A friendly neighborhood best guarantee for South Korea's national security

[ChineseTiger1986]

Hurting the economic relations between China and South Korea plays rights into the hands of the US.

US sees China's strong economic bond with South Korea. The US wants to damage that anyway they can.

THAAD has multiple purposes. One, to monitor Chinese missile launches. Two, damage economic relations between China-South Korea. Three, bring South Korea over to the anti-China camp.

South Korea is not the enemy of China here, it is America. South Korea is a mere vassal state. It has no independent foreign policy. It's basically America's '51st' state that has a bunch of 'South Koreans' living there.

China must target America.

Also to monitor Russia's ICBMs in its eastern part.

One stone three birds.

 

[TaiShang]

Hurting the economic relations between China and South Korea plays rights into the hands of the US.

US sees China's strong economic bond with South Korea. The US wants to damage that anyway they can.

THAAD has multiple purposes. One, to monitor Chinese missile launches. Two, damage economic relations between China-South Korea. Three, bring South Korea over to the anti-China camp.

South Korea is not the enemy of China here, it is America. South Korea is a mere vassal state. It has no independent foreign policy. It's basically America's '51st' state that has a bunch of 'South Koreans' living there.

China must target America.

That's exactly the reason why I shared the news. The THAAD development should not lead to decline in business relations, which would directly serve to the US interests.

China (and Russia) needs to continue to pressure SK for a win-win solution (SK has every right to seek protection, but, it needs to do it without harming Chinese and Russian national security and through domestic means without inviting a third actor).

"The global anti-missile systems will not only do no good for promoting global security, but will also weaken global security. It will disrupt the global strategic balance which we've maintained since the second world war. The deployment will greatly increase the risk of military escalation -- which also includes the DPRK. It's a very bad signal for South Korea So I think for South Korea, the first interest is drop the plan," President of Russian Institute of Strategic Research Mikhail Remizov said."

CCTV News

 

[BoQ77]

That's exactly the reason why I shared the news. The THAAD development should not lead to decline in business relations, which would directly serve to the US interests.

China (and Russia) needs to continue to pressure SK for a win-win solution (SK has every right to seek protection, but, it needs to do it without harming Chinese and Russian national security and through domestic means without inviting a third actor).

"The global anti-missile systems will not only do no good for promoting global security, but will also weaken global security. It will disrupt the global strategic balance which we've maintained since the second world war. The deployment will greatly increase the risk of military escalation -- which also includes the DPRK. It's a very bad signal for South Korea So I think for South Korea, the first interest is drop the plan," President of Russian Institute of Strategic Research Mikhail Remizov said."

CCTV News

You can't order they shoot NK BM only but not CN BM if the missile overfly SK.
There're some solution,
- China donates their interceptors to SK with condition that only SK personnel could use that.
- China press NK to stop developing nuclear weapon and ballistic missiles ( this is clearly a great support to regional peace )

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

A unified Korea is not in the best interests of troublemakers.

Then there will be no reason for THAAD or other strategic weapons placed in SK.

Besides THAAD in SK gives the troublemakers opportunity of preemptive strike against China.
It can look deep into Chinese airspace.

SK could have chosen a more strategic autonomy from the US and said no. But then SK is not a free country, just like JP.

More critical question now is not what SK should have or not have done...but what can China do to safeguard its national security.

All this mess in SCS is just smokescreen.. a context that the troublemakers needed and created.

What can be done?

 

[TaiShang]

More critical question now is not what SK should have or not have done...but what can China do to safeguard its national security.

All this mess in SCS is just smokescreen.. a context that the troublemakers needed and created.

What can be done?

Keeping in mind SK's lack of political sovereignty:

1. Keep pressuring Seoul.

2. Pool efforts with Russia.

3. Develop counter-measures to specifically target the US without endangering SK interests.

4. Enlarge CN-SK FTA and push for CJK FTA. The anti-thesis of the US policy in the region is development.

 

[jhungary]

Keeping in mind SK's lack of political sovereignty:

1. Keep pressuring Seoul.

2. Pool efforts with Russia.

3. Develop counter-measures to specifically target the US without endangering SK interests.

4. Enlarge CN-SK FTA and push for CJK FTA. The anti-thesis of the US policy in the region is development.

Naïve.

The whole thesis of the regional security stem in North and South Korea border tension. It have nothing to do with China-South Korea FTA or China-Japan-South Korea FTA. Or South Korea/US relations

The reason why South Korea goes the other way (The way the Chinese Don't want) is because of China remaining on the side of NK, it have no bearing on the US or Japan, South Korea want to survive and the threat from the north gone, not helping US invade China or whatever the Chinese accuse them of doing.

If you want the US out of South Korea? Cease supporting North Korea, and force them to have a regime change, if you have been to Korea for any amount of time, you know they fear North Korean more than the Chinese. You fix the North Korean Problem, then you "MAY" see them shown US the door, not before.

 

[California]

us protection 》Friendly neighborhood

 

[TaiShang]

Interview: THAAD deployment short-sighted for Seoul: Russian expert
Source: Xinhua | 2016-08-05 10:26:01 | Editor: huaxia

SEOUL, July 8, 2016 (Xinhua) -- The deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system is a serious policy mistake made by South Korea, which is expected to escalate tension on the Korean Peninsula, a Russian political analyst said.

"The decision to deploy THAAD missile defense system in South Korea is a provocation from the American side ... the system provides no additional benefits for the defense of South Korea," Oleg Barabanov of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations told Xinhua.

Meanwhile, its deployment will serve to escalate tension on the Korean Peninsula, forcing the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) to take countermeasures, he noted.

The DPRK on Wednesday fired two ballistic missiles, one of which was reportedly landed in Japan's exclusive economic zone. The launch was the latest in a volley of missiles fired by the DPRK, apparently in protest against the deployment of THAAD in South Korea.

On July 13, Seoul and Washington announced an agreement to install one THAAD battery in the Seongju county by the end of next year, claiming that it is aimed to deter ballistic missiles from the DPRK.

Barabanov said this decision undermines the constructive relations between Seoul and Moscow, which have been strengthened in recent years and withstood the test of the Ukrainian crisis.

China and Russia are strongly opposed to the deployment of THAAD, as the X-band radar of the system could easily snoop on the territories of the two countries, a potential threat to regional peace and stability.

Russia earlier indicated the possibility of deploying missile units in the country's eastern region in response to the deployment of THAAD.

"Neither Russia nor China wants a new round of militarization on the Korean Peninsula and in the Asia-Pacific region ... The deployment of the THAAD system will only exacerbate the DPRK nuclear issue," said the expert.

In his opinion, the short-sighted decision Seoul was talked into by Washington would justify Pyongyang's development of nuclear capabilities as in a "quite natural and even legitimate response."

In a broader view, Barabanov believes that the THAAD deployment fits into Washington's strategy to contain both Russia and China.

The expert believes that the U.S. moves in the Asia-Pacific region are aimed largely at curbing China.

"We see this not only in the economic sphere, for example in the project of Trans-Pacific Partnership, but also in the military and political sphere, given that the United States is behind the ongoing tensions in the South China Sea."

THAAD deployment in South Korea indicates a new arms race initiated by the United States, he added.

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

Keeping in mind SK's lack of political sovereignty:

1. Keep pressuring Seoul.

2. Pool efforts with Russia.

3. Develop counter-measures to specifically target the US without endangering SK interests.

4. Enlarge CN-SK FTA and push for CJK FTA. The anti-thesis of the US policy in the region is development.

My brother, but these things are already in play.

Personally, I would like to see China constantly reminding SK that JP will benefit from their unfriendly moves. Both in public and private.

One thing no SK politician can afford to be seen doing is acting in a way that will benefit the rise of JP.

SK public will eat them as traitors.

Again boils down to how to craft a communication strategy that keeps an active alliance of SK, JP and US from happening. All in public opinion space. We need to shape the opinions of SK and JP public first and farmost.

JP right wingers are capitising on SCS to promote China Threat theory to weaponise fast.

Ask yourself why out of nowhere you see NATO at russian borders with preemptive strike infrastructure.

And same for China with preemptive strike infrastructure placed in SK and JP.

What is driving this aparent maddness? As an analyst I am certain you will come up with the heart of the matter.

As I stated many times... SCS is just a smokescreen.

 

[TaiShang]

My brother, but these things are already in play.

Personally, I would like to see China constantly reminding SK that JP will benefit from their unfriendly moves. Both in public and private.

One thing no SK politician can afford to be seen doing is acting in a way that will benefit the rise of JP.

SK public will eat them as traitors.

Again boils down to how to craft a communication strategy that keeps an active alliance of SK, JP and US from happening. All in public opinion space. We need to shape the opinions of SK and JP public first and farmost.

JP right wingers are capitising on SCS to promote China Threat theory to weaponise fast.

Ask yourself why out of nowhere you see NATO at russian borders with preemptive strike infrastructure.

And same for China with preemptive strike infrastructure placed in SK and JP.

What is driving this aparent maddness? As an analyst I am certain you will come up with the heart of the matter.

As I stated many times... SCS is just a smokescreen.

I see. Obviously, at this point, I am not in favor of a dramatic move. Perhaps if SK is given some space, they will try to formulate a middle way to satisfy China-Russian concerns.

I agree about information/communication aspect, which I probably glossed over (as I am in general of very low opinion of public opinion).

But, I agree, to prevent a triple alliance, public sentiment in JP and SK must be addressed to, as well. How open those populations to opinion coming from China (Russia), however, is another matter.

It is clear that it all boils down to US regional hegemony and containing China in the same manner as containment of Russia.

 

[Place Of Space]

Keeping in mind SK's lack of political sovereignty:

1. Keep pressuring Seoul.

2. Pool efforts with Russia.

3. Develop counter-measures to specifically target the US without endangering SK interests.

4. Enlarge CN-SK FTA and push for CJK FTA. The anti-thesis of the US policy in the region is development.

Correctly.

We have a basic judgement. When America criticize a Chinese policy, it must be the right policy. Obama even didn't hide his opinion of impeding China's rise.

 

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

I see. Obviously, at this point, I am not in favor of a dramatic move. Perhaps if SK is given some space, they will try to formulate a middle way to satisfy China-Russian concerns.

I agree about information/communication aspect, which I probably glossed over (as I am in general of very low opinion of public opinion).

But, I agree, to prevent a triple alliance, public sentiment in JP and SK must be addressed to, as well. How open those populations to opinion coming from China (Russia), however, is another matter.

It is clear that it all boils down to US regional hegemony and containing China in the same manner as containment of Russia.

Communication is a multidimensional mechanism.

Chinese official media will not be able make a dent. The controlled SK and JP media and academia will be all over it and redicule it for fun.

Cultural industry, social media, business people, tourists and of course diplomats...all are different channels of infulence...

What is needed is a wholistic/Toaist Strategy of PR & Influence. Can be done with much greater impact.

 

[Nan Yang]

Naïve.

The whole thesis of the regional security stem in North and South Korea border tension. It have nothing to do with China-South Korea FTA or China-Japan-South Korea FTA. Or South Korea/US relations

The reason why South Korea goes the other way (The way the Chinese Don't want) is because of China remaining on the side of NK, it have no bearing on the US or Japan, South Korea want to survive and the threat from the north gone, not helping US invade China or whatever the Chinese accuse them of doing.

If you want the US out of South Korea? Cease supporting North Korea, and force them to have a regime change, if you have been to Korea for any amount of time, you know they fear North Korean more than the Chinese. You fix the North Korean Problem, then you "MAY" see them shown US the door, not before.

Regime change will result in war. Why would S Korea want war. Koreans will suffer the most.

China will never allow that to happen.

 

[bbccdd1470]

I have a question, these THAAD things will be operated by ROK military or the US military?

If i remember correctly, that is the US military that operates THAAD and SK have to pay for the missiles. Really stupid deal.

 

[jhungary]

Regime change will result in war. Why would S Korea want war. Koreans will suffer the most.

China will never allow that to happen.

Depends on who initiate the regime change. If it was the Chinese who initiated that, it may not have result in war if works are done appropriately. Otherwise any US/UN/SK Attempt to force a regime change would most definitely result in war.

The point is, as long as NK is run by a renegade regime, they (The S Korean) will do what the US said, they won't turn to the Chinese because they know of one simple fact that China Is supporting the NK. Before that, nothing can rid the US out of the Korean Peninsula