Pressure to act comes from the drop in estimated time it will take for North Korea to develop a missile that could hit America with nuclear weapons. Just a few years ago it was believed the regime was a decade away from that point, but now the figure has dropped to as little as 18 months – though estimates vary. Senior figures in the Trump administration have made clear in public that it would be unacceptable for North Korea to reach that position.
The Daily Telegraph also says that there is a split within the Trump administration between the advocates and opponents of military action
Experts also say there is a split in the US administration with Mr Trump and Mr McMaster more willing to consider military action than Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state, and Jim Mattis, the defence secretary.
In such a situation it is no surprise that there is active planning in Washington for a strike on North Korea, and that Washington has split into ‘hawks’ and ‘doves’ ie. between advocates and opponents of military action. Indeed this is the classic situation in Washington whenever the US finds itself in confrontation with another country, and it is one which has repeated itself on numerous occasions since the start of the Cold War.
It is however likely that behind all this war talk there is a strong element of bluff.
With the US apparently incapable of making any concessions that might open the way for talks with North Korea – eg. by accepting the Chinese proposal for a ‘double freeze’ (a cessation of US military exercises in the Korean Peninsula in return for a suspension by North Korea of its ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programme) – the strong possibility must exist that articles like the one in the Daily Telegraph are being deliberately leaked to the media in order to scare China into ramping up pressure on North Korea by imposing an oil embargo on the country.
I say this because I still find it very difficult to believe that the US seriously intends a military strike against North Korea which every serious analyst I know of considers both extremely risky and likely to be completely ineffective, and which is opposed by both the Secretaries of State and Defense.
It is not after all as if there has ever been an occasion in the past when the US has attacked a country which possess nuclear weapons. Would it really take on itself the enormous risk of doing so against a country as unpredictable as North Korea?
Having said this the danger in all this war talk and in all this planning is that beyond a certain point it starts to acquire its own dynamic.
It is very easy to see how as the North Korean ballistic missile and nuclear weapons programme gathers pace pressure in Washington for a US strike on North Korea might increase. If it appears that there is an option for a strike on the table, then that pressure would increase still more.
Needless to say the risks involved in such a strike are colossal and I cannot imagine anything that might alarm and anger China more. However when people of war instead of peace war is what tends to happen.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48475.htm