South Korean Unification Minister Cho Myoung-Gyon (R) shakes hands with the head of the North Korean delegation Ri Son-Gwon (L) after their meeting in the Demilitarized Zone on Jan. 9, 2018 in Panmunjom, South Korea. (Photo: Korea Pool/Getty Images)
Jan 09, 2018
Following diplomatic talks between North and South Korea aimed at easing tensions over military drills and nuclear weapons, the North has agreed to send a contingent of athletes and high ranking officials to the Olympic Games in PyeongChang next month, even as the Trump administration is reportedly considering launching a limited attack on a North Korean facility in what's been dubbed a "bloody nose" strike.
Tuesday's talks--the first in over two years--come in response to a overture by North Korea leader Kim Jong Un amid global concerns over his country's nuclear weapons program. As Korean diplomats meet at a village on the nations' militarized border to discuss the Olympics--including the proposal that both countries march together during opening and closing ceremonies--and family reunification, with the hope of working toward the nuclear issue, the Wall Street Journal reports, "U.S. officials are quietly debating whether it's possible to mount a limited military strike against North Korean sites without igniting an all-out war on the Korean Peninsula."
The Journal's Washington bureau chief, Gerald F. Seib, details what he calls the "enormously risky idea" that U.S. war hawks within the Trump administration are supposedly weighing:
The idea is known as the "bloody nose" strategy: React to some nuclear or missile test with a targeted strike against a North Korean facility to bloody Pyongyang's nose and illustrate the high price the regime could pay for its behavior. The hope would be to make that point without inciting a full-bore reprisal by North Korea.
It's an enormously risky idea, and there is a debate among Trump administration officials about whether it is feasible. North Koreans have a vast array of artillery tubes pointed across the demilitarized zone at Seoul, the capital of South Korea, with which they could inflict thousands of casualties within minutes if they choose to unleash an all-out barrage.
Now, that danger is coupled with the risk that the North Koreans could attempt to use a nuclear weapon if they choose to escalate in retaliation against even a single strike.
Officials told Seib that within the Trump administration, the president is the "wild card," as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis push for a diplomatic effort to convince North Korea to denuclearize, while national security adviser H.R. McMaster "is arguing more vocally, publicly and privately, that military options need to be considered."
As the administration's warring factions lobby for the support of a president who has repeatedly attacked the diplomatic route and is inclined to possibly provoke nuclear war with fiery tweets aimed at Kim, the open question remains whether diplomatic talks will continue beyond the Olympics to address the issues critical to Seoul, namely the process of family reunification and lessening regional hostility.
Ultimately, Seib notes, "the diplomatic move needed to really start dialing back tensions would be conversations between North Korea and the U.S," and unfortuantely, "that possibility seems stuck in a long-distance dance between Pyongyang and Washington, with each side making opening bids the other finds unacceptable."
After the Journal story broke, politicians as well as international affairs and national security experts from across the political spectrum raised alarms about the potential consequences of a "bloody nose" strike:
\u201cPOTUS, given your scathing criticism of the Bushes & the Iraq war, the bloody nose theory & cries for preemptive war make no sense. Don\u2019t let \u201cexperts\u201d talk you into another FP blunder. Stick w/ peace through strength thru containment & tough diplomacy. https://t.co/427yXeWXY2\u201d— Rep. Ro Khanna (@Rep. Ro Khanna) 1515504374
\u201cThe "bloody nose" concept to strike North Korea is aptly named. It would be an act of irrational frustration that only makes a bad situation worse. https://t.co/MJRrCXa8W4\u201d— Adam Mount (@Adam Mount) 1515473778
\u201cJust as my anxiety level about North Korea was starting to drop:\nhttps://t.co/DNZR7UqmTB\u201d— Forrest Wickman (@Forrest Wickman) 1515509074
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just hours away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Following diplomatic talks between North and South Korea aimed at easing tensions over military drills and nuclear weapons, the North has agreed to send a contingent of athletes and high ranking officials to the Olympic Games in PyeongChang next month, even as the Trump administration is reportedly considering launching a limited attack on a North Korean facility in what's been dubbed a "bloody nose" strike.
Tuesday's talks--the first in over two years--come in response to a overture by North Korea leader Kim Jong Un amid global concerns over his country's nuclear weapons program. As Korean diplomats meet at a village on the nations' militarized border to discuss the Olympics--including the proposal that both countries march together during opening and closing ceremonies--and family reunification, with the hope of working toward the nuclear issue, the Wall Street Journal reports, "U.S. officials are quietly debating whether it's possible to mount a limited military strike against North Korean sites without igniting an all-out war on the Korean Peninsula."
The Journal's Washington bureau chief, Gerald F. Seib, details what he calls the "enormously risky idea" that U.S. war hawks within the Trump administration are supposedly weighing:
The idea is known as the "bloody nose" strategy: React to some nuclear or missile test with a targeted strike against a North Korean facility to bloody Pyongyang's nose and illustrate the high price the regime could pay for its behavior. The hope would be to make that point without inciting a full-bore reprisal by North Korea.
It's an enormously risky idea, and there is a debate among Trump administration officials about whether it is feasible. North Koreans have a vast array of artillery tubes pointed across the demilitarized zone at Seoul, the capital of South Korea, with which they could inflict thousands of casualties within minutes if they choose to unleash an all-out barrage.
Now, that danger is coupled with the risk that the North Koreans could attempt to use a nuclear weapon if they choose to escalate in retaliation against even a single strike.
Officials told Seib that within the Trump administration, the president is the "wild card," as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis push for a diplomatic effort to convince North Korea to denuclearize, while national security adviser H.R. McMaster "is arguing more vocally, publicly and privately, that military options need to be considered."
As the administration's warring factions lobby for the support of a president who has repeatedly attacked the diplomatic route and is inclined to possibly provoke nuclear war with fiery tweets aimed at Kim, the open question remains whether diplomatic talks will continue beyond the Olympics to address the issues critical to Seoul, namely the process of family reunification and lessening regional hostility.
Ultimately, Seib notes, "the diplomatic move needed to really start dialing back tensions would be conversations between North Korea and the U.S," and unfortuantely, "that possibility seems stuck in a long-distance dance between Pyongyang and Washington, with each side making opening bids the other finds unacceptable."
After the Journal story broke, politicians as well as international affairs and national security experts from across the political spectrum raised alarms about the potential consequences of a "bloody nose" strike:
\u201cPOTUS, given your scathing criticism of the Bushes & the Iraq war, the bloody nose theory & cries for preemptive war make no sense. Don\u2019t let \u201cexperts\u201d talk you into another FP blunder. Stick w/ peace through strength thru containment & tough diplomacy. https://t.co/427yXeWXY2\u201d— Rep. Ro Khanna (@Rep. Ro Khanna) 1515504374
\u201cThe "bloody nose" concept to strike North Korea is aptly named. It would be an act of irrational frustration that only makes a bad situation worse. https://t.co/MJRrCXa8W4\u201d— Adam Mount (@Adam Mount) 1515473778
\u201cJust as my anxiety level about North Korea was starting to drop:\nhttps://t.co/DNZR7UqmTB\u201d— Forrest Wickman (@Forrest Wickman) 1515509074
Following diplomatic talks between North and South Korea aimed at easing tensions over military drills and nuclear weapons, the North has agreed to send a contingent of athletes and high ranking officials to the Olympic Games in PyeongChang next month, even as the Trump administration is reportedly considering launching a limited attack on a North Korean facility in what's been dubbed a "bloody nose" strike.
Tuesday's talks--the first in over two years--come in response to a overture by North Korea leader Kim Jong Un amid global concerns over his country's nuclear weapons program. As Korean diplomats meet at a village on the nations' militarized border to discuss the Olympics--including the proposal that both countries march together during opening and closing ceremonies--and family reunification, with the hope of working toward the nuclear issue, the Wall Street Journal reports, "U.S. officials are quietly debating whether it's possible to mount a limited military strike against North Korean sites without igniting an all-out war on the Korean Peninsula."
The Journal's Washington bureau chief, Gerald F. Seib, details what he calls the "enormously risky idea" that U.S. war hawks within the Trump administration are supposedly weighing:
The idea is known as the "bloody nose" strategy: React to some nuclear or missile test with a targeted strike against a North Korean facility to bloody Pyongyang's nose and illustrate the high price the regime could pay for its behavior. The hope would be to make that point without inciting a full-bore reprisal by North Korea.
It's an enormously risky idea, and there is a debate among Trump administration officials about whether it is feasible. North Koreans have a vast array of artillery tubes pointed across the demilitarized zone at Seoul, the capital of South Korea, with which they could inflict thousands of casualties within minutes if they choose to unleash an all-out barrage.
Now, that danger is coupled with the risk that the North Koreans could attempt to use a nuclear weapon if they choose to escalate in retaliation against even a single strike.
Officials told Seib that within the Trump administration, the president is the "wild card," as Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis push for a diplomatic effort to convince North Korea to denuclearize, while national security adviser H.R. McMaster "is arguing more vocally, publicly and privately, that military options need to be considered."
As the administration's warring factions lobby for the support of a president who has repeatedly attacked the diplomatic route and is inclined to possibly provoke nuclear war with fiery tweets aimed at Kim, the open question remains whether diplomatic talks will continue beyond the Olympics to address the issues critical to Seoul, namely the process of family reunification and lessening regional hostility.
Ultimately, Seib notes, "the diplomatic move needed to really start dialing back tensions would be conversations between North Korea and the U.S," and unfortuantely, "that possibility seems stuck in a long-distance dance between Pyongyang and Washington, with each side making opening bids the other finds unacceptable."
After the Journal story broke, politicians as well as international affairs and national security experts from across the political spectrum raised alarms about the potential consequences of a "bloody nose" strike:
\u201cPOTUS, given your scathing criticism of the Bushes & the Iraq war, the bloody nose theory & cries for preemptive war make no sense. Don\u2019t let \u201cexperts\u201d talk you into another FP blunder. Stick w/ peace through strength thru containment & tough diplomacy. https://t.co/427yXeWXY2\u201d— Rep. Ro Khanna (@Rep. Ro Khanna) 1515504374
\u201cThe "bloody nose" concept to strike North Korea is aptly named. It would be an act of irrational frustration that only makes a bad situation worse. https://t.co/MJRrCXa8W4\u201d— Adam Mount (@Adam Mount) 1515473778
\u201cJust as my anxiety level about North Korea was starting to drop:\nhttps://t.co/DNZR7UqmTB\u201d— Forrest Wickman (@Forrest Wickman) 1515509074
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.