• SHARE

As U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Washington’s “strategic patience” with North Korea has ended and “all options are on the table” to slow its nuclear ambitions, U.S. and South Korean forces were preparing for a range of military scenarios.

South Korean and U.S. personnel are involved in military drills that will run until the end of April. These exercises have been a feature of life on the peninsula since the Korean War ended in a 1953. In recent years, they have become larger and more realistic.

Every U.S. president since at least Bill Clinton has confronted North Korea’s weapons program and been offered a range of potential military action to tackle them. So far, none has been willing to strike — primarily because all the options are bad, particularly given the risk of North Korean retaliation that could turn the peninsula, and perhaps the wider region, into a bloodbath. At worst, violence on the peninsula could even drag the United States into war with China.

As Pyongyang moves forward with warhead and missile testing, however, many experts believe the likelihood of Washington finally taking such steps is gradually increasing. President Donald Trump says will he will not allow Pyongyang to develop the ability to strike the U.S. with nuclear force. If he orders a limited strike on its facilities, however, the North’s nuclear progress may only slow temporarily — and such an operation could spark brutal retaliation. A broader effort to bring down the entire regime would be a huge undertaking.

Small wonder, then, that the U.S. has preferred to stick with other techniques such as economic sanctions and cyber attacks to interfere with missile tests. The recent deployment of the Terminal High Area Altitude Defense system to South Korea should offer some protection, although no one knows how effective they would be against North Korean missiles. If Washington did choose to go further, the most likely action would be sudden, hopefully overwhelming bombing raids on suspected North Korean military facilities.

While such action would be unlikely to destroy the program, it would slow development. At best, it would prevent the North from perfecting some of its more ambitious weapons programs, such as mounting ballistic missiles in submarines.

The reason such strikes have not been launched is that experts believe they would leave many facilities intact — and the potential retaliation might be devastating. Pyongyang might launch missile strikes against Japan and regional U.S. bases such as Guam, and a devastating artillery barrage into South Korea. Analysts disagree over how effective that barrage would be — some suggest the North could land up to 500,000 shells in Seoul in the first hour, others are more skeptical. There is also the fear that if the North believed its rockets and warheads were under threat, it might fire them — with Japan the most likely target.

Either action would probably spell the end for the North Korean regime, prompting Washington and Seoul to put into action already existing plans to overrun the North. Over the last few years, U.S. and South Korean forces have shifted their focus from training to stop a North Korean offensive to having plans in place for a comprehensive invasion across the Demilitarized Zone.

That would be a major undertaking, one that would dwarf any war America — or any other country — has fought in recent history. Attacking troops would face mountainous terrain, concerted opposition and potential chemical, nuclear and radiological threats.

There are some signs the U.S. might try to halt escalation by simply decapitating the regime. According to South Korean news agency Yonhap, this month’s exercises included U.S. Navy SEAL Team Six, the unit that conducted the 2011 raid that killed Osama bin Laden. They were working with South Korean counterparts to simulate a strike on the North Korean leadership, according to a South Korean military official quoted by the news agency.

Such an option would be extremely hard to put into practice. North Korea’s air defenses make sending troops by helicopter difficult, while Kim is believed to be heavily guarded.

For now, Kim appears to think he can keep ramping up his nuclear program unchallenged. Washington, though, may not be willing to watch from the sidelines. Trump is one of the most unpredictable presidents to ever hold that office. If any U.S. leader is going to take a risk with military options in North Korea, he very well might be the one.

It’s an unenviable choice. Action could provoke disaster. But failure to do anything might be blamed for a future conflict that could be even worse.

Peter Apps is Reuters’ global affairs columnist.

In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever.
By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.

SUBSCRIBE NOW