During his recent trip to South Korea Defense Secretary Gates used the term extended deterrence to describe the US defense of South Korea. He also pledged that the United States would use its missile defense shield to defend South Korea against North Korean missiles in the case of war on the Korean Peninsula. This is the first time that such plans of an increased U.S. deterrence pledge have been revealed and stipulated in the periodic joint communiqués that the defense chiefs issue. In a related issue a Japanese SM-3 Block A missile intercepted a target missile over the Pacific.
The communiqué issued at the end of the Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) between Gates and his Republic of Korea (ROK) (South Korea) counterpart, Defense Minister Kim Tae-young:
Secretary Gates reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to provide extended deterrence for the RoK [Republic of Korea], using the full range of military capabilities, to include the U.S. nuclear umbrella, conventional strike, and missile defense capabilities.
Minister Kim was appreciative for the U.S. commitment. The two sides agreed to work closely together to enhance the effectiveness of extended deterrence. Under extended deterrence the US would:
• Use its Aegis ship-based ballistic missiles to intercept North Korean missiles
• Launch Tomahawk cruise missiles from nuclear-powered submarines to strike targets, or the U.S. Air Force could send B-2 and B-52 bombers and fighter jets maybe even carrying nuclear warheads to neutralize nuclear facilities in North Korea.
Gates said in the communiqué that the United States would use not only capabilities that are on the peninsula, but also “globally available U.S. forces and capabilities that are strategically flexible to deploy to augment the combined defense in case of crisis.” Previously, the U.S. had only said that it would reinforce the U.N. Command’s bases in Japan in case of a crisis in Korea.
Do these stronger statements mean that the two sides see an increased need to deter North Korea? Are such public statements effective in conveying the right deterrent message? Do such messages deter North Korea? These are critical questions to consider.
Additionally, the two countries again stated that they would not accept North Korea acquiring nuclear weapons. They again accused the communist regime of violating U.N. Security Council resolutions and six-party denuclearization agreements by continuing to engage in missile test firings and possible nuclear tests last spring.
Gates told a joint news conference that: “North Korea’s emerging nuclear weapons programs have a destabilizing effect both regionally and internationally.”
It should be noted that South Korea has not joined the regional ballistic missile defense system that involves the US and Japan. Instead South Korea is beginning to build its own low-tier missile shield, involving Aegis destroyers and refurbished German Patriot Advanced Capability-2 interceptors. The system should initially become operational in 2012.
As noted, the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force achieved another ballistic missile intercept in space using a Standard Missile-3. During the Oct. 27 test, the SM-3 Block IA missile engaged and destroyed a medium-range ballistic missile target that had been launched from the US Missile Test area on Kauai more than 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean. The crew of a Japanese destroyer detected and tracked the target before firing the intercepting missile.
What do you think is going on in Northeast Asia?
Comments