Korean Peninsula Developments

mrrosenthal

Member
Can someone explain why South Korea has any military worries from North Korea? I honestly dont get it.
If Korea invests in rock solid anti missile defense, overwhelming air superiority, and a decent amount of mobile artillery, there wont be a need for 3 million personnel. I dont even see a significant need for lots of tanks if air superiority is assured.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Can someone explain why South Korea has any military worries from North Korea? I honestly dont get it.
1. You might not be interested in this North East Asian conflict but I can assure you that North Korea is willing and able to use its weapons of war to advance its political objectives.
(a) Put another way, the answer lies with the country’s geography, a nuclear armed North Korea that is supported by its ally China (with the North Koreans willing to kill or injure South Koreans to make a point); and the domestic politics of Seoul being so close to the demilitarized zone.​
(b) While South Korea has a large army and is top 10 in the world for defence spending, at US$46.7 billion, it is nevertheless geopolitically sandwiched between larger powers like China (No. 2 in defence spending) and Japan (No. 8 in defence spending) — this limits the options of President Moon Jae-in, when faced with a hostile North Korea.
(c) Further, South Korea’s armed forces are shrinking. To offset the military’s dwindling supply of soldiers, the country is reforming its forces to accommodate a necessary reduction from a 599,000-strong force to a size of 522,000 troops by 2022. This figure includes both conscripts and volunteer forces. The number of twenty-year-old men each year, a typical age for conscription—is slated to fall from 330,000 at the end of 2020 to about 240,000 by 2036, and then the figure is expected to drop further to around 186,000 by 2039.​
(d) All Korean men must serve and the length of service depends on the military branch. The service time period for the South Korean Army and Marines is 21 months, the Korean Navy is 23 months, and the Air Force is 24. Service lasts 34 months for industrial technical personnel, and 36 months for those completing their service as doctors, lawyers, veterinarians, or expert researchers.​

2. The Nov 2010 North Korean bombardment of Yeonpyeong (killing 4 South Koreans and injuring 19) and ROKS Cheonan sinking on 26 March 2010 (killing 46 South Korean sailors) near the Northern Limit Line (NLL) are good examples of this hostile behaviour — the North are willing to kill or injure, whereas the South lacks escalation options as the country cannot be seen as dragging their American ally into a unwanted war.

3. Security on the Korean Peninsula often focuses on North Korea's nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles along with deterrence along the demilitarized zone. Yet an equally likely candidate for starting a conflict is a disputed maritime boundary called the NLL. The NLL remains one of the most serious flashpoints for conflict on the Korean Peninsula.

4. South Korea under President Moon Jae-in has had to hedge its geopolitical responses to Chinese and North Korea actions that impact the security dynamics in the Korean Peninsular. South Korea's defence budget for 2022 has been finalised at KRW54.61 trillion (US$46.32 billion), the Ministry of National Defense (MND) in Seoul announced. President Moon, whose government has been accused of being too soft on North Korea, refraining from joining international condemnations and descriptions of its missile tests as provocations.
(a) President Moon almost certainly exaggerated Kim Jong Un’s willingness to make concessions to President Trump, and then criticised Trump in the US media when it failed. I doubt Team Biden trusts the snake, Moon, whose ‘peace initiatives’ are made with a view to benefiting his party in the country’s domestic politics. Team Biden is pretty clearly waiting for his successor to appear after the 9 Mar 2022 election, given that Moon’s term is set to expire this year.​
(b) There are three key themes that have emerged in North Korean rhetoric since the failed 2019 Hanoi Summit that help illuminate the North’s thinking about its relations with the US and the prospects of restarting nuclear negotiations.​
  • First, is North Korea’s perception of a hostile policy. Although the US has offered to resume talks with North Korea, Pyongyang has rejected them, instead asserting that it will not return to the negotiating table until Washington withdraws what it calls its “hostile policy.”
  • Second, Pyongyang has expressed frustration over the international community’s reactions to its pursuit of increased military capabilities, especially the UN criticism over missile testing, while remaining silent about South Korea’s missile developments.
  • Third, given these developments, the Biden administration’s offer for talks “anywhere, anytime” is not likely to be accepted by Pyongyang any time soon. North Korea believes that the US is employing a two-pronged policy: that on the one hand, the US is offering diplomatic dialogue as a way to demonstrate a peaceful measure, while, on the other hand, it is still pushing them with military and economic pressures.
 
Last edited:

STURM

Well-Known Member
Someone else no doubt will provide you with a more comprehensive answer but bear in mind the North Koreans have a large well trained and heavily indoctrinated army, Seoul and its surrounding areas are well within range of large numbers of arty, the North Koreans have large numbers of conventional IRBMs and will resort to various asymmetric means.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Technically the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea has been at war with the Republic of Korea and the UN in the form of the US, UK, Canada, Australia, NZ, plus 20 other nations since 1950. Only a truce was signed in 1953 and no Peace Treaty has been negotiated or signed since. It will be 70 years next year since the truce agreement was signed.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Can someone explain why South Korea has any military worries from North Korea? I honestly dont get it.
If Korea invests in rock solid anti missile defense, overwhelming air superiority, and a decent amount of mobile artillery, there wont be a need for 3 million personnel. I dont even see a significant need for lots of tanks if air superiority is assured.
Thousands of artillery pieces, thousands more artillery rocket launchers, lots of heavy mortars, a few thousand tanks & hundreds of thousands of well-trained infantry backed up by millions of militia are not to be dismissed lightly, however old their equipment is.

It'd take time to destroy all those guns & rocket launchers, however good your air force & mobile artillery are, & while that's happening they can do a hell of a lot of damage. Ballistic missiles with chemical warheads can put airfields out of action for a long time, as can a few hundred old bombers & fighter-bombers on one-way trips. The best air defence in the world won't stop everything. Remember, the enemy won't cooperate: there'd be mass attacks, with lots of missiles at once.

Quantity has a quality of its own.
 

Meriv90

Active Member
Lived both, for some months, for study and work in Singapore and Seoul.

If in Singapore I had the feeling, it was present in the air, at least in my perception, that was their last standing, I dont know how to explain.
In Seoul I didn't get the same feeling. My perception was more oriented towards, or SK consider itself able to completely trample NK defense line saving Seoul or a conflict is literally not contemplated.

This got even more accentuated when doing roadtrips. No way to evacuate 25mln from Seoul with that infrastructure. It didn't felt isolated but not able to allow a fast escape route to such megacity.

P.s. Off-topic but my italian side literally died every time I saw how not exploited were all korean hills :p so much possibility for grapes, fruits, sheeps and goats etc.. etc...
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Why evacuate 25 million people? Look up the ranges of North Korean artillery & rockets, & where the 26 million in the Seoul Capital Area actually live.
 

Meriv90

Active Member





Yes the south of the city would be safe, Coex for example would be bordeline inside, and probably Songpa outside the range of most rockets.

The whole metropolitan area wont be inside so the 25mln isn't the right number, as you correctly write, probably more like the 10mln (the amount of shelter space after all).

Still north of the river and good portion of the south of the Han is in range. Population will be safe but focus nodes (like financial centers) are still well inside the range. Also Incheon is still inside. Dam from the map I'm discovering they would arrive even to Ansan (loved going there for ethnic food).
 

mrrosenthal

Member
I dont understand why if you know there are 10,000 fixed mobile assets, why doesn't SK have a satellite system that tracks them, and 'first strike capability' on 10,000 pieces that can attack those artilleries in a 1 to 1 ratio of attack capability to their units.
SK is advanced, so getting enough satellites, and enough precision guided attack units that constantly adjust to any movement of artillery(1 to 1) shouldn't be that complicated. No need for guessing games and complicated missile defense when their attacking pieces are known.

Just find the targets and load them into a system, and get 1 attacking unit per piece they have
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
I dont understand why if you know there are 10,000 fixed mobile assets, why doesn't SK have a satellite system that tracks them, and 'first strike capability' on 10,000 pieces that can attack those artilleries in a 1 to 1 ratio of attack capability to their units.
SK is advanced, so getting enough satellites, and enough precision guided attack units that constantly adjust to any movement of artillery(1 to 1) shouldn't be that complicated. No need for guessing games and complicated missile defense when their attacking pieces are known.

Just find the targets and load them into a system, and get 1 attacking unit per piece they have
IIRC, many of these pieces move back and worth from caves/tunnels. Not sure about satellite tracking during nighttime nor the ability for development of reliable software that could keep track of 10,000 moving pieces. A program to move most important assets south beyond range of NK arty might be a better investment.
 

Meriv90

Active Member
Because already from the first Korean war, thanks to Allied air support the north evolved its hiding capabilities and that meant massive use of tunnels.

Correct if I'm wrong but if Israel with a way smaller area, smaller opponent, way less technological opponent, had to develop the Iron Dome because it couldn't prevent all launches I would have less hope on the ability to prevent NK artillery.
 

mrrosenthal

Member
Correct if I'm wrong but if Israel with a way smaller area, smaller opponent, way less technological opponent, had to develop the Iron Dome because it couldn't prevent all launches I would have less hope on the ability to prevent NK artillery.
Israel is moving away from the Iron Dome because it views this is as a weak solution. It is moving towards Shooter to Sensor capabilities (Rafael Fire Weaver) where
1. Drones, satellites, and radar are linked
If something is fired
2. An AI processes the data and gives immediate (microseconds) directives to nearest/most effective attack capability with coordinates lined up.
So if someone fires a rocket launcher out of a window, the system lines up coordinates and can automatically fire or keep a human in the loop to agree to fire or not.

I just seems to me that Korea is preparing against a multitude threats and using expensive force buildup and redundancy as a solution rather than technical and creative solutions.
 
Last edited:

76mmGuns

Active Member
Lived both, for some months, for study and work in Singapore and Seoul.

If in Singapore I had the feeling, it was present in the air, at least in my perception, that was their last standing, I dont know how to explain.
In Seoul I didn't get the same feeling. My perception was more oriented towards, or SK consider itself able to completely trample NK defense line saving Seoul or a conflict is literally not contemplated.

This got even more accentuated when doing roadtrips. No way to evacuate 25mln from Seoul with that infrastructure. It didn't felt isolated but not able to allow a fast escape route to such megacity.

P.s. Off-topic but my italian side literally died every time I saw how not exploited were all korean hills :p so much possibility for grapes, fruits, sheeps and goats etc.. etc...
Modern Singapore has an atmosphere of being under seige????

Maybe of covid, but not in general life.
 

Blackshoe

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
I just seems to me that Korea is preparing against a multitude threats and using expensive force buildup and redundancy as a solution rather than technical and creative solutions.
My guy, your solution would cost (oh, SWAG estimate here) the entire GDP of the ROK several times over. Let's not talk about expensive here.

But as one note, some of those tubes that need to be destroyed can't be taken without artillery (well, at least not conventional shells). You need very specialized bombs to do the trick. So that takes aircraft, which requires being available, which means it's not a 100% of the time availability.

You say it "shouldn't be that complicated"...but I assure you, it is, and far more so even than that.
 

mrrosenthal

Member
If 90% of North Koreas assets are not hard targets(super underground)

My guy, your solution would cost (oh, SWAG estimate here) the entire GDP of the ROK several times over. Let's not talk about expensive here.

But as one note, some of those tubes that need to be destroyed can't be taken without artillery (well, at least not conventional shells). You need very specialized bombs to do the trick. So that takes aircraft, which requires being available, which means it's not a 100% of the time availability.

You say it "shouldn't be that complicated"...but I assure you, it is, and far more so even than that.
Then building a satellite and drone network that can see everything, an AI system to track and adjust a massive firing capability, and lining up enough artillery pieces for a 1 to 1 'first strike' ability seems like a great solution
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
If 90% of North Koreas assets are not hard targets(super underground)

Then building a satellite and drone network that can see everything, an AI system to track and adjust a massive firing capability, and lining up enough artillery pieces for a 1 to 1 'first strike' ability seems like a great solution
Those ~90% of N. Korean artillery tubes would still be something like 9,000 distinct targets, even if they are not hardened targets.

So not only would any surveillance & counterbattery system need to be able to handle the volume of data coming in from ~10k (TBH I seem to recall N. Korean having up to 11k artillery tubes positioned within range of S. Korea) shooters in areas which include rugged, mountainous terrain, S. Korea would also need to have sufficient shooter assets (tube, mortar, rocket/missile, aircraft, etc.) constantly available so that S. Korea could provide a 1:1 engagement capability.

TBH that to me sounds much less like a great solution, and much more like a fantasy solution, and that is even before considering the possibility that one or more inbound N. Korean shells could be 'special' munitions.

Now, I could well believe that S. Korean intelligence has been working diligently over the years to identify and keep track of N. Korean artillery near/along the DMZ, but again, we are talking somewhere around 10k or 11k tubes to keep track of, plus all the other N. Korean forces which could and would be used if combat were to break out again. This is turn also requires that S. Korea keep sufficient forces of the appropriate compositions to deal with/counter N. Korean forces which might be used to cross the DMZ. An anti-artillery system which detects and provides counter-battery fire direction control would be of little use should N. Korean infantry or armour cross the DMZ.

There is also the very real question on whether a system could be constructed which would able to effectively and accurately detect the incoming fires from 10k+ hostile artillery tubes and then provide the needed fire direction control for effective counter battery fires in real time. Relating to that, I am unaware of any way to accurately test the actual effectiveness of such a proposed system, given both the terrain which would need to be constantly monitored, but also the sheer number of units which would need to be tracked and coordinated with. Testing on a 'local' level could certainly be done, but attempting to test the detection of 10k targets, and then the coordination required for ~10k shooters to at least near-simultaneously to engage...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ananda

The Bunker Group

New President of ROK, coming from more conservative opposition. It is very tight race, and basically the new president before move to conservative oposition, part of current Moon Jae In liberal administrations.


Moon himself actualy quite popular, however as ROK constitution, President can only work in one term only. Thus this conservative win actualy quite an upset. How this is going to translate on engagement with DPRK, will be interesting to see.
 
Last edited:

Blackshoe

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
New President of ROK, coming from more conservative opposition. It is very tight race, and basically the new president before move to conservative oposition, part of current Moon Jae In liberal administrations.


Moon himself actualy quite popular, however as ROK constitution, President can only work in one term only. Thus this conservative win actualy quite an upset. How this is going to translate on engagement with DPRK, will be interesting to see.
It's amusing to see a guy who used to be part of the Moon admin be described as an "outsider".
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
There are several threads about North-Korea, but i think this thread is the most suitable one for this article.


So in short, according to this article, dozens of christians are caught and excuted on spot for the crime of being religious. Even just possessing a Bible is a crime, because anything else than following communism and worshipping the Kim-dynasty is regarded as a heavy sin in this country.

I havent found English language reports about this.


Edit:
I found one.

A quick search on the internet will lead to similar articles. Anyway, everyone with a other religion than communism, will get serious problems in North-Korea.
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
Those ~90% of N. Korean artillery tubes would still be something like 9,000 distinct targets, even if they are not hardened targets.

So not only would any surveillance & counterbattery system need to be able to handle the volume of data coming in from ~10k (TBH I seem to recall N. Korean having up to 11k artillery tubes positioned within range of S. Korea) shooters in areas which include rugged, mountainous terrain, S. Korea would also need to have sufficient shooter assets (tube, mortar, rocket/missile, aircraft, etc.) constantly available so that S. Korea could provide a 1:1 engagement capability.

TBH that to me sounds much less like a great solution, and much more like a fantasy solution, and that is even before considering the possibility that one or more inbound N. Korean shells could be 'special' munitions.

Now, I could well believe that S. Korean intelligence has been working diligently over the years to identify and keep track of N. Korean artillery near/along the DMZ, but again, we are talking somewhere around 10k or 11k tubes to keep track of, plus all the other N. Korean forces which could and would be used if combat were to break out again. This is turn also requires that S. Korea keep sufficient forces of the appropriate compositions to deal with/counter N. Korean forces which might be used to cross the DMZ. An anti-artillery system which detects and provides counter-battery fire direction control would be of little use should N. Korean infantry or armour cross the DMZ.

There is also the very real question on whether a system could be constructed which would able to effectively and accurately detect the incoming fires from 10k+ hostile artillery tubes and then provide the needed fire direction control for effective counter battery fires in real time. Relating to that, I am unaware of any way to accurately test the actual effectiveness of such a proposed system, given both the terrain which would need to be constantly monitored, but also the sheer number of units which would need to be tracked and coordinated with. Testing on a 'local' level could certainly be done, but attempting to test the detection of 10k targets, and then the coordination required for ~10k shooters to at least near-simultaneously to engage...
Treating it as an intellectual exercise, obviously matching tube for tube is impractical. The only solution I can think of which might have a hope in hell of actually working is having lots of missiles (artillery rockets with the simplest guidance that can reliably deliver them to a pre-registered spot) on the cheapest possible launchers targeting all the N. Korean fixed installations. But if they're in big fixed batteries they'll become prime targets for N. Korean missiles, & if they're dispersed & mobile the cost & manpower requirements rocket . . . . .
 
Top