Global Network Conference Keynote:  StratCom is the Main Threat to
Peace in Korean Peninsula

By Ko Young-dae (Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea)


( Keynote speech by Mr. Ko Young-dae, SPARK co-representative at
Global Network conference held in Omaha, Nebraska on April 12, 2008)


After the September 11 incident, by the Bush administration's
decision, the USSTRATCOM began to develop a close relationship with
the Korean Peninsula. On December 31, 2001, Bush submitted the Nuclear
Posture Review, which defined Russia, China, and the so-called "rogue
states" - North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya - as potential
targets of pre-emptive nuclear strikes. Moreover, North Korea and
Iraq, unlike the other three nations, were singled out as "chronic
military concerns." Since Iraq is under US occupation, only North
Korea remains as a "chronic military concern."


Moreover, based on the NPR, the Bush administration has formulated a
nuclear war strategy plan with North Korea and Iran as the main
targets, thereby making the Korean Peninsula the most dangerous region
in the world, with the US nuclear weapons playing a part in military
strategy.


This nuclear war plan is called CONPLAN 8022, which combines five
regional theaters into a single unit and articulates the idea of a
global strike, where by the US can strike at any region within one
hour.


CONPLAN 8022 was completed in November 2003, and was approved by
former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld in June 2004. This plan includes
Pinpoint attack, destruction of underground military facilities,
cyberwarfare to demobilize anti-missile systems and air defense, and
the use of Special Operational Forces to seize North Korea's nuclear
facilities and weapons.


It can't be denied that CONPLAN 8022 may have been implemented in
2003, when it was formulated, and the Korean peninsula was immersed in
a military crisis atmosphere.


Bush also strengthened the OPLANS of the USPACOM, ROK-US Combined
Forces Command (CFC)/United Nations Command (UNC). These included
PACOM, CFC, UNC OPLANS 5026, 5028, 5029, 5030, in addition to 5027.
OPLAN 5027 was developed beginning in 1974, but OPLAN 5026 and 5029
were developed at the same time as CONPLAN 8022, and have similar
operational purposes and complementary characteristics.


OPLAN 5027 also is based on the use of nuclear weapons. The
pre-emptive strike strategy appeared after OPLAN 5027-98. OPLAN
5027-04 includes MD, while OPLAN 5027-06 includes pre-emptive strike
against North Korea's nuclear missile facilities.


During the 25th ROK-US Military Committee Meeting (November 2003), it
was agreed that CONPLAN 5029 would develop OPLAN 5029, but it was not
established due to the ROK government's opposition. Under US pressure,
however, in June 2005 defense ministers agreed to push OPLAN 5029,
which is expected to be completed by 2008. OPLAN 5029 violates
international law because it is very aggressive. It envisions military
intervention during turmoil in North Korea, and even in times of
natural disasters. The main purpose of OPLAN 5029 is to allow the US,
not South Korea, take over and seize North Korea's nuclear facilities,
weapons, and materials.


As requested by the US, OPLAN 5026 was agreed upon during the ROK-US
Security Consultative Meeting(SCM) in December 2002 and was completed
in July 2003. It stipulates pinpoint attacks on 700 targets including
nuclears biological, and chemical (NBC) facilities and command and
control facilities. It also includes a counter plan against North
Korea's long-range artillery. Thus OPLAN 5026 functions as a
supplement to OPLAN 5027 and 5029, and CONPLAN 8022.


If a war breaks out in Korea, USSTRATCOM, with strengthened
authorities, increased responsibilities, and organic units, is likely
to take the commanding lead. USSTRATCOM's role has expanded to nuclear
and conventional war, space, global strike, missile defense,
cyberwarfare, and Combating WMD. To perform this role, USSTRATCOM
subordinated USSPACECOM in October 1, 2002, and organized Air Combat
Command, USPACFLTCOM, USATLANTFLTCOM. Intelligence reports including
IMINT and SIGINT collected from the Korean peninsula and the rest of
Northeast Asia are reported to the USSTRATCOM.


"A Framework for Peace and Security in Korea and Northeast Asia,"
formulated by the Atlantic Council Working Group in April 2007, cites
North Korea's fear of a potential US attack as one of the reasons why
the North developed nuclear weapons, the fear of a potential US
attack.


This Working Group's suggestion is valid, considering the development
of the crisis at the time. Whenever Bush exerted pressure on North
Korea, by including North Korea as a preemptive strike target in the
NPR, including it in the "axis of evil", expanding the Proliferation
Security Initiative (PSI) that is anti-North Korea blockade policy,
North Korea responded in defense of its system. For example, in
response to the "axis of evil" label, it considered it as a
declaration of war against NK. In response to being targeted for a
preemptive under NPR, it stated that the Agreed Framework would have
to be reevaluated completely. It claimed that the PSI is another
example of the US's hostle policy, which aims to isolate and strangle
North Korea.


Thus when the US occupied Iraq and began to talk about a military
crisis in Korea, in October 2003, North Korea announced that it had
completed the reprocessing of nuclear materials and that it was
strengthening its nuclear deterrence capability as a self-defense
measure. This turn of events shows that North Korea decided to develop
nuclear weapons US military policies such as the preemptive strike
plan and CONPLAN 8022.


The Bush administration is capable of pressuring North Korea
militarily, more than any other previous administration, because of
the ROK-US Alliance, which came into being based on the Mutual Defense
Treaty and Agreed Minutes (November 1954). With the establishment of
the alliance, South Korea became dependent on the US in political,
military, economic, state, reunification matters, in all matters. In
military matters. ROK forces lost wartime military operational control
authority, (OPCON), to US Forces in Korea. This means that South Korea
has limited power over military administration and is dependent on the
US in areas such as military strategy and weapons systems.


After the Cold War, as the US became the only superpower and as South
Korea surpassed North Korea in military capabilities, the ROK-US
alliance's stance against North Korea became more apparent. In June
1994, the Clinton administration contemplated a nuclear strike against
NK, but gave up after computer simulations showed that vast
destruction in South Korea and even Japan world result.


The aggressive nature of ROK-US alliance has heightened during the
Bush administration. The US and South Korean authorities are thinking
of a new ROK-US alliance based on strengthening their postures against
North Korea, as well as expanding operations to 'out of area', beyond
the Korean peninsula.


First, this involved relocating of US forces from the forward
deployment near the DMZ to the rear, out of range of North Korea's
long-lange artillery, removing the abstacles to launching a preemptive
strike, and installing MD. To implement CONPLAN 8022, the US to deploy
Aegis destroyers and submarines carrying Trident missiles, equipped
with the most advanced utra-sophisticated conventional warheads, on
the high seas near the Korean peninsula.


Moreover the policy of Strategic Flexibility was agreed on, allowing
'out of area' operations beyond the Korea peninsula, which was
prohibited before January 2006. Therefore, US Forces in Korea, without
consultation or agreement by the ROK government, have acquired the
potential to intervene in a conflict in the Taiwan strait or any other
crisis region in the world.


The new alliance's call for 'out of area' operations beyond Korea
suggests a call for a regional alliance. The current Asia-Pacific
alliance system is based on bilateral alliances such as the US-Japan,
US-Australia, US-Korea, and Japan-Australia alliances. The US is using
the USPACOM's Theater Security Cooperation Plan to develop bilateral
alliances into an Asia Pacific regional military alliance.


On November 18, 2007, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and
then-President Roh Moo Hyun agreed to expand the ROK-US alliance into
a global alliance and agreed to explore South Korea's participation in
NATO and the Global Partnership program, which suggests the US
ambition of elevating the Asia- Pacific alliance into a global
military alliance.


The US government reportedly is planning to establish the US-led Pan-
Asia Pacific Security Union. The first step toward this is to include
South Korea and Japan in PAPSU, and the South Korea-USA Summit Talk in
April will be the beginning of this first step. The second step is to
include Taiwan, Australia, and New Zealand in PAPSU. The plan to
establish PAPSU clearly shows the US government¡¯s intention to build
a multilateral security alliance in the Asia-Pacific region.


The formation of a US-led Asia-Pacific alliance and a globel alliance
will be facilitated by US-led combined exercises such as the Rim of
the Pacific exercise which involves Asia Pacific alliance nations and
NATO, and the Theater Security Cooperation Plan, RF-A/N, in which the
US's Asia-Pacific allies and NATO countries take part.


Countering this trend, China and Russia are increasing their military
cooperation and are engaged in combined exercises such as landing on
the Korean peninsula. They are continuously engaged in combined
exercises through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. In August
2007, SCO, in order to counter NATO's eastward expansion, held
large-scale combined exercises, using advanced conventional weapons,
in Xinjang, China and Chelyabinsk, Russia, in the Eurasian heartland.
This suggests the US's global alliance building may lead to a new Cold
War.


One of the ways to disable USSTRATCOM's CONPLAN 8022 is to establish
peace on the Korean Peninsula. For the 55 years since the Korean War
ended with the signing of the armistice agreement, the Korean
peninsula has been experienced continuous military confrontation and
local conflicts, and has been exposed to the constant danger that
these could escalate into all-out war.


The only way to ensure peace on the Korean peninsula is to conclude a
peace agreement and end the Korean War legally and to demilitarize to
the level where the two sides would not be able to engage in
aggressive all-out war. Moreover, during this process the USFK must be
withdrawn. The USFK are the principal offender in the military crises
that destabilize the Korean peninsula. Therefore, unless and until the
USFK are completely and permanently withdrawn from South Korea, it
will be impossible to establish peace on the Korean peninsula. Also,
withdrawal of the USFK is an obligation stipulated in article 60 of
the armistice agreement.


In the 9·19 Joint Declaration resulting from the 6-Party Talks in
Beijing, it was agreed that holding a forum on the establishment of a
peace structure for the Korea peninsula greatly increases the chances
for concluding a peace agreement. If a peace agreement for the Korean
peninsula is concluded, the withdrawal of the USFK is realized, and
peace is established on the Korean peninsula, this will be a major
contribution to the attainment of peace in the Northeast Asian region
as well.


SPARK (Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea) is now working
with other civic organizations to realize the conclusion of a Korean
peninsula peace agreement and the withdrawal of the USFK. SPARK is
also struggling to prevent the reinforcement of the South Korean-US
military alliance, since it is incompatible with a peace agreement and
withdrawal of US troops.


Our struggle to achieve that result will make a small contribution
toward disabling USSTRATCOM and CON-PLAN 8022 here.


We rely on the Global Network's active support and engagement to this end.


Thank you very much.

http://www.spark946.org/bugsboard/lee/mj_english_doing.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)