North Korea is once again taking provocative actions, this time launching two ballistic missiles in which one landed for the first time in Japanese controlled waters. Last month, North Korea fired three short-range missiles into the sea. The latest series of tests, which violate UN resolutions, come on the heels of an agreement last month between Washington and Seoul to deploy the THAAD missile defense system in South Korea. Annual military exercises between the U.S. and South Korea are also scheduled for later this month.
The Cipher Brief talked with Fran Moore, the CIA’s former Director of Intelligence, about the significance of North Korea’s latest actions and why she sees them as a game-changing act.
The Cipher Brief: North Korea tested two Nodong type missiles, something it has done several times previously. Is this instance unique, and if so, why?
Fran Moore: A missile test alone by North Korea obviously is not unique. Pyongyang has conducted at least seven short range, medium range, and long range missile tests this year, sometimes with multiple launches in a single day. These launches are an integral part of North Korea’s efforts to be recognized as a nuclear power with delivery systems able to reach U.S. allies in Asia and in the westernmost parts of the U.S. And of course, the test comes in the midst of escalating North Korean condemnation of the U.S. announcement of an agreement with South Korea to deploy the THAAD missile defense system, its decision to financially sanction Kim Jong un personally as a result of human rights violations, and the announcement that the U.S. would proceed with its joint annual military exercise with South Korea later this month.
What is unique about this launch is that it is so provocative. It was launched in the direction of Japan, rather than on a path that would have steered clear of any risk to populated areas. The last time that North Korea launched a missile this close to Japan was in 1998 when it launched the Taepodong over Japan and it landed on the Pacific side, also in or near economic zone waters. This was a game-changing act by North Korea, because it demonstrated a capacity to strike off the peninsula and a willingness to endanger lives by testing near populated areas. So, in many ways, the launch Wednesday brings that test back into focus as a provocative message to Japan, the U.S., and South Korea.
TCB: What is the significance of the U.S. and Japan calling an emergency session of the U.N. Security Council? What impact does such a meeting have?
FM: The launch violates UN Security Council resolutions that prohibit North Korea from developing missile technologies, and in the past, the council has condemned missile launches. The council has also imposed sanctions after North Korea’s nuclear tests, all the way back to 2006 and most recently in March, when it imposed some fairly substantial sanctions, such as banning exports on coal, and sanctioning banks. This is another opportunity for the U.S., with Japan, to seek international censure of North Korea and bring pressure on Pyongyang to cease its aggressive behavior.
The key on UN action will be to watch China. China has signed on to tough actions when it believes that North Korea’s behavior is going to destabilize the region and that North Korea needs a firm message. Beijing did just that in March. But at other times, Beijing has acted to block harsh sanctions against Pyongyang. What it comes down to is, on the one hand, China wants to preserve some bilateral influence with North Korea and does not want Pyongyang to be so isolated that it becomes more provocative. On the other hand, it worries that unchecked provocative behavior by North Korea will strengthen the U.S. security commitment in East Asia So Beijing will calibrate its decision. The Chinese have been critical of the THAAD agreement. If dissatisfaction with the decision between South Korea and the U.S. on the THAAD is uppermost in China’s mind, it may not move as quickly or as strongly against North Korea as the U.S. might like.
TCB: Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe just announced the appointment of a new Defense Minister, Tomomi Inada, described by many as a hawk. How does North Korea’s behavior affect the greater security dynamic in East Asia?
FM: I would start by saying that the timing of the test on Wednesday could be targeted in part at the Japanese cabinet announcement. It’s been publicly known that those announcements were going to come in early August, and Pyongyang may have had some intent to upstage the naming of a Defense Minister with such strong views on Japan’s defense. Defense Minister Inada, as you mentioned, is a hawk. Most recently, she was heading a research committee studying Japan’s constitution, and she supports changes to Japan’s constitution that would allow it to take a more direct role in rebuilding its military capabilities. Article 9 in Japan’s post-WWII constitution restricts Japan to a self-defense force, that while modern, is limited to defending Japan. With the ruling Liberal Democratic Party-Komeito coalition holding a supermajority in both the upper and lower house, Article 9 could actually be on the table for review.
In the case of Wednesday’s launch, the North Koreans were clearly seeking to intimidate Japan. The message to Japan and its public is that North Korea has the capacity to inflict damage, and the implicit message here is that the threat could be a nuclear-tipped missile. If intimidating Japan is in fact North Korea’s intent, Pyongyang could be miscalculating. The provocative nature of the test could play into the nationalist debate in Japan and strengthen support among the Japanese public for stronger military capabilities. At a minimum, Prime Minister Abe and Tokyo will be looking for a strong show of U.S. support, and I think the decision to take this quickly to the UN is probably part of that effort.
TCB: The U.S. and South Korea will be conducting joint military drills this month, something that has frequently drawn the ire of North Korea. Is this missile test related, and how do you expect North Korea to respond as the drills draw nearer?
FM: As I said before, I think the provocation is also aimed at showing displeasure at the exercise, and certainly Pyongyang over the last few months has characterized the recent missile tests as part of its own “military exercises.” So, we may see more provocative acts in the days and weeks ahead. Such acts have included bombastic threats of nuclear attack and increased artillery barrages aimed at South Korea.
TCB: The Obama administration has backed UN sanctions over North Korea’s nuclear program and the Treasury has targeted specific individuals in the North Korean regime with sanctions. What other policy tools are left for the U.S. and its allies?
FM: This is a tough one, because North Korea is an incredibly challenging foreign policy and security issue. Having watched U.S. foreign policy over the last 30 years from my perch in the intelligence business, I don’t know that it’s necessarily a matter of new or other policy options so much as it is a combination of the tools we already have in play to keep the pressure on a country like North Korea. On the security side, I think continuing to signal U.S. resolve to be the security guarantor in Asia will be key. Bolstering our security relationships with allies on the one hand, combined with painstaking diplomacy on the other, to get the greatest compliance on tools that already exist like sanctions, it’s that combined effort that has put pressure on North Korea to at least ratchet back it’s provocative behavior.
