By So how likely do people think this US Army war game is to happen:
North Korean forces are invading South Korea. Drug gangs along the U.S.-Mexican border are seizing parts of El Paso, Texas. A nuclear device is floating in waters somewhere near the U.S. And, NATO forces are deploying along the border of Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan to quell ethnic violence. American military minds confronted these crises in detail. But don’t worry. It’s not yet the end of the world. All were of fictional future scenarios from a U.S. Army wargame at the U.S. Army War College in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. They are designed to help U.S. forces anticipate and prepare for tomorrow’s military problems. (…………)
And then there’s North Korea. The scenario facing the Pacific Command (PACOM) posits that Kim Jong Il dies in 2016 and is replaced by a new leader who resumes the processing of uranium for the countries’ long-disputed nuclear weapons program. Once two North Korean uranium enrichment plants are discovered, the United Nations passes a security council resolution to oppose the action. In response, North Korean forces cross the DMZ and launch an invasion of the south by disguising thousands of troops within groups of refugees, creating what is called “an irrgular warfare-type scenario that may require a mixture of conventional and counterinsurgency tactics.” (……….)
In the case of the North Korea scenario, the Blue forces decided to launch measured air strikes as an initial move. “The military is one of the options we have to use. The problem here is complex. You don’t really have your full-frontal attack with the North Korean Army coming,” says U.S. Army Col. Chris Chae, blue team lead for the North Korea panel. [TIME]
This war game is already out of date because North Korea has already said they plan on reprocessing uranium and producing more nuclear bombs. Also I have a hard time believing that the ROK Army manning the DMZ would allow in thousands of refugees without checking them for weapons. I don’t have the context of what the term launching airstrikes means but I have to wonder what the logic is of launching air strikes within the densely populated South Korea would be when these North Korean soldiers are dressed as civilians?
I have always believed that if the US bombed North Korea’s nuclear and missile sites, which I am by the way against, that North Korea would respond by launching small scale infiltrators to ambush soldiers and launch terrorism attacks. Then the North Koreans will blame the United States bombing raids for the need to launch these attacks and coordinate this with their South Korean fifth column who will begin protesting and broadcasting fraudulent information over the Internet and television against the US military. Look at what the misinformation launched by these groups did in 2002 when two Korean girls were tragically killed in military vehicle accident, imagine what the response would be if the United States is blamed for the deaths of hundreds of people?
Sending thousands of soldiers across the DMZ disguised as civilians to attack the South would be a declaration of war. The North Koreans might as well as launch a full scale attack then. In my opinion the North Koreans will not do anything that would lead to the destruction of their regime, which an invasion of the South would be. So these war planners are on the right track in regards to irregular warfare, but they might want to reassess what method of irregular warfare the North Koreans will use.
10:12 am on May 12th, 2009 1
I have just a couple of points.
First, these don't appear to be in depth wargames, just mental drills. I can't remember how many times we beat back the soviet-esq East Northistanians least we piss off the easily offended peaceloving soviets. At least they are using real country names this time.
Second, a dozen or so acts of the norks in the past decade have also qualified as acts of war. They have infiltrated entire squads, blow up airliners, ambushed ships south of the NLL, etc. They can actually get away with a lot because we let them. The norks will continue to poke the badger, it has always worked for them in the past.
Finally, are those the new Axis and Allies minitures? I really miss Panzer Blitz and Panzer Leader.
2:55 pm on May 12th, 2009 2
If the aim is to get minds to thinking about different ways in which refugee streams with mixed in soldiers might be handled in a real situation, then I'd guess the whole scenario isn't really too vital and this one works well enough. Otherwise, I agree that the scenario is too unlikely.
If the North were to plan something like this, something like a rolling invasion, they'd try their best to coordinate it with not just infiltrations at the DMZ but disruptive acts of terrorism and "uprisings" across the whole of the peninsula, especially in key cities well to the south – like Pusan and Kwangju. And I think the big war plans have always kept that in mind, if I'm not mistaken.
It's hard for me to imagine any situation in which North Korea would use refugee flows as a primary initiating tactic. They have too much control of their people and of the DMZ.
I can picture refugee flows more like in the Korean War after the US starts striking back into the North and the North has less means of controlling its civilians.
But, I think a more realistic war came scenario would be one in which the start of a new post-Kim regime dramatically losses significant amounts of control of the regime — say — faces a revolt in one or more of the provinces that make up or are near the DMZ — an uprising that includes revolt by some military units in the area. Then, as the central government tries to regain control, all hell is basically breaking out, and then refugee flows start braving the hurdles of the DMZ. And then as part of that, the North also infiltrates fighters —- as a "going for broke" effort to expand the conflict. Maybe even thinking that by expanding the conflict into the northern areas of the South, it can force the US and SK and world community to help it regain control of its own provinces…???…
Not that specific scene – but the general idea is what I'm putting my money on as how things will come to an end for the regime: that it will start to implode and decide to go down swinging by throwing what it has left against South Korea (and possible Japan with missiles).
9:46 pm on May 12th, 2009 3
Nice Sherman tank, is than an M4A3 variant? From the look of the end of the barrel it looks like it's seen some action.
11:50 pm on May 12th, 2009 4
There is a big difference between a infiltrating platoon sized elements into South Korea and thousands of soldiers as this war game claims as an invasion of the South. There is no doubt this would be an act of war.
12:29 pm on May 13th, 2009 5
Well those war games are just quick mental exercises meant to get students thinking of non-linear warfare. To start to see the "big picture" of conflicts (as generals must) rather then the force-counterforce tactical engagements (as field officers do).
For the "real" conflict as it is now. North Korea won't do anything that would cause a regime removal scenario to take place. But we (the US Armed Forces) must make it perfectly clear how capable we are of executing that scenario should we be required to do so. This is why we conduct so many exercised every year, with the two "big ones" being so damn public. We monitor everything that moves in NK, we would know if they sent any sort of large force "over the wire". And we WANT them to know that we know it. That is the whole base of our strategy now.