Symphony

Cadence of Conflict: Asia, September 11, 2017

The North Korean situation makes much more sense when seen from the perspective of a film director performing a social experiment. Film makers, directors, actors, screen writers—they love to do good "real life" research. If one was making a movie simulating culture in a story such as Orwell's 1984, North Korea would be a perfect laboratory.

Looking at North Korea through this lens, some predictions could be made. What outside forces and events would be necessary to watch a "hermit kingdom" implode?

Another perspective could be from, say, China's view. China rightly fears that it is surrounded by US allies—Vietnam, Japan, Taiwan... India is a "frenemy" of the US, but more of an "enemi-friend" from China's view. Then, there is Korea. If the North were provoked to invade the South, that would be "plus one" ally for China and "minus one" ally for the United States, at least on China's border. "Gain more land to win the war" is an old school strategy from Westpoint, a strategy that Grant had to put aside at Gettysburg.

So, the jockeying in the West Pacific could be more predictable by thinking of international policy for North Korea as Film Maker vs Westpoint China. One set of policies wants the North to be easily provoked into decimating the South to win a land war in Asia. The other set of policies initiates "outside force" to carefully study an implosion of the North—and that includes allowing the North to be provoked, but on a controlled terms.

This week, North Korea made even more threats. So, the theorem of Film Maker vs Westpoint China can be put to the test in weeks to come, watching international policies provoke the North to attack and pressure the North to implode. While that transpires, international support from common folk to see North Korea's dynasty come to an end only grows, and the international press certainly doesn't do anything to shift sentiment the other direction.

continue reading

Standard
Symphony

Cadence of Conflict: Asia, September 4, 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQy0_XBp_Ks

Korea's situation is amplifying. We know this. North Korea is making more threats than ever with it's "boy king" on the iron clad throne. We know that military options are 1. relevant and 2. undesirable. The Pentagon consistently barks about "military options", while "economic options" stay on the table—don't overlook how talk of military bolsters economic action. Rather than reviewing the obvious, consider North Korea through the eyes of the White House—viewing both economics and security—and from the rest of the world.

As the Pentagon, economists, and surrounding nations sees things, not China, but specifically the Communist Party seated in Beijing, is viewed as the "menace of Asia", venturing into increased trouble with Vietnam, India, the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Myanmar, Malaysia, Mongolia, Africa, Europe, and others. North Korea has six months of oil remaining, and China does 90% of North Korea's trade. No Beijing Communist Party feeding the Kim Dynasty equals no Kim Dynasty nukes. That's how the Pentagon, the US Treasury, and many surrounding nations view China and North Korea.

It will never be said, just as much as it will always be considered: North Korea is a stepping stone to facing the Beijing Communist Party. For the Pentagon, it's practice and demonstration. For economics, North Korea is an excuse to cut off trade with China who manufactures technology, but does not develop their own, and uses copied technology with trade money to make it more difficult for their neighbors to sleep at night. Right or wrong, justified or not, that's how others view China these days.

Now, Xi Jinping addresses an assembly over the BRICS bank group, while still not having dealt with the menace in its own back yard. Without a word being mentioned, Brazil, Russia, India, and South Africa—and the nations who trade with them—will view China as being the "maker of promises that won't be kept".

China had so much going for it, as did the Communist Party in Beijing. They had trade, they had marked-off territory that no one encroached. But, it wasn't "what they deserved by rite", thereby provoking them into too much venture and not enough housecleaning. Make no mistake, North Korea is only the tip of the iceberg marking regional vendettas that loom beneath the surface, both militarily and economically. The US is not as friendly as it seems, "considering either" economics "or" military; it has already been implementing both as part of a greater regional ambition.

continue reading

Standard