North Korea Now Miniaturizing Warheads for Their ICBMs

 

Well, this isn’t good.

North Korea has successfully produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles, crossing a key threshold on the path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power, U.S. intelligence officials have concluded in a confidential assessment.

The new analysis completed last month by the Defense Intelligence Agency comes on the heels of another intelligence assessment that sharply raises the official estimate for the total number of bombs in the communist country’s atomic arsenal. The U.S. calculated last month that up to 60 nuclear weapons are now controlled by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Some independent experts believe the number of bombs is much smaller.

The findings are likely to deepen concerns about an evolving North Korean military threat that appears to be advancing far more rapidly than many experts had predicted. U.S. officials last month concluded that Pyongyang is also outpacing expectations in its effort to build an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of striking cities on the American mainland.

The UN Security Council unanimously passed a new sanctions regime against North Korea which is expected to cut its export revenue by a third. This led Pyongyang, or course, to issue more threats:

“Packs of wolves are coming in attack to strangle a nation,” the North Korean statement said. “They should be mindful that the D.P.R.K.’s strategic steps accompanied by physical action will be taken mercilessly with the mobilization of all its national strength.”

Given Seoul’s 10 million residents are located just 35 miles from the demilitarized zone, all allied military options would be very bloody indeed. How do you recommend the US and its allies respond?

Published in Foreign Policy, Military
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 104 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Majestyk Member
    Majestyk
    @Majestyk

    Joe P (View Comment):

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    GLDIII (View Comment):

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    The irony is that we now have a President who promised to be different from all of those in substantive ways and although he uses incredibly bellicose language, we have no idea whatsoever what he’ll actually do about this.

    And neither do the Norks, so the question on the table “is this a feature or a bug?”

    The responses from the Trump Administration thus far have ranged from “incredibly tepid” to “dropping 50 Cruise Missiles or a MOAB on you.”

    Refresh my memory, what was he tepid towards?

    The cruise missiles at least showed he was willing to take some advice from somebody on striking an appropriate balance between doing something and starting WWIII (ignoring the larger question of whether there is a compelling US national interest in Syria).

    I’m old enough to remember when China was going to be labeled a “Currency Manipulator” and Mexico was going to pay for the wall.  His actions along those axes have been mousy at best.

    • #31
  2. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    DocJay (View Comment):
    Tell the Chinese that every dime we spend on the war, and pre-war build up, will be subtracted from the money we owe them.

    @docjay is spot on here.   NK is the crazy, mean dog in the neighborhood without a collar or a license.     Nobody knows who it belongs to.    If you ask China “that your dog?” They’ll deny it to your face.    But after dark they leave their gate open and set out food and water for it.

    Somebody has to make it abundantly clear to China that if this dog bites someone…. Anyone at all….  We are holding China personally responsible.

    • #32
  3. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Ummm…(expletive)

    • #33
  4. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    DocJay (View Comment):
    Tell the Chinese that every dime we spend on the war, and pre-war build up, will be subtracted from the money we owe them.

    @docjay is spot on here. NK is the crazy, mean dog in the neighborhood without a collar or a license. Nobody knows who it belongs to. If you ask China “that your dog?” They’ll deny it to your face. But after dark they leave their gate open and set out food and water for it.

    Somebody has to make it abundantly clear to China that if this dog bites someone…. Anyone at all…. We are holding China personally responsible.

    The Chinese Communist Party denies helping North Korea in any way. I know this because they told me so when I taught English to a party officials class in China a few years back.

    • #34
  5. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    For 38 years now, the Iranians have been threatening and killing Americans, as well as publicly calling for Death to America, and what good has it done them?

    Well, the US left Beirut when Iranian proxies murdered hundreds of US Marines in their sleep; years later, even after Iranian explosives had killed or maimed lots of US troops in Iraq, we stood idly by and ignored a popular uprising against the mullahs: the US under Obama did nothing; instead he entered into the (still largely secret) deal letting the Iranians continue to acquire and work with nuclear materials, make nuclear weapons, and for good measure, receive untold billions of dollars from the highest authority in the US  (a now former President, Thank God).

    Mao and the ChiComs used to call the US a paper tiger — I wonder what Kim thinks.With the paradigm of our dealings with Iran, what lesson ought Lil’ Kim draw?

    If we do nothing but sanctions and jaw jaw jaw, he will be all that better prepared when it comes to war war war. If we make a preemptive strike that is insufficient, Kim will destroy Seoul and its millions of inhabitants, throw whatever he has against us and our allies in the region, and call on China for help to resist the “aggression.” The pressure seems to be mounting towards a massive, overwhelming and devastating attack to eliminate the NK regime and the real threat it poses. It may be time to bring the Korean War to a close once and for all. MacArthur may be proven right in the end.

    It is a bitter and terrifying prospect, and as all wars seem to go, the plans do not usually survive the first hostile contact. China would probably take advantage of the chaos to invade Taiwan; Russia could move into more areas of the former USSR that Putin so craves; and Iran could launch an attack on Israel, which has the capability to respond. Instant WWIII doomsday scenario with nukes.

    The situation is grave and getting more so every day. Very scary times. If I have one consolation on this plane, it is not Hillary and John Kerry mangling the situation (quick! send James Taylor!); and on a higher plane, I know that my Redeemer lives, so I have hope.

    • #35
  6. Majestyk Member
    Majestyk
    @Majestyk

    Fritz (View Comment):
     

    The situation is grave and getting more so every day. Very scary times. If I have one consolation on this plane, it is not Hillary and John Kerry mangling the situation (quick! send James Taylor!); and on a higher plane, I know that my Redeemer lives, so I have hope.

    Messianism is how we’ve gotten into this situation with the Iranians and NorKs in the first place.  I hardly think the solution is more cowbell.

    • #36
  7. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    DocJay (View Comment):
    Tell the Chinese that every dime we spend on the war, and pre-war build up, will be subtracted from the money we owe them.

    @docjay is spot on here. NK is the crazy, mean dog in the neighborhood without a collar or a license. Nobody knows who it belongs to. If you ask China “that your dog?” They’ll deny it to your face. But after dark they leave their gate open and set out food and water for it.

    Somebody has to make it abundantly clear to China that if this dog bites someone…. Anyone at all…. We are holding China personally responsible.

    The Chinese Communist Party denies helping North Korea in any way. I know this because they told me so when I taught English to a party officials class in China a few years back.

    “North Korea” means “plausible deniability” in Chinese

    • #37
  8. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    Fritz (View Comment):

    The situation is grave and getting more so every day. Very scary times. If I have one consolation on this plane, it is not Hillary and John Kerry mangling the situation (quick! send James Taylor!); and on a higher plane, I know that my Redeemer lives, so I have hope.

    Messianism is how we’ve gotten into this situation with the Iranians and NorKs in the first place. I hardly think the solution is more cowbell.

    It’s a great day to live in rural Indiana. God protects my town really well from interesting events.

    • #38
  9. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Okay, someone has to ask this, and I think I’m the appropriate person to do it.

    Which is easier to spin politically, signing a weak-kneed peace treaty with “that fat guy” (as the Chinese call him) or 100,000 dead South Koreans?

    Are both better than losing a few thousand people on the West coast?

    • #39
  10. Joe P Member
    Joe P
    @JoeP

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    Joe P (View Comment):

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    GLDIII (View Comment):

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    The irony is that we now have a President who promised to be different from all of those in substantive ways and although he uses incredibly bellicose language, we have no idea whatsoever what he’ll actually do about this.

    And neither do the Norks, so the question on the table “is this a feature or a bug?”

    The responses from the Trump Administration thus far have ranged from “incredibly tepid” to “dropping 50 Cruise Missiles or a MOAB on you.”

    Refresh my memory, what was he tepid towards?

    The cruise missiles at least showed he was willing to take some advice from somebody on striking an appropriate balance between doing something and starting WWIII (ignoring the larger question of whether there is a compelling US national interest in Syria).

    I’m old enough to remember when China was going to be labeled a “Currency Manipulator” and Mexico was going to pay for the wall. His actions along those axes have been mousy at best.

    Ahh. I guess I never really took either of those seriously enough to consider them actual policy stances. But if you count those as being real, then they would be examples of tepidity.

    • #40
  11. James Gawron Inactive
    James Gawron
    @JamesGawron

    Majestyk (View Comment):
    The security procedures that surround Kim Jong-un’s whereabouts are notoriously byzantine and supposedly include body doubles. It’s hard to say whether merely decapitating them would be enough or whether that would simply set in motion the much-feared artillery barrage on Seoul.

    Maj,

    Any action could not be piecemeal. It would require a full-scale simultaneous action. It would require some time to move enough assets into place to be successful. If you remember the build up to the first Gulf War, George H. W. Bush maintained a bargaining stance with Saddam Hussein as he brought assets to the region. Then, with all diplomatic attempts rejected, Stormin Norman launched everything at once.

    It still depends on China. If China joins a military coalition to rid itself of the N. Korean problem or at a minimum provides intelligence to the coalition then Kim is cooked. We will still need to wipe out all N.K. offensive capabilities that can hit Seoul in far less than one day. Less than one hour would be getting there. I’d want it shorter than that.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #41
  12. Hypatia Member
    Hypatia
    @

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Majestyk (View Comment):

    2.5 Million people live in Pyongyang.

    I have no doubt that we possess the firepower to vaporize that city and every single one of its inhabitants. I weep at the thought that we must contemplate it.

    More than 10 million people live in Los Angeles, and most of them are Americans. I weep that we must contemplate it too, but contemplate it we must. We have given this vile regime the time it needed to arm itself with our lack of resolve. It may be too late to do anything but live with it and pray there’s no catastrophic misstep. Or it may not. I don’t know enough to know. But I think the time for “taking options off the table” should be over and we should be considering whatever is necessary to keep those millions of Americans safe from a holocaust on our shores.

    I don’t deny that it’s a choice of damnations and seriously wonder if we have the political will to snuff out a million human beings in one stroke.

    I’m glad I don’t have to make that decision, but I’m terrified that Trump is the decider on this one. This is the literal, most hair-raising and awful outcome that we feared last fall. At times it almost makes me wish I were stupid enough to just watch the Kardashians and not worry about real issues.

    Not really, though.

    You have no reason, none, to doubt Trump’s judgment. It’s up to the Norks now.  Let’s all pray they dont do the unthinkable.

    • #42
  13. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    James Gawron (View Comment):
    It still depends on China. If China joins a military coalition to rid itself of the N. Korean problem

    I frequently nod in agreement with your posts, but I think you are off the mark here.    I think these assumptions are part of our problem.   I do not see NK as an independent actor.    I see them as a wholly owned subsidiary of the PRC.   As such, NK is not a problem for the Chinese to be rid of.   Rather they are a Chinese asset whose value we keep bidding up.

    • #43
  14. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    James Gawron (View Comment):
    It still depends on China. If China joins a military coalition to rid itself of the N. Korean problem

    I frequently nod in agreement with your posts, but I think you are off the mark here. I think these assumptions are part of our problem. I do not see NK as an independent actor. I see them as a wholly owned subsidiary of the PRC. As such, NK is not a problem for the Chinese to be rid of. Rather they are a Chinese asset whose value we keep bidding up.

    A unified liberal democratic ally of the US right on their border would be a liability for China. The interests of China and the US are in conflict on the Korean peninsula.

    • #44
  15. Majestyk Member
    Majestyk
    @Majestyk

    Joe P (View Comment):
    Ahh. I guess I never really took either of those seriously enough to consider them actual policy stances. But if you count those as being real, then they would be examples of tepidity

    I took Trump seriously, not literally.

    • #45
  16. Randy Webster Inactive
    Randy Webster
    @RandyWebster

    Fritz (View Comment):
    China would probably take advantage of the chaos to invade Taiwan;

    I’m pretty sure China doesn’t have the logistical capability to invade Taiwan.

    • #46
  17. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Ummm…(expletive)

    I know it’s scary.  It really is.  But that’s the only message that has a chance of solving this problem.  We are not dealing with people who will meet weakness with friendship.  We are dealing with people who will hurt us if they do not fear us.

    • #47
  18. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Ummm…(expletive)

    I know it’s scary. It really is. But that’s the only message that has a chance of solving this problem. We are not dealing with people who will meet weakness with friendship. We are dealing with people who will hurt us if they do not fear us.

    Back up talk with action. I almost hope Kim Jong Un fires on Guam and misses. Then there is no more choice, just moral clarity and righteous fury. Millions of North Koreans dead? Maybe, but is what they’re doing living?

    • #48
  19. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Ummm…(expletive)

    I know it’s scary. It really is. But that’s the only message that has a chance of solving this problem. We are not dealing with people who will meet weakness with friendship. We are dealing with people who will hurt us if they do not fear us.

    Back up talk with action. I almost hope Kim Jong Un fires on Guam and misses. Then there is no more choice, just moral clarity and righteous fury. Millions of North Koreans dead? Maybe, but is what they’re doing living?

    Well, the problem isn’t how many North Koreans will die, but how many other people will also die?

    • #49
  20. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Ummm…(expletive)

    I know it’s scary. It really is. But that’s the only message that has a chance of solving this problem. We are not dealing with people who will meet weakness with friendship. We are dealing with people who will hurt us if they do not fear us.

    Back up talk with action. I almost hope Kim Jong Un fires on Guam and misses. Then there is no more choice, just moral clarity and righteous fury. Millions of North Koreans dead? Maybe, but is what they’re doing living?

    Well, the problem isn’t how many North Koreans will die, but how many other people will also die?

    If I have to choose between South Korea and the west coast, I have to choose the west coast, although that’s a hard choice.

    • #50
  21. Steve C. Member
    Steve C.
    @user_531302

    Joe P (View Comment):
    I’ve heard that the THAAD system we have deployed in that region is actually pretty good. Maybe instead of doing a test run of it against practice drones we should swat their next missile.

    Yes. Our policy should be, we can shoot them down faster than you can build them.

     

    • #51
  22. TeamAmerica Member
    TeamAmerica
    @TeamAmerica

    @Steve C, Blood Thirsty Neocon, and Cato Rand- Do any of you think that a serious slap on the risk would deter Kim. Iow, shoot down the next missile he launches; warn him that if one of his supposedly cruise-missile toting patrol boats comes within a certain range of a US destroyer or carrier, we will destroy it, and then follow through if he ignores the warning. Treat him as Trump treated Syria. I doubt he would escalate, and it might show we are serious. What do you think?

    • #52
  23. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    A unified liberal democratic ally of the US right on their border would be a liability for China. The interests of China and the US are in conflict on the Korean peninsula.

    What if we told China “look, if hypothetically one day you were to annex North Korea, we’d give some really angry speeches at the U.N. but we wouldn’t actually do anything about it…”

     

    • #53
  24. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Fredösphere (View Comment):
    I think the present calculus–overwhelming short-term advantage for SK and the US in avoiding war–will persist right up to the moment an accident or miscommunication or panic prompts NK to start something.

    Certainly possible, and frightening, though it does seem that the Kims have nothing to gain and everything to lose by starting something.  Presumably they realize they can’t actually win a war with us; unlike the Iranians, who might actually believe that Allah will be on their side, I doubt the Kims believe in much of anything.

    To be fair, their actions to date have been entirely rational.  They’ve seen the U.S. topple regimes we don’t like, they saw how even after Khadafi played ball and voluntarily gave up his WMD program, he ended up dead on a roadside.  They’ve calculated that only a credible nuclear threat to the U.S. mainland can ensure we never invade them, and I’m not sure they’re wrong about that calculation.

    I don’t think they want to attack us; I think they want to ensure we never attack them, so they can continue to rule their pathetic little country with an iron fist for generations to come.

     

    • #54
  25. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Majestyk (View Comment):
    A series of highly coordinated, simultaneous strikes using cluster munitions on as many of the artillery positions on the north side of the DMZ in combination with cruise missile strikes to destroy as much NorK command and control structure as possible would minimize casualties in S. Korea.

    The Trump Administration should immediately announce that they are reviving the bunker-busting nuclear weapon development program on a fast-track in order to threaten the NorKs’ 8 underground nuclear sites with destruction.

    Too late to close the barn door now unfortunately.  It would be almost impossible to ensure we got all their nuke’s and a large amount of their artillery.  South Korea would pay a huge price if this goes to a hot war.

    • #55
  26. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Ekosj (View Comment):
    Somebody has to make it abundantly clear to China that if this dog bites someone…. Anyone at all…. We are holding China personally responsible.

    So you want to go to war with China too?

    • #56
  27. Robert E. Lee Member
    Robert E. Lee
    @RobertELee

    We’ve been kicking this can down the road since 1953, and most Americans would be happy to just keep kicking.

    Kim Jong Un is not sane by Western standards and North Koreans do not operate within the same world-view as we do.  That means we cannot guess what he will do in a given situation with any certainty.  And it only takes one to start a war.  In his mind, he can win.

    I spent two tours in Korea.  I wasn’t on the DMZ but we exercised constantly for an attack.  North Korean infiltrators were regularly operating in South Korea then and still are now, a bit of news you don’t here in our entertainment obsessed media.  Our equipment was frequently old, sometimes faulty, or just plain unavailable.  No one in America wants to be reminded that the War is still on.

    American service members in Korea know what is expected of them and have, in the main, served with honor and dedication to protect an important American ally.  The people of Korea are worth every effort we’ve expended on their behalf.

    There will be war and the blood of innocents will be spilled.  The choices we have are limited to when, where, and how much.  I don’t want war but what I want, what America wants, is irrelevant.  Unless we decide to do something it will all be in the hands of that maniac in Pyongyang.

    • #57
  28. J. D. Fitzpatrick Member
    J. D. Fitzpatrick
    @JDFitzpatrick

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    A unified liberal democratic ally of the US right on their border would be a liability for China. The interests of China and the US are in conflict on the Korean peninsula.

    What if we told China “look, if hypothetically one day you were to annex North Korea, we’d give some really angry speeches at the U.N. but we wouldn’t actually do anything about it…”

    The Machiavell in me likes this, but do you think the Chinese would stop with the North?

    • #58
  29. Richard Harvester Inactive
    Richard Harvester
    @RichardHarvester

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):
     

    I don’t think they want to attack us; I think they want to ensure we never attack them, so they can continue to rule their pathetic little country with an iron fist for generations to come.

    I think you’re right. But their friends in Iran *are* on the warpath.

    • #59
  30. Matt White Member
    Matt White
    @

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    A unified liberal democratic ally of the US right on their border would be a liability for China. The interests of China and the US are in conflict on the Korean peninsula.

    What if we told China “look, if hypothetically one day you were to annex North Korea, we’d give some really angry speeches at the U.N. but we wouldn’t actually do anything about it…”

    I wouldn’t even bother with the angry speeches.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.