A report compiled by the Congressional Research Service has given Congress seven possible
ways to act to handle the North Korea threat — ranging from walking away to ending the
Kim regime entirely.
"Though North Korea has been a persistent U.S. foreign policy challenge for decades,
during 2017 the situation evolved to become what many observers assess to be a potential
direct security threat to the U.S. homeland," the report states, according to Business Insider.
The report, dated Oct. 27, lists the advances made by North Korea in both missile and nuclear
technology, along with the regime's bellicose rhetoric.
"Combined with the long-standing use of aggressive rhetoric toward the United States
by successive Kim regimes, these events appear to have fundamentally altered U.S. perceptions
of the threat the Kim Jong-un regime poses, and have escalated the standoff on the Korean
Peninsula to levels that have arguably not been seen since at least 1994," the report
reads.
"In the coming months, Congress may opt to play a greater role in shaping U.S. policy
regarding North Korea, including consideration of the implications of possible U.S. actions
to address it."
Granted, power over the military and American foreign policy belongs almost exclusively
to the White House, but Congress has the final say in declarations of war.
It also controls the power of the purse, under the Founders' system of checks and balances,
so it wields considerable authority in international affairs.
The report lists seven options:
The first is maintaining the status quo — hold military drills and go about business as usual
in South Korea, just like has been happening for years.
This option wouldn't necessarily escalate the conflict, at least from the American side.
The problem is that it's already been tried — and North Korea has ICBMs and miniaturized
nuclear weapons now.
The second option would be more aggressive: it would essentially arm the region with America's
most technologically advanced and deadly weaponry.
"US stealth jets and bombers, aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, guided-missile destroyers,
and even tactical nuclear weapons could deploy to South Korea and Japan on a more permanent
basis to step up the US presence in the area," Business Insider reports.
"Meanwhile, an increased cyber and naval presence would seek to interdict any shipments
to North Korea that could further Pyongyang's weapons program."
However, the report's authors also note that upping allied armament in the region
is often used by the North Koreans in order to justify their own saber-rattling, such
as missile tests or other such provocations.
The third idea would involve shooting down every short- and medium-range ballistic missile
that North Korea tests in order to prove the strength of our anti-ballistic missile technology.
Not only would it be an embarrassment, it would mean Pyongyang would lose vital test
data they need to improve the program.
However, this would mean that anti-ballistic missile assets — including Navy destroyers
— would need to be in the region constantly, at considerable cost.
"Additionally, North Korea could still test shorter-range missiles that put U.S. forces
in the region at risk, and it's unknown how Pyongyang would respond to having its
missiles shot down," Business Insider notes.
The fourth option is possibly the most hawkish: destroy all of North Korea's ICBM and missile
test launch sites.
"With limited airstrikes and likely some Tomahawk missile launches from the U.S. Navy,
the U.S. military would look to destroy in one quick pass every single known missile
launchpad and ICBM manufacturing site," Business Insider notes.
However, this is assuming we even know all of their missile launching sites — and if
secret or undiscovered sites are left behind, this could leave us vulnerable to a strike.
Furthermore, North Korea could take it as an act of war and unleash hell upon South
Korea and (possibly) Japan — definitely a scenario to be avoided.
The fifth option goes even further and advocates destroying all of the nuclear sites in the
regime.
"This option stages an even bigger military campaign targeting every known nuclear and
missile site across North Korea," Business Insider reports.
"Instead of just airstrikes and cruise-missile launches, this type of attack may necessitate
U.S. Special Forces pouring over the border to neutralize key North Korean sites."
Again, this carries the same risks as option number four — and unlike the ICBM and missile
test sites, the United States military isn't entirely certain it knows every nuclear site
set up by the regime.
The sixth option is regime change.
A Wall Street Journal commentary in August — co-written by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson
and Defense Secretary James Mattis — specifically stated that regime change in the North and
the reunification of the Korean Peninsula is not a goal of the United States.
However, the Congressional Research Service Report states that the possibility should
not be discarded.
"Although the Tillerson/Mattis op-ed specifically states that the United States has no interest
in regime change on the Korean Peninsula, it remains a potential (if unlikely) option,
particularly should the Kim regime behave in an aggressive manner toward the United
States or its allies," the report states.
"A more comprehensive operation that might make regime survival untenable could involve
strikes against not only nuclear infrastructure but command and control facilities, key leaders,
artillery and missile units, chemical and biological weapons facilities, airfields,
ports, and other targets deemed critical to regime survival.
This operation would be tantamount to pursuing full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula, and
risk conflict elsewhere in the region."
In other words, you couldn't just kill the insane fat kid and his retinue of toadies.
You'd literally have to wipe out a whole lot of the Juche regime's infrastructure
and the military in order to make it feasible.
That's not an easy task — and one that, as the report states, is nothing short of
"pursuing full-scale war on the Korean Peninsula."
The final option is the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula in exchange
for denuclearization negotiations.
"Adherents to this view could maintain that withdrawing U.S. troops in exchange for DPRK
denuclearization might eliminate or greatly alleviate any possibility of North Korean
military action against the United States, and might even create greater latitude for
internal political reform," the report reads.
"Withdrawing U.S. armed forces from the Korean Peninsula, however, would not necessarily
be accompanied by major changes in, let alone the termination of the U.S.-ROK alliance;
U.S. forces positioned elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific might be able to reinforce South Korea in
the event of a crisis."
And there's part of the problem — we assume that Kim would be willing to negotiate if
South Korea was weaker, which it would be without U.S. troops.
Reports from North Korean defectors have also claimed that the primary reason Kim has developed
ICBMs and nuclear warheads to fit on them is that he believes a nuclear strike on the
U.S. would cause an American military withdraw from the Korean Peninsula, thus leaving South
open to invasion — as it was when the Korean War broke out in 1950.
North Korea is a complicated situation, and none of these are easy solutions.
However, the Trump administration has planned to take a harder line on Pyongyang, meaning
one of the proposals Kim Jong Un probably isn't going to like is definitely going
to be on the table.
For more infomation >> Saturday a.m. KSBW Weather Forecast 11.4.17 - Duration: 4:08. 
For more infomation >> Once Upon a Time 7x06 Promo "Wake Up Call" (SUB ITA) - Duration: 0:31. 
For more infomation >> The Exorcist 2x06 Promo "Darling Nikki" (SUB ITA) - Duration: 0:21. 
For more infomation >> Decora en navidad DIY renos de papel reciclado - Decorate at Christmas, DIY recycled paper reindeer - Duration: 12:21. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét