By Anders Corr, Ph.D.

The Obama administration is currently under pressure by certain US lawmakers, as well as Britain, France, and Israel, to take limited military action in Syria. These actions could include securing a humanitarian corridor into the country, providing military equipment to the non-Al Qaeda affiliated Free Syrian Army (FSA) and Syrian Opposition Coalition (SOC), and destroying the Syrian Air Force (WSJ).

Such measures might remove a bit of pressure from rebels and provide a public opinion boost to current participating governments in the US, France, and Britain, in that voting publics in those countries would feel that their governments were doing something positive to end the Syrian crisis. However, due to the limited nature of the proposed military measures, they would not alter the balance of forces on any side of the complex conflict and could lead to notable negative consequences. Continue reading →

By Anders Corr, Ph.D.

Recent negotiations initiated by South Korea with the United States to obtain acquiescence for South Korean production of nuclear fuel show that South Korea is serious about improving its energy and security independence from the United States. Such moves are a response to growing public opinion pressure in South Korea, which perceives the need for a stronger and more independent counterweight to North Korean threats. Such steps in the fuel production cycle could eventually lead to an independent South Korean nuclear weapons capability (WSJ).

The United States seeks to assure its ally verbally, and with military training exercises, overflights, advanced fighter presence, and naval destroyer movements. But relying on an outside deterrent has become increasingly unnerving to the South Korean public. While the United States and its allies won the Cold War against the Soviets, the United States appears to be overstretched on the global stage from a South Korean perspective. Eleven years of war against terror have not yielded a clear victory. China is ascending. Nuclear proliferation edges forward, with recent proliferators being India, Pakistan, Israel, and as recently as 2006, South Korea’s belligerent neighbor North Korea. Deterrence pro tem would increase deterrence of North Korean belligerence. Continue reading →

While the probability of conflict on the Korean peninsula is still quite low, the latest military and diplomatic movements signal a greater likelihood of an outbreak.

The US moved missile defense ships to a zone near Korea that is optimal for defending against North Korean missile strikes, and South Korean President Park Geun-hye called for a swift military response without concern for politics. Both events demonstrate that the mood of the South Korean public is more bellicose than prior to the 2010 North Korean attacks. The South Korean response, according to public opinion polls, was weak. The South Korean Defense Minister of the time was forced to resign as a result (WSJ).

However, the probability of conflict is still low. The North Korean government and China know that given this history, any new attacks by North Korea would almost certainly result in a strong and potentially fatal US counter-attack. China will have already counselled its client state in North Korea to lay low for the time being.

Saturday marked the first flight between Egypt and Iran since 1979. The election of Islamist President Mohamad Mursi in Egypt in June 2012 significantly thawed relations between the two countries. Diplomatic ties had been cut by Iran in 1979 when the deposed Shah took refuge in Egypt, but the heads of state from the two countries visited in February and the relationship is now largely mended (Reuters).

President Mursi was a leader in the pan-Islamist movement called the Muslim Brotherhood, which has approximately 600,000 members who pay a percentage of their incomes to the organization. It has members worldwide, and promotes Sharia law and the unification of Arab states. These goals are, incidentally, shared by the terrorist group Al Qaeda. The 2011 popular overthrow of President Mubarak in Egypt served as a strong indicator of the Muslim Brotherhood’s growing power. The US announced diplomatic relations with the group immediately following. Egypt was a strong US ally against the Soviets during the Cold War, and was a voice for stability in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The manifestation of the Arab Spring in Egypt, which deposed long-time US ally Hosni Mubarak, has not been kind to US foreign policy goals in the region.

Iran and Egypt are the third and sixth largest Muslim countries by GDP. Iran has a GDP of $522 billion and Egypt has a GDP of $231 billion (United Nations 2011). While the economy is half that of Iran, Egypt will attempt to expand its regional power status in the Arab states, Africa, and closely align with Iran and China.

For indicators of balancing against NATO and tilting away from the US, watch for Egypt joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as an observer state, as has Iran. Watch for increased commercial relations with North Korea and Iran, and improved diplomatic ties with Pakistan. For indicators of nuclear club aspirations, watch for Egyptian efforts to improve types of nuclear power generation that yield fissile by-products for potential use in nuclear weapons. Also watch for increased Egyptian government links to organizations with likely ties to global terrorism. Egyptian political instability will continue until more authoritarian rule is imposed by either the Islamists or the pro-western faction. Expect further loss of value in Egypt-tied investments, including equities, commercial debt, and sovereign debt. Egyptian oil production is less than 1% of global supply, so there should be negligible effects on oil prices.

The United States Treasury Department claimed on March 22 that it was confident that China would back new United Nations’ financial sanctions against North Korea. The sanctions punish North Korea for the nuclear tests of February 12. An anonymous Chinese official — almost certainly speaking at the direction of his government – on March 22 revealed that China halted oil exports to North Korea.

Unfortunately, the pro forma Chinese punishment of North Korea for its most recent nuclear test will be intentionally lightweight. China had a similarly weak response to the first North Korean nuclear test on October 6, 2006, and it proved an insufficient disincentive to further nuclear and missile development. It increased backing to UN financial sanctions, and ceased oil exports to the country for a short period. As in 2006, China knows that Iran is likely to supply the energy shortfall to North Korea resulting from any loss from China’s embargo. Without a much stronger set of sanctions and enforcement mechanisms, a network of embargoed, rogue, and failed states have the outside option of trading with each other, and regaining overt Chinese and Russian support when international attention fades.

Anything more than a slap on North Korea’s wrist would chill Chinese relations with authoritarian regimes across the globe. For this reason, China can ill-afford any drastic action against North Korea. China is a long-time supporter of authoritarian governments worldwide, from Uzbekistan to Syria. This support is concretized in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. China is the key diplomatic supporter of North Korea, and can dictate many North Korean policies based on China’s economic power and physical proximity. Other authoritarian states will watch the magnitude of Chinese reaction to North Korean behavior to calibrate the trust they can place in their own relations with China. These global relations between China and authoritarian regimes are crucial for China to obtain relatively inexpensive raw commodity imports that fuel its present top priority of economic growth. It is inconceivable that China would risk slowing its own economic growth because of a recent uptick in threats to the West from North Korea.

Short-term sanctions, however, will occur. China believes the young Kim Jong-Un, the new leader of North Korea, has overstepped his bounds with recent tests and threats towards the United States and South Korea. The increased Chinese support to sanctions and a decrease in North Korea’s access to oil markets serve China as both a message to Kim Jong-Un to follow a slightly quieter path, and a tool to stave off criticism of China at the United Nations were it not to support sanctions. Time is currently on the side of China and North Korea, leading to a trend of which China is well aware. China’s economy is growing much more rapidly than Western-allied economies, which strengthens China’s military and diplomatic position with respect to the West. North Korea continues tests of its nuclear and missile technology, with no effective response from the West. With the latest sanctions, China is telling North Korea not to rock the boat because the race is being won.

Watch for China’s long and short-term strategies to have an immediate effect on Kim Jong-Un by decreasing his public belligerence. Also watch for China to ease pressure on North Korea as soon as it either complies or public attention goes elsewhere. Without a Chinese-supported embargo on imports and exports to North Korea, plus enforcement by international naval vessels deployed to the East China Sea and Sea of Japan, the latest round of financial and oil restrictions will be ineffective; North Korea will continue to progress in developing and proliferating nuclear weapons and missile technology.