Korean_Conflict_Ii

Running Head: KOREAN CONFLICT II Korean Conflict II July 10, 2009 Kim Jong -il Kim Jong-il is the Chairman of the National Defense Commission, Supreme Commander of the Korean People's Army, and General Secretary of the Workers' Party of Korea which has been the ruling party since 1948. He succeeded his father Kim Il-sung, founder of North Korea, who died in 1994, and commands the fourth largest standing army in the world. North Korea officially refers to him as the Dear Leader. Kim Jong-il was born in the village of Vyatskoye, near Khabarovsk, in 1941. His father, Kim Il-sung, commanded the 1st Battalion of the Soviet 88th Brigade. The unit consisted of Chinese and Korean exiles. Kim- il Sung began gradually preparing Kim Jong- il as heir apparent since 1971. Following the death of Kim -il Sung on July 8, 1994, Kim Jong -il inherited supreme power. Kim Jong-il micro manages every detail of government business. Kim Jong-il has created a system of summarizing all accounts of events from all over North Korea into a daily report format during consolidation of his power within the party. Even county and municipal parties are to report directly to the party center if the event is deemed significant enough to warrant his attention. Kim Jong-il's impatience and extemporaneous behavior contrasts obviously with Kim Il-Sung's magnanimity and charisma. The elder Kim was mindful of advice from others, while Kim Jong-il is arrogant and self centered in policy decisions. In addition, the junior Kim does not take kindly to criticism or opinions different from his own. Kim Jong-il's personality can be characterized by suspicion, and is extremely emotional in his expression of his likes and dislikes, which borders on double personality. Kim’s personality type appears to be Pragmatic. The pragmatic personality type is a take charge person; their views is the way things will probably get done; they listen to others points of view out of courtesy or intellectual curiosity, but will still do things their own way. Conflict The conflict between the US and North Korea goes back to the Korean War. However it appears as though Korea is trying to push the US into another War. They have been testing missiles close to US soil. Also Korean warships patrolled the Sea of Japan and Patriot batteries were set up around Tokyo as North Korea counted down to a missile launch intended to challenge President Barack Obama as he attends the G20 summit in London. Two Japanese guided missile destroyers set sail under orders to intercept the Taepodong-2 if the launch goes wrong and it threatens to come down in Japan, a key US ally. North Korea has said any interception would amount to an act of war. Kim Jong-il, the North Korean dictator, has hinted that if the missile is destroyed, his country will strike back violently, and conduct a second nuclear weapons test and ruin years of American disarmament diplomacy. On May 25 and May 26, 2009, North Korea continued to escalate the conflict through a clear violation of the United Nations resolution which prohibits their development of nuclear missiles. On Monday, May 25th, they reported successful underground nuclear tests, which seismic and military analysts have confirmed. Strategies for conflict resolution There are a few options the United States could take in consideration as to resolving this conflict. However military response does not seem to be a wise choice. After researching all parties involved Kim Jong-il is not the type of man that responds to threats or force this would inevitably lead to a war where both parties would suffer a tremendous lost. Pay offs are another option that would prove futile Kim Jong-il’s personality type would most likely take that as a sign of weakness his threats would become more outrageous and the payoffs would never be enough. There are two options that might be beneficial and productive for the US to consider and implement. When dealing with a man like Kim you have to hit them where it hurts. So why not start with his pockets. The US could execute boycotts and economic sanctions. If the US is successful they could affect the economy in North Korea immensely thus, removing the threat by reducing their funding for missiles and testing. If the US rallied up allies with other countries this tactic would be efficient and the effects would be seen rather quickly. As a last resort the US could consider political assassination this option should only be considered after all other attempts at resolution have failed. In 1976, President Gerald R. Ford issued an Executive Order 11905 to clarify U.S. foreign-intelligence activities. In a section of the order labeled "Restrictions on Intelligence Activities, Ford concisely but explicitly outlawed political assassination: Prohibition on Assassination. “No employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination”. Since 1976, every U.S. president has upheld Ford’s prohibition on assassinations. In 1978, President Jimmy Carter issued an executive order with the chief purpose of reshaping the intelligence structure. In Section 2-305 of that order, Carter reaffirmed the U.S. prohibition on assassination: In 1981, President Reagan, through Executive Order 12333, reiterated the assassination prohibition: 2.11 “No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination”. Reagan was the last president to address the topic of political assassination. Because no subsequent executive order or piece of legislation has repealed the prohibition, it remains in effect. At the beginning of 2001, however, U.S. Representative Bob Barr, a Georgia Republican, introduced a bill called the Terrorist Elimination Act of 2001. The act asserts that the assassination prohibitions limit the swift, sure and precise action needed by the United States to protect our national security. Furthermore, the act says, present strategy allows the military forces to bomb large targets hoping to eliminate a terrorist leader, but prevents our country from designing a limited action which would specifically accomplish that purpose. Barr’s bill also notes that "on several occasions the military has been ordered to use a military strike hoping, in most cases unsuccessfully, to remove a terrorist leader who committed crimes against the United States. To remedy these perceived flaws, the bill would repeal the assassination ban laid out in Ford’s, Carter’s and Reagan’s executive orders. Therefore the US could use political assassination to purge Kim. Conclusion It is apparent that Korea is not responding to Barack Obama and other US officials warning therefore it’s time to put words into actions. America is under a watchful eye by all countries right now and how we deal Korea will set the stage for things to come. The US needs to be strong and stern with Korea in order to show the rest of the nation that if pushed the United States will lie down its hand in vengeance and its wrath will be felt. Even a liberal like Barack Obama has to know when a situation cannot be salvaged by discussion and action is the only way to be heard. Now, what action we the United States as a whole will take if any remains to be seen. References 2001,Nov. 18). Political assassination. Retrieved July 12, 2009, from trialbrief.com Furlong, Gary (2005). The conflict resolution toolbox. Mississauga, Ontario: John Weiley & Sons Canada, ltd.