Invasion Of North Korea: The Afghanistan Syndrome

Invading North Korea would be a terrible idea and could end up like Afghanistan because of the following reasons:

Firstly, North Korea has nuclear weapons, and the US has never fought a sustained conflict against a nuclear power. The North built these weapons to deter US offensive action, and it is likely that they would launch them once US ground forces arrived on their territory. Secondly, the Korean People's Army would probably fight, and with almost every able-bodied male in North Korea having extensive military training, this would be a challenging war for the US. Thirdly, the People's Liberation Army of China might also fight, as a US invasion would set US-Chinese relations back by decades and push the two countries into a larger, violent, heavily militarised cold war throughout Asia.

North Korea has nuclear weapons

North Korea is believed to possess a small but dangerous stockpile of an estimated 30 to 50 nuclear weapons, with the capability to produce fissile material for six to seven nuclear weapons per year. The country has also developed ballistic missiles capable of delivering these nuclear payloads.

The North Korean nuclear weapons program can be traced back to the 1950s, but it was in the 1960s that the country began to actively pursue nuclear capabilities. In 1963, North Korea asked the Soviet Union for assistance in developing nuclear weapons, but was refused. Instead, the Soviet Union agreed to help North Korea develop a peaceful nuclear energy program, including the training of nuclear scientists.

Over the years, North Korea has continued to develop its nuclear capabilities, despite international pressure and sanctions. In 2003, the country withdrew from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and conducted its first nuclear test in 2006. Since then, North Korea has conducted five additional tests, with the most recent one taking place in 2017.

The North Korean leadership views nuclear weapons as a means of protecting the regime from perceived security threats posed by adversarial countries. In recent years, North Korea has accelerated its nuclear and missile testing program, conducting more than 90 tests of various missile systems in 2022 alone.

The possession of nuclear weapons by North Korea has significant implications for any potential military action against the country. The country's nuclear arsenal serves as a deterrent, and there is a high risk that North Korea would use these weapons if it perceives its leadership or command structure to be under threat.

In the event of a conflict, North Korea could use its nuclear weapons at the beginning of a war, rather than as a last resort. This is because North Korea understands that any US and South Korean strike would aim to destroy or capture its nuclear weapons. Therefore, North Korea may feel compelled to use its nuclear arsenal early in the conflict to avoid losing it altogether.

Additionally, North Korea's nuclear weapons give it the ability to credibly threaten to destroy major US cities, which could make the US hesitant to intervene militarily in the region. This dynamic could potentially change the strategic calculus and increase the risk of miscalculation or misinterpretation leading to a full-blown war.

In conclusion, North Korea's nuclear weapons program poses a significant challenge to regional stability and global security. The country's possession of nuclear weapons increases the risks associated with any potential military action and underscores the need for a diplomatic solution to address the issue.

The Korean People's Army would probably fight

The Korean People's Army (KPA) is the unified military force of North Korea, encompassing the Ground Force, the Naval Force, the Air Force, the Strategic Force, and the Special Operation Force. It is the second-largest military organisation in the world, with 29.9% of North Korea's population actively serving, in reserve, or in a paramilitary capacity.

The KPA has a mix of domestically produced and imported equipment in its inventory. Prior to the breakup of the Soviet Union, most of these items were Soviet-made, and later, from China. The KPA's arsenal includes 4,100 tanks, 2,100 armoured personnel carriers, 8,500 field artillery pieces, 5,100 multiple rocket launchers, 11,000 air defence guns, and some 10,000 MANPADS and anti-tank guided missiles.

The KPA has positioned massive numbers of artillery pieces, especially its longer-range systems, close to the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) that separates the two Koreas. North Korea's threat of a 'sea of fire' upon Seoul, the capital of South Korea, is usually taken to refer to the use of this artillery. Studies have differed over the number of casualties these artillery pieces can inflict. One study suggests that the North Korean artillery, if fired to cause maximum civilian casualties instead of for military effect, could inflict "only" about 3,000–30,000 casualties in the first day of a conflict, after which the population would evacuate or find shelter. Another study estimates that Kim could hammer the South Korean capital with an astonishing 10,000 rockets per minute—and that such a barrage could kill more than 300,000 South Koreans in the opening days of the conflict.

The KPA's Ground Force was formed on 20 August 1947. It outnumbered and outgunned the South Korean army during the Korean War in June 1950 before being pushed back by a combined United Nations-Republic of Korea counteroffensive.

The KPA has a vast number of rocket launchers and artillery pieces within range of Seoul. It is highly likely that Kim would use these weapons to devastating effect if the US were to invade North Korea.

The People's Liberation Army might fight too

The People's Liberation Army (PLA) of China might fight too if the US invades North Korea.

Firstly, China has a mutual defence treaty with North Korea. This means that China is obliged to defend North Korea if it is attacked. However, this treaty does not apply if North Korea initiates aggression.

Secondly, China has a history of intervening in the Korean Peninsula. In 1950, China's Mao Zedong sent hundreds of thousands of troops to North Korea to prevent the fall of the Kim regime and to avoid sharing a border with a US ally. This intervention was also driven by Mao's unwillingness to see the defeat of a fellow communist government.

Thirdly, China's primary strategic concern is to keep the Korean Peninsula out of US hands. A unified Korea allied with the US would break the strategic balance in the region. China would also lose its strategic buffer against the US.

Fourthly, China has a vested interest in preventing a massive flow of refugees into its territory. It also wants to prevent the contamination that would result from the activation of North Korea's chemical weapons.

Finally, China has been North Korea's most important trading partner and ally. Although there has been friction between the two countries, China has continued to support North Korea economically and diplomatically.

Therefore, if the US invades North Korea, the PLA might fight too in order to defend its ally, maintain regional stability, and protect its strategic interests.

Reconstruction would fall to the US

The US has spent billions of dollars on reconstruction projects in Afghanistan, and the same would likely be true if it invaded North Korea. However, the US reconstruction of Afghanistan has been criticised as wasteful and ineffective.

In Afghanistan, the US spent $133 billion on reconstruction, aid programs, and security forces. This is more than the US spent on the Marshall Plan in Western Europe after World War II, adjusted for inflation. Despite this enormous investment, the US has failed to achieve its goals in Afghanistan. Experts argue that the US foolishly tried to reinvent Afghanistan in its own image, imposing a centralised democracy and a free-market economy on an ancient, tribal society.

The US has built schools, hospitals, roads, and other infrastructure in Afghanistan. However, much of this infrastructure has fallen into disrepair or been abandoned. For example, the US spent $775 million on electrical projects in Kandahar, including the Kajaki Dam, but power generation in Kandahar is still plagued by dysfunction, and the Afghan public utility there may never be commercially viable.

The US also spent $3.7 billion on the Commanders' Emergency Response Program (CERP), which allowed military commanders to bypass normal contracting rules and spend up to $1 million on infrastructure projects. However, this program was criticised as wasteful and ineffective, with commanders copying paperwork from past projects and unable to demonstrate that the projects were achieving their intended outcomes.

The reconstruction effort in Afghanistan has also come at a high human cost. A report by the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction found that 2,214 people have been killed and 2,291 wounded in attacks on reconstruction projects since 2002.

If the US invaded North Korea, it would likely face similar challenges. North Korea, like Afghanistan, is a poor country with an ancient, tribal society. Imposing a centralised democracy and a free-market economy on North Korea would likely be just as challenging as it has been in Afghanistan. Additionally, North Korea has a large standing army, and an invasion would likely result in heavy casualties on both sides. Therefore, it is likely that the US would face similar challenges in trying to rebuild North Korea as it has in Afghanistan.

North Korea would use nuclear weapons at the beginning of a war

North Korea has a military nuclear weapons program and is estimated to have an arsenal of around 50 nuclear weapons. It has also stockpiled a significant quantity of chemical and biological weapons.

North Korea has expressed its intention to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict on the Korean peninsula. There are three main reasons for this:

• Operationally, Pyongyang will face an intense "use-it-or-lose-it" dilemma regarding its weapons of mass destruction as soon as a war starts. The US will try to immediately suppress Northern missiles, creating an extreme dilemma for Pyongyang. If Kim Jong-un does not use his nuclear weapons at the start of hostilities, most will be destroyed shortly after by allied airpower, turning the conflict into a conventional war that the North will probably lose.
• Strategically, North Korea's conventional military capabilities are quite inferior to those of the US and South Korea. The North Korean army is large but its equipment is technologically outdated. The country's chronic malnutrition likely affects its soldiers' health and fitness. Allied air supremacy would expose North Korean military assets to intense, immediate bombardment. The US and South Korea also have superiority in almost every other area, including logistics, communications, intelligence, surveillance, and weaponry.
• On a grand strategic level, any serious conflict between the two Koreas will quickly become existential for the North. Defeat would bring regime change and probably annihilation for Kim Jong-un and his family.

In September 2022, North Korea passed a law enshrining the right to use preemptive nuclear strikes to protect itself. Under this law, Kim Jong-un has "all decisive powers" over nuclear weapons. If the command-and-control system is threatened, then missiles may be launched "automatically".

North Korea's use of the term "launch drill" instead of "test firing" to describe an ICBM launch in December 2023 suggested that the country is ready to mass-produce and deploy Hwasong-18 ICBMs.

North Korea's nuclear arsenal poses a significant threat to South Korea and Japan, and its ability to target the continental US with nuclear weapons has raised concerns about the credibility of the US nuclear umbrella in these countries.

Frequently asked questions