Tag Archives: united nations security council

March 22, 2013 · 01:20

Reflections on the Invasion of Iraq: 10 Years Later in Light of Nuremberg

saddam0978

“If certain acts of violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or whether Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us.” Justice Robert Jackson International Conference on Military Trials, London, 1945, Dept. of State Pub.No. 3080 (1949), p.330.

In March 2003 I like many of us on active duty at the time saw the nation embark on a crusade to overthrow an admittedly thuggish criminal head of state, Saddam Hussein. The images of the hijacked airliners crashing into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were still relatively fresh in our minds. The “evidence” that most of us had “seen,” the same that most Americans and people around the world were shown led many of us to believe that Saddam was involved in those attacks in some manner and that he posed a threat to us.

Now it wasn’t that we didn’t have doubts about it or even the wisdom of invading Iraq. It didn’t matter that there was also credible evidence that maybe what we were being told was not correct, and it didn’t matter that some of our closest allies voted against a mandate to invade Iraq in the United Nations Security Council. We were emotionally charged by the events of 9-11 and “we knew” that Saddam was a “bad guy.” We also believed that we could not be defeated. We had defeated the Iraqis in 1991 and we were stronger and they weaker than that time.

We really didn’t know much about Iraq, its history, people, culture and certainly we paid little attention to the history of countries that had invaded and occupied Iraq in the past. T.E. Lawrence, the legendary Lawrence of Arabia wrote in August of 1920 about his own country’s misbegotten invasion and occupation of Iraq, or as it was known then Mesopotamia.

“The people of England have been led in Mesopotamia into a trap from which it will be hard to escape with dignity and honour. They have been tricked into it by a steady withholding of information. The Bagdad communiqués are belated, insincere, incomplete. Things have been far worse than we have been told, our administration more bloody and inefficient than the public knows. It is a disgrace to our imperial record, and may soon be too inflamed for any ordinary cure. We are to-day not far from a disaster.”

The sad thing is that the same could have been written of the United States occupation by 2004.

But even more troubling than the words of Lawrence are the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials. Somehow as a historian who has spent a great deal of time studying the Nazi period and its aftermath I cannot help but look back in retrospect and wonder what Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson and the other Nuremberg prosecutors would have done had they had some of our leaders in the dock instead of the Nazis.

776px-Nuremberg-1-

The indictments against the Nazis at Nuremberg are chilling if we were to be held to the same standard that we held the Nazis leaders at Nuremberg. True, we did not have massive death camps or exterminate millions of defenseless people, nor did we run slave labor factories, but we did like they launched a war of aggression under false pretense against a country that had not attacked us.

At Nuremberg we charged twenty top Nazi political officials, as well as police and high ranking military officers with war crimes. The indictments included:

Count One: Conspiracy to Wage Aggressive War: This count addressed crimes committed before the war began, showing a plan by leaders to commit crimes during the war.

Count Two: Waging Aggressive War, or “Crimes Against Peace” which included “the planning, preparation, initiation, and waging of wars of aggression, which were also wars in violation of international treaties, agreements, and assurances.”

Count Three: War Crimes. This count encompassed the more traditional violations of the law of war already codified in the Geneva and Hague Conventions including treatment of prisoners of war, slave labor, and use of outlawed weapons.

Count Four: Crimes Against Humanity, which covered the actions in concentration camps and other death rampages.

While count four, Crimes Against Humanity would be difficult if not impossible to bring to trial because there was nothing in the US and Coalition war in Iraq that remotely compares to that of what the Nazis were tried, some US and British leaders could probably have been successful prosecuted by Jackson and the other prosecutors under counts one through three.

The fact is that none of the reasons given for the war by the Bush Administration were demonstrated to be true. Senior US and British officials knowing this could be tried and very probably convicted on counts one and two. We also know that some military and intelligence personnel have been convicted of crimes that would fall under count three.

r-SADDAM-HUSSEIN-large570

Saddam Hussein was a war criminal. He was also a brutal dictator who terrorized and murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people. But we went to war over his alleged ties to Al Qaeda and WMDs and he had not attacked us. Looking back at history and using the criteria that we established at Nuremberg I have no doubt that had Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld been in the dock that Justice Jackson would have destroyed them and the court would have convicted them.

So 10 years, nearly 5000 US military personnel dead, 32,000 wounded, over 100,000 afflicted with PTSD, and other spiritual and psychological injuries, with an estimated 22 veterans committing suicide every day; somewhere between 1 and 2 trillion dollars spent, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead, wounded and displaced from their homes and a country destroyed and still in turmoil. And somehow those that decided to take us to war roam free. They write books defending their actions and appear on “news” programs hosted by their media allies who 10 years ago helped manipulate the American public, still traumatized by the events of 9-11-2001 to support the war.

nuremberg-jackson-10400

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=No06Lwk_TAg

Saddam and many of his henchmen are dead or rotting in Iraqi prisons for their crimes against the Iraqi people. However good this may be one has to ask if how it happened was legal or justified under US or International Law, if it was worth the cost in blood, treasure or international credibility. Likewise why have none of the men and women who plotted, planned and launched the war been held the standard that we as a nation helped establish and have used against Nazi leaders and others?

If we cannot ask that and wrestle with this then we as a nation become no better than the Germans who sought minimize their responsibility for the actions of their leaders, and in doing so enable future leaders to feel that they can do the same with impunity. That is a terrible precedent.

Peace

Padre Steve+

About these ads

Leave a Comment

Filed under History, iraq,afghanistan, middle east

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 21, 2011 · 23:59

Damned if you do and Damned if you Don’t: The Allied Intervention in Libya

Libyan Rebels gather around a destroyed T-72 outside Benghazi

War is the unfolding of miscalculations.
Barbara Tuchman

Back on the 9th of March I wrote this closing line to an article entitled The Guns of March where I discussed the developing situation in Libya and the really terrible options that world and regional leaders had in response to Muammar Gaddafi’s criminal actions against his own people. I concluded that article with this statement.

“There are many possibilities for the situation in Libya to get worse and potentially engulf the region in a war that no one wants or really is prepared for.

We can only see what develops but there are no good options only options of bad or worse. Will the region like Europe in 1914 be engulfed in war where there are no winners or will somehow the situation be resolved before it can get that far?”

It is obvious to all that the region stands a very good chance of becoming engulfed in a regional war unless the rebels drive Gaddafi from power, Gaddafi steps down on his own or he is killed or captured. Gaddafi has promised a “long war” against the “colonial and crusader” enemy.

Gaddafi Defiant

In the days since I wrote the referenced article the Arab League spoke up in support of establishing a no-fly zone and the United Nations Security Council voted for member nations to enforce a no-fly zone and take “all necessary measures” in order to stop Gaddafi’s forces attacks on other Libyans. By the time the Security Council acted Gaddafi’s forces had retaken many rebel held cities inflicting great slaughter on civilians and were on the outskirts of the rebel capital Benghazi with Gaddafi threatening to send his forces “house to house” to kill the opposition and promising to show no mercy.  Within a day French and British aircraft were flying missions and striking the spearhead of Gaddafi’s forces outside of Benghazi and United States Navy ships were launching Tomahawk Cruise Missiles at the Libyan air defense system. They were joined by aircraft from the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force as well as Canada, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Norway, Denmark and Qatar.  Gaddafi’s forces were decimated outside of Benghazi and forced to retreat and a renewed rebel force, this time acting more like a military organization began a pursuit which has reached Ajdabiya.  In the west Gaddafi’s forces continue to attack the towns of Misrata and Zintan and according to observers and medical personnel inflicting heavy casualties on civilians.

President Obama in a briefing

Around the world there is much criticism of the operation as well as support. In the United States representatives as diverse as Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are raising concerns on the Constitutional issues of the intervention in that President Obama did not secure the approval of Congress prior to sending American forces into battle. Kucinich even calls it an impeachable offense.  Likewise a diverse assembly of politicians, former military and executive branch officials including those with experience at the State Department, the United Nations, NATO and the Middle East are voicing their concerns about the fact that the end state of the operation is not defined and about the possibility of mission creep. The administration has not helped matters in sending a number of messages over the past few days of a desired end state. It is obvious that President Obama did not want this fight nor did he want it to appear that we were again leading an attack on an Arab nation.  His hesitancy has led to some conservatives attacking his lack of decisiveness even as other conservatives criticize his decision to join the military operations. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has been outspoken in his opposition to becoming involved in another war and seems to want U.S. involvement to decrease sooner rather than later.

Rebels with damaged 152mm Self Propelled Howitzer

The situation is still evolving by the hour and one thing is clear. The outcome is very unclear and the repercussions across the region are also uncertain. One problem is the apparent discontinuity in U.S. and Western policy to various despotic Arab regimes, supporting the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, a military operation against Gaddafi in Libya and very muted and lukewarm support to popular political movements in Bahrain and Yemen. The Bahraini demonstrations have been put down with the help of Saudi forces but in Yemen numerous influential military officers have taken their units to support the Yemeni protestors. Of course the situation in all of these nations is different with the exception of the fact that all are ruled by long term undemocratic and repressive regimes of varying degree. Likewise actors in each country are different as are the geo-political interests of the United States.

A friend of mine pointed out to me that we are not viewed as “the good guys” in much of the Arab World as much as we see ourselves as such. I think that is true to a large extent because of foreign policy choices of the past century in regard to the Arab World as well as the past decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan where even today photos taken by a rogue Army unit of soldiers posing with the mutilated and dead bodies enemies of the enemy further degrade opinion in the region against us.  But we are also the hope of many of those in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and other nations and in those places and others popular uprisings have called out to us for political support and in the case of the Libyans military protection.

Parallels of 1989 in the fall of the Soviet Empire in Eastern Europe are drawn by the optimistic observers of what has been called the “Arab Spring.” However as much as I would like to believe that this is the case I think the miscalculations of 1914 are more readily apparent. There is nothing simple about what is going on and it seems to me that the region is sinking into a war with very unpredictable and grave consequences. Those consequences will probably with us for a generation was were the unanticipated outcomes of the First World War. Of course one of those outcomes was the breakup of the Ottoman Empire and the arbitrary redrawing of boundaries and selection of leaders in the newly created Arab nations and emirates by the victorious Allies. That is something that we are dealing with even as I finish this article.

As I wrote in another article I believe that acting to prevent the slaughter of Libyans by Gaddafi was the right thing to do.  Unfortunately as most observers know the people of Libya will not be safe unless Gaddafi leaves power. I think by backing Gaddafi into a corner early, even before he began his offensive against what were peaceful protestors and not giving him a face saving way out that we may have brought about a war that no one wanted and has few possible good endings. We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t.

Peace

Padre Steve+

3 Comments

Filed under Foreign Policy, History, middle east, Military, national security

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 20, 2011 · 23:42

Strike on Libya: The Unknown outcome of Operation Odyssey Dawn

Libyan Rebels among tanks and vehicles destroyed by coalition air strikes outside Benghazi (AFP photo)

“No plan survives contact with the enemy.” Field Marshal Helmuth Von Molkte the Elder

“War is the province of chance. In no other sphere of human activity must such a margin be left for this intruder. It increases the uncertainty of every circumstance and deranges the course of events.”
- Karl von Clausewitz

Under the authority of a United Nations Security Council resolution the military forces of a number of NATO nations began air and missile strikes against Libyan air defenses command a control facilities and ground forces.  While the United States and British Royal Navies lobbed salvoes of Tomahawk cruise missiles aircraft from France, Britain, the United States launched the initial air strikes. They have been joined by or soon will be joined by aircraft from Italy, Spain, Denmark, Norway, Canada and Qatar, the first Arab nation to participate. A number of other Arab countries may join the force as operations move from air strikes to the enforcement of the no-fly zone itself. The French Navy has deployed the nuclear aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle from Toulon and it will join the naval forces in conducting air strikes and enforce the no-fly zone.

Air strikes have significantly degraded Libya’s air defenses and blasted Libyan forces arrayed against the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. The attacks on the ground forces stopped the Libyan attack in its tracks and the rebels have returned to the advance after appearing to be on the verge of a last stand against Gaddafi’s forces. In the past few days Gaddafi and his son Saif Al Islam Gaddafi have said that they would destroy the revolt and show “no mercy” in doing so. It is my belief that Libyan military officers and forces which have been “on the fence” will join the revolt in short order as the rebel forces renew their advance to the west as their loyalty to the regime is tenuous at best.

The strikes though extensive seem to have avoided doing to the Libyan people what was done to the Iraqi people and not targeted power plants or other infrastructure needed by the Libyan people. In other words NATO is trying to make sure that the Libyan people do not suffer for Gaddafi’s crimes. Gaddafi is trying to play up the attack as an attack against Libya by the “Crusader or Colonial enemy.”

Gaddafi has said that he will wage a “long war” and that he would arm a “million civilians” as loyalists gathered in his compound to act as a human shield to protect Gaddafi.  Gaddafi is known for his propaganda and his ruthlessness so we have to believe that he will at least attempt to resist but arming a million civilians is likely beyond his logistical capabilities while under heavy bombardment. The United States and NATO have said that they have not targeted Gaddafi but of course as everyone knows no one would object if Gaddafi happened to be in the neighborhood of a military target.

As the operation is in its early stages it is unknown how it will turn out. Morally and under the United Nations charter it is the right thing to do as Gaddafi was killing civilians and on the verge of killing many more and making the humanitarian crisis even worse. Unfortunately when any military operation is undertaken the consequences are and outcomes are never pre-determined. One hopes that the strikes will keep Gaddafi from killing more of his own people and causing greater chaos in the region. One also hopes that it will encourage the pro-democracy and secular movements that began in Iran but was crushed but which has taken root in Tunisia and Egypt to continue to spread across the Middle East. One hopes that other Arab nations will help Libya recover from Gaddafi and do what is right for the Libyans and for their own people. One also hopes that the strikes will level the playing field enough for the rebels to overthrow Gaddafi and bring him to justice.  So analysts in the Middle East believe that this will be the case. Al Jazeera reports that “Faysal Itani, deputy head of Middle East and North Africa forecasting at Exclusive Analysis tells Reuters that Gaddafi’s use of heavy weaponry against civilians has narrows his options considerably. He says: The doors are really shut for negotiation …  We think Gaddafi will be killed, or commit suicide or simply run away. It’s over.”

Of course one never knows. Gaddafi has stated that he has issued a cease fire but witnesses in Misrata which has been under heavy attack for the past week state that Gaddafi’s forces are still waging a campaign against civilians in that city. Likewise as Nicholas Burns a former United States Undersecretary of State notes that “one of the gambles that Britain, France and the United States, and indeed the Arab League, have taken is not having an agreement on what the mission is. Is the coalition trying to protect civilians in harm’s way, or in essence trying to overthrow Gaddafi? The coalition has intervened in a civil war on behalf of one of the protagonists. They have got to straighten out exactly what they are trying to accomplish.”

That is a big question mark. The real danger in this kind of unscripted intervention is the unforeseen consequences of each action taken. Even an action undertaken with the noblest of reasons can run afoul of unforeseen and undesirable outcomes. Thus only time will tell and we can only hope that freedom comes to Libya and that the bloodshed will end, hopefully with the Gaddafi regime thrown upon the ash heap of history by the Libyan people.

The die has been cast….

Peace

Padre Steve+

 

2 Comments

Filed under Foreign Policy, History, middle east, Military

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 17, 2011 · 23:58

All necessary Measures….the Coming End of the Gaddafi Regime

Gaddafi (Reuters photo)

After weeks of dithering the United Nations Security Council has authorized a “No Fly Zone” and authorized “all necessary measures” to protect civilians from the onslaught of Muammar Gaddafi’s military.  The vote came after days of urging by the French, British, the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Arab League and belatedly the United States. The vote of 10 for and 5 abstentions authorizes member nations to act together to protect civilians in Libya and comes as Gaddafi has threatened to attack the rebel capital of Benghazi and to “show no mercy” in doing so. Gaddafi responded to the vote by proclaiming “The UN Security Council has no mandate. We don’t acknowledge their resolutions” and he promised to respond harshly to any UN-sponsored attacks stating “If the world is crazy, we will be crazy too.”

While Gaddafi pledged to mount an attack against Benghazi tonight his forces were repulsed for the first time by rebel forces at Ajdabiya with the rebels using tanks and artillery of their own for the first time. Gaddafi’s air force launched attacks on Benghazi but it is my assessment that these strikes were to instill terror in the civilian population and break the back of rebel supporters. His announcement that his forces were coming “tonight” was obviously a propaganda claim.

It is true that the situation on the ground has shifted in favor of Gaddafi’s forces and that they have enjoyed a run of success over the past week and a half. However the success is illusory as it came at the expense of ill equipped and trained rebel forces in the western part of the country near the main operating bases of the forces that Gaddafi has employed with the greatest effect. Likewise his success east of his tribal home of Sirte has come against rebel forces which had advanced too far and had neither the training or firepower to hold the ground that they had taken. Deployed on open ground with no air support they were no match for Gaddafi’s forces. The further east Gaddafi’s forces go the more that they will face military forces which went over to the rebels, forces that will do better than those in the west and this was evident today at Ajdalbiya.

The repulse at Ajdabiya is significant and more significant than some people will believe. Gaddafi’s Army is now operation far from their home bases and the trek across the Libyan Desert is probably facing logistical problems. The first is that they have had to advance hundreds of miles. His armored forces are probably not well maintained and likely are experiencing mechanical difficulties especially since logistic support in most of the Arab World’s militaries is not a high priority. Lacking skilled mechanics and technical personnel they have probably lost a good number of vehicles. Photos of Libyan forces show no military cargo trucks accompanying the Army which indicates to me that the pro-Gaddafi forces are operating at the edge of their logistical support system.  Anyone who has operated in a dessert war can testify to this fact. Should the rebels yield to him at Ajdabiya they will fall back to far more defensible terrain to the southwest of Benghazi, the heavily forested and mountainous uplands of the Jebel Akhdar which would even the playing field in favor of the rebels who until now have been fighting in open terrain which would even the playing field.  To further help the rebels the first confirmed shipments of Egyptian arms have reached rebel forces.

Another component to the story is that Gaddafi’s forces are divided. He has a significant number of troops attempting to overcome rebel forces at the town of Zindan about 120 kilometers southwest of Tripoli.  These forces are operating in a region less hospitable than those near Ajdabiya but because they are closer to their supply base have a better chance of success than those in the east.

However all of this goes away once the airstrikes from American, French, British and Arab air forces start pounding his exposed forces at Ajdabiya. These forces are operating outside of the range of the Libyan air defense network. What little anti-aircraft capability they have will not protect them against modern air forces. As soon as Gaddafi’s tanks and APCs start getting “brewed up” by air attacks the forces manning them will give up the fight.  Likewise the air defenses that Gaddafi has in his arsenal are antiquated and no match for what will be coming after them. The fact is that many of the officers in command of these forces only stayed loyal because it appeared that the world would not stand up to Gaddafi and until today they were correct. This marriage of convenience will end once the bombs start falling.

What looked like a certain victory for Gaddafi will disappear as fast as a mirage in the Libyan Desert. At some point the officers that had reluctantly supported Gaddafi will turn against him as they would have weeks ago had the actions of world leaders matched their words. There will not be a need for ground troops and thankfully the U.N. authorization does not authorize occupation.  The Libyan’s military and people knowing that Gaddafi stands alone will topple his ruthless regime on their own and because the west, led by the French acted to support them Al Qaeda and its allies who were hoping to commandeer this revolt will be left in the dust. As for Gaddafi he will be luck not to avoid the fate of another dictator who ruled Libya, Italy’s Benito Mussolini and end up handing from a meat hook.

Of course I could be wrong, but I expect that within a week the situation which looked so bleak for the rebels will look very different and Gaddafi will be fighting not for the survival of his regime but for his life. But it has to go down this way. Neither Egypt Tunisia nor Europe can handle the influx of refugees should Gaddafi survive. They all have a vested interest in stopping Gaddafi now as do we as we cannot let Gaddafi remain in control and turn Libya into a haven for Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.

One can hope that the carnage in Libya will end soon and that something of a democratic and peace minded Libya will be the result.  Somehow I think that there is a chance for this now.

Peace

Padre Steve+

 

2 Comments

Filed under Foreign Policy, middle east, national security

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

May 25, 2010 · 21:04

The Sinking of the Cheonan and the Escalation of Tensions on the Korean Peninsula

The forward half of teh hulk of the Corvette Cheoson being raised from the Yellow Sea

On March 26th at 2110 hrs local the 1200 ton South Korean Corvette Cheonan (PCC-722) was torpedoed by a North Korean Submarine about 1 nautical mile from Baengnyeong Island. The assailant appears to have been a North Korean Yeono Class miniature submarine using a North Korean CHT-02D 21” torpedo using acoustic homing mechanism set for a detonation under the hull of Cheonan at 6-9 meters depth.  There is the possibility that a Song class coastal submarine could have been involved but the likelihood is a Yeono class boat based on the proximity to land and the observation of a number of “small submarines” departing base a few days before and returning a few days after to their tender. The blast created an underwater shockwave and bubble effect which broke the back of the ship causing it to sink in less than 5 minutes with the loss of 46 crew members.

The probable assailant a Yeono or Yono class Miniature Sub and an Iranian variant below


The sinking of Cheonan was the first sinking of a warship by a hostile submarine since the Argentine light cruiser the General Belgrano was sunk by the Royal Navy nuclear hunter-killer attack submarine Conqueror on May 2nd 1982 during the Falkland war.  The sinking of the Belgrano was controversial but occurred in the context of active hostilities and which posed no real threat to regional destabilization or a war that could easily escalate into a nuclear, chemical and biological conflict. The Cheonan was sunk by the North Koreans in a clear violation of the Korean Armistice and represents such a brazen move by the North Koreans that one has to wonder what purpose that it served.  There are reports that Kim Jong Il ordered the attack in retaliation for a confrontation in the same area in November 2009 in which a North Korean ship was heavily damaged.

The last warship sunk by a hostile submarine

The effects are now being felt following the May 20th release of the international investigation of the sinking which confirmed with hard evidence that the torpedo was North Korean and that there were no other possibilities for the sinking. (http://www.mnd.go.kr/mndEng_2009/WhatsNew/RecentNews/index.jsp#wrap ) The North Koreans reacted with anger toward the report while South Korea, the United States, Japan, Australia, Canada and the UN made statements condemning the sinking.  In the following days the US and South Korea announced naval exercises (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10150379.stm ) (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2010/0524/Pentagon-dials-up-pressure-on-North-Korea-for-Cheonan-sinking ) and on the 24th the South Koreans suspended economic relations and assistance to the North and announced the renewal of psychological warfare against the North. The North Koreans have responded in kind severing all relations with the South, threatening to attack sites broadcasting into the North and announced that it gave its military the order to prepare for war.  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100525/ap_on_re_as/as_skorea_ship_sinks;_ylt=Alwl3biZwLFab7TyXX4HwRz9xg8F;_ylu=X3oDMTM5NTExM2R2BGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNTI1L2FzX3Nrb3JlYV9zaGlwX3NpbmtzBGNjb2RlA21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDMgRwb3MDMgRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3JpZXMEc2xrA25rb3JlYXNldmVycw

North Korean Torpedo components from the sinking of the Cheonan

The North on the 21st announced that “From this time on, we will regard the situation as a phase of war and will be responding resolutely to all problems in North-South relations,” and that “If the South puppet group comes out with ‘response’ and ‘retaliation’, we will respond strongly with ruthless punishment including the total shutdown of North-South ties, abrogation of the North-South agreement on non-aggression and abolition of all North-South cooperation projects.” (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/asia/3725039/North-Korea-declares-phase-of-war-with-south )

Secretary General of the United Nations Ban Ki Moon said that the Security Council should take action against North Korea stating “I’m confident that the council, in fulfilling its responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, will take measures appropriate to the gravity of the situation.” (http://www.undispatch.com/node/9910 )

The situation seems to escalate by the hour as additional nations condemn the North Koreans and movement in the UN to do sop as well.  With the problem of succession in the North Korean leadership and potential struggles for internal power between the North Korean military and others within Communist Party and government it is hard to say who might gain in this situation. There are reports that part of the reason for the attack was the need for Kim Jong Il to secure the place of his son to leader the regime if he is incapacitated or dies.  The succession of Kim to the leadership was unusual as it was the first time in a Communist nation that the son of the national leader succeeded his father.  It is possibility that senior military or party leadership could oppose such a move.

There are a number of scenarios for this to play out.  Of course one would be for the North to stand down however that would be an act of weakness and loss of face for the regime after sinking a South Korean warship.  The other alternatives include the full fledged resumption of the Cold War on the peninsula or even the outbreak of a regional war which could draw in other nations and involve the use of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons on a large scale.   Any such situation would devastate the economies of much of Asia which in tour could cripple the world economy at a time when the European Union is in crisis, the United States is struggling its way out of a recession and many other nations are experiencing economic crisis or downturn.

This is a very dangerous situation and as one who has spent time on the Korean DMZ I can imagine almost nothing worse for the world than a war in Northeast Asia, perhaps a major showdown in the Arabian Gulf with Iran or a major conflict involving Israel and Iran or other Middle Eastern states, but not much other than those scenarios.  The situation has also demonstrated the threat to warships in the littorals from comparatively simple, cheap and deadly platforms firing weapons based on World War Two technology.  The reality for naval surface forces be they in the Korean littorals, the Arabian Gulf or Gulf of Oman is that low tech weaponry on low tech platforms in congested waters can deal deadly blows to unsuspecting warships.

This situation will need to be watched as it has the potential to get worse with dire consequences.

2 Comments

Filed under Foreign Policy, Military

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,