility on North Korea, then they won’t be able to go far. It’s a thermometer. The US has been threatening to take action against North Korea since the 1990s and the North Korea has been able to buy time. The Israeli concern is that’s exactly what will happen with Iran.”

It’s anyone’s guess what the Obama administration will do about North Korea besides downplaying the crisis.

Meanwhile, Reuters reports on “tougher responses” from the U.S. and our allies in Asia if North Korea continues its nuclear program. Gates said “other steps may be considered” if North Korea doesn’t disarm. A Pentagon official said the U.S. preferred six party talks, but admitted that such talks haven’t been effective against the rogue nation.

FOX News has posted a transcript from Greta Van Susteren’s show “On the Record.” News anchor Martha MacCallum interviewed retired Major General Bob Scales on May 29. An excerpt:

“MACCALLUM: All right, so it would seem that North Korea is a bit peeved, to put it mildly, that South Korea has joined this initiative with the United States and that they have — and as part of that initiative, they have the right to stop a ship. So that says to me that North Korea really wants to get some things on ships out of there and perhaps sold to other countries. And they’re doing quite a bit of advertising lately, aren’t they.

“SCALES: Well, that’s exactly right. And one of the reasons they fired these missiles is to demonstrate to their allies, people like Iran and Syria, Yemen, and so forth, that they have the technological capability to do this because, you know, they make several hundred million dollars off of sales of missiles and missile parts every year. And it’s that money that then fuels their nuclear weapons development and their missile development. So they need this money to keep coming in, in order for them to keep producing these weapons.”

 
Calm down, everyone. U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates says North Korea’s nuclear testing and missile launching are nothing to be alarmed about. (Source)

This week, North Korea conducted a nuclear test and fired at least five short-range missiles. Kim Jong-Il is flouting the U.N. Security Council’s resolutions, and President Barack Obama’s response has been restrained at best and nonchalant at worst. Now Gates is downplaying North Korea’s hostile acts.

“I don’t think that anybody in the administration thinks there is a crisis,” he told the Los Angeles Times. “What we do have, though, are two new developments that are very provocative, that are aggressive, accompanied by very aggressive rhetoric.” He added: “I do not think there is a need for us to reinforce our military presence in the South. Whatever responses there are have to be multilateral.”

Meanwhile, the U.S. and South Korea have raised alert levels. (Source) Earlier this week, the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea called South Korea “puppets” for taking the rogue state’s actions seriously and sending warships to the maritime border along with ours.

North and South Korea called a truce after the Korean War, but the two countries have never signed a peace treaty. Given North Korea’s defiance, they likely never will.

 
The big news this post-Memorial Day weekend is North Korea’s continued defiance in the face of international criticism. On Monday, North Korea reportedly conducted a nuclear test and fired three short-range missiles, which countries like China and Russia condemned. On Tuesday, the rogue state reportedly test-fired two more short-range missiles, and there’s talk of more launches for tomorrow. (Source)

South Korea said it would join the U.S. in intercepting ships from countries like North Korea carrying weapons. The defiant country has already stated it would consider declaring war if its ships were intercepted.

Sanctions against North Korea obliviously are ineffective.

As expected, the U.N. Security Council condemned North Korea’s actions in an emergency meeting on Memorial Day. President Barack Obama said, “By acting in blatant defiance of the United Nations Security Council, North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community. North Korea’s behavior increases tensions and undermines stability in Northeast Asia. Such provocations will only serve to deepen North Korea’s isolation.”

There’s no doubt the U.S. has the military might to do something about North Korea, but what, and more importantly, when? Last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the U.S. has 30 ground-based missile interceptors in place to counteract missiles from North Korea. He also said the Obama administration planned to shift funds away from weapons and research for future conflicts and focus on weapons needed for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 
In a U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the U.S. has 30 ground-based missile interceptors in place to counteract missiles from North Korea. (Source)

Gates also said the Obama administration intends to cut spending for additional interceptors, from 44 to 30. He said the administration has chosen to redirect funds to other systems and that 30 interceptors are sufficient.

At the same hearing, Gates said he wanted to shift funds away from weapons and research for future conflicts and focus on weapons needed for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. “We have to be prepared for the wars we are most likely to fight. Not just the wars we have traditionally been best suited to fight or threats we conjure up from potential adversaries who in the real world also have finite resources.”

Last month, North Korea launched a long-range Taepodong-2 rocket over the Pacific Ocean. The rocket didn’t attain orbiting altitude before it crashed into the Pacific. North Korea claims the launch was for peaceful and scientific purposes. Before the launch, Gates said the U.S. was not prepared to do anything about it but would have considered action had the missile headed for Hawaii.

Before the launch, Gates was hesitant and unsure whether his country would defend against North Korea? This is national defense in the Obama age.

 
The The Associated Press reports that Israel wants to buy a missile defense system from the U.S. for protection against short-range rockets and mortar fire. Israel has its eyes on the Vulcan-Phalanx cannon and radar system, and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak will ask Defense Secretary Robert Gates to sell the system to his country.

Made by defense contractor Raytheon, the Vulcan-Phalanx will house the Iron Dome, an anti-rocket shield Israel successfully tested earlier this month, and two additional missile systems. (The Iron Dome is designed to defend Israel from Hamas and Hizbullah rockets and also serves as a major component in a multi-layered missile defense system that includes the Arrow anti-ballistic missile shield.)

Faced with short-range weapon and mortar shell attacks, Israel needs an anti-rocket system to neutralize these threats. Protection against long-range weapons includes systems like the Arrow II, which would counter Iran’s Shahab-3 missile.

In related news, Iran has warned Israel not to attack its nuclear sites. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently called Israel a “most cruel and repressive racist regime” during a United Nations conference in Geneva. Iran is developing long-range missiles and a nuclear program, and countries like Iran and Syria have Israel in their sights.

Last year it was reported that Israel may preemptively strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, and Iran said it would retaliate by deploying the Shahab-3. Syria’s president said that if Israel attacks Iran, there would be “catastrophic consequences for the entire world.” Despite the tension, Israel is still interested in peace talks with these rogue nations.

 
What sounds like something straight out of a Stephen King novel is what the Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano describes could happen if a nuclear bomb, unseen and unheard, was detonated over North America.

Electrical systems and computers would shut down, and not just those in our home. Everything that requires electricity to work, from traffic signals to gas tanks, would cease to work. Chaos, everywhere. You don’t have to read fiction to imagine such a scenario. The reality is more probable than you think. Cafano writes:

“This scenario may sound like the plot of a science-fiction movie, but Bill Graham, former science adviser to President Reagan, says it’s a realistic portrayal of what would happen to the United States after a massive electromagnetic pulse from a nuclear explosion.

“The former deputy administrator for NASA now chairs the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. In July 2008, Graham testified before the House Armed Services Committee on the commission’s latest report. Only a handful of the committee’s 60 members showed up for the hearing.

“‘It’s obvious that there’s not very much interest,’ sighed Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., a committee member who pushed for the commission;s establishment. In a radio interview, another committee member actually derided the subject as ‘science fiction.’ Such mockery and indifference could very well come back to haunt the commission.”

If you think electromagnetic pulse devastation is far-fetched, remain skeptical at your own peril. As Carafano notes, massive mutual destruction-type attacks are less of a concern to the U.S. these days. More troublesome are the schemes of rogue states like Iran and North Korea with ballistic missile capability and terrorist groups that like to blow up people. Read the full text of Carafano’s article for examples of credible nuclear threats.

What naysayers and skeptics need to understand is that countries like Iran and North Korea clearly believe long-range ballistic missiles are worth having, and they’re committed to investing in and developing them. While they may not be capable of mass destruction, they grow closer to it every day.

Our Congress has demonstrated a lack of concern over the nuclear threats we face. Carafano notes:

“That indifference carries over into budgeting. Congress spends as little as it talks about missile defense. In the last appropriation, Congress cut the missile-defense budget and allocated a paltry $5 million to study the problem – about as much as it dedicated to “wood-utilization research” in the past fiscal year.

“For years, the common argument against missile defense was simply that it’s infeasible. However, technology has advanced steadily. Dozens of tests have been conducted successfully in recent years. Gen. Trey Obering, commander of the Missile Defense Agency that oversees the Pentagon’s missile-defense programs, says, ‘They used to say that you can’t hit a bullet with a bullet. Well, now we can hit a spot on a bullet with a bullet.’

“Another frequent complaint was that missile defense would cost too much. ‘Missile defense comprises less than one-70th of what the nation is spending each year for defense,’ writes missile defense expert Robert Pfaltzgraff. ‘And defense spending represents only about 4 percent of our national wealth as an expression of GDP. By reasonable standards, missile defense is a modest national security investment.’ Pfaltzgraff adds that those calculating the costs of missile defense should also add up the cost of a devastating missile strike in America.”

Days after North Korea launched a long-range missile, the Obama administration proposed $1.4 billion in cuts to missile defense. A five-year-old could see how counterintuitive that is. Why can’t the leader of the free world? Read the rest of Carafano’s informative and well-researched article at Legion.org.

(Image by Metatech)

 
Earlier this month, North Korea said it would launch a communications satellite sometime during the first week of April. The Associated Press reports that the U.S., Japan, and South Korea will be monitoring the launch.

The U.S. has sent missile-destroying ships to watch the situation. Japan has deployed Patriot missiles around Tokyo and interceptor-armed warships near the country, and South Korea is sending its Aegis-equipped destroyer to the area.

All three countries suspect North Korea is using the launch as a cover to test long-range missile technology, which would result in United Nations sanctions. After failing to give notification for previous launches, which the U.N. called dangerous and provocative, North Korea is providing ample warning this time around. North Korea knows the launch violates U.N. resolutions, but hopes issuing a warning will keep negative comments and admonitions to a minimum and provide China and Russia with an incentive to also buck U.N. resolutions.

Additionally, North Korea has detained a South Korean worker after he criticized the government, increasing tension between the two countries.

On Sunday, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the U.S. will not intercept the rocket.

“I think if we had an aberrant missile, one that was headed for Hawaii, that looked like it was headed for Hawaii or something like that, we might consider it,” Gates said on FOX News Sunday. “But I don’t think we have any plans to do anything like that at this point.”

 
Last week at a meeting with NATO defense ministers in Poland, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said President Barack Obama would take “into consideration” Russia’s concerns about our agreed-upon plans to build missile defense bases in Poland and the Czech Republic. (AP)

It looks like what we’ve been blogging about for the past few months is true: the Obama administration hasn’t decided whether we’ll honor our agreements with the two countries. Russia claims to believe the bases would pose a threat and wants to establish a joint missile defense system.

“I would…reiterate what Vice President Biden said at Munich — that this administration does believe the time has come to reset the relationship with Russia and move forward,” Gates said.

Although Poland and the Czech Republic already signed agreements with the U.S. to build the bases—with NATO’s approval—the agreements likely will not be honored under the new president. We assume the two countries are remaining hopeful.

 
In July, we mentioned that the U.S. was considering deploying missile defense X-band radar to Israel to protect against possible Iranian attacks. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Robert Gates, secretary of the U.S. Department of Defense, agreed to “explore” the possibility of sharing missile early warning launch information and funding two projects that would defend against short-range rockets and mortars.
 
Israeli state radio reported yesterday that the U.S. has carried out its plan to deploy missile defense radar, although a defense ministry spokesperson denied the deployment. The radar has a range of over 1,240 miles and is situated in the country’s south. According to the AFP, the base will be staffed by 120 members of the U.S. Army.

(Source: AFP)

 
The U.S. and the Czech Republic signed an agreement last week that facilities the development of a missile defense radar base in the Czech Republic. Negotiations for the base took years, but both sides quickly came to an agreement in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Georgia. The base may be operational by 2013. (AFP)

Raytheon and Boeing are developing three prototype air-to-ground missiles, thanks to a $125 million contract awarded by the U.S. Army. Expected to be ready by 2016, the missiles will be made for helicopters, fixed-wing aircraft, and unmanned air drones. (Boston Business Journal)
 
Last week, Russia successfully launched a Bulava-M submarine-based ballistic missile from the ballistic missile nuclear submarine Dimitry Donskoi. Russia plans to adopt Bulava-M missiles for service with its navy and will commission the first Borey-class strategic nuclear submarine by 2009. (RIA Novosti)