‘Kill the King and the regime will collapse. That is the rationale offered by South Korean military planners for a “decapitation unit” they are forming for the sole purpose of assassinating North Korea’s Supreme Leader, Kim Jong-un. They are convinced that, in the ensuing chaos, North Korea’s leadership would disintegrate and abandon the nuclear programme on which he has staked his prestige.
‘ “Decapitation means we have only one target,” said Choi Jin-wook, a long-time North Korea analyst at the government’s Korea Institute for National Unification. “It’s much simpler to eliminate the leader than attack military bases.”
‘South Korean defence planners have ordered “decapitation strikes” in air, naval and ground exercises in which the targets are simulated to resemble one of Kim’s many hideouts or residences. Such exercises are the prelude to the formal formation later this year of the unit, Spartan 3000.
‘South Korea’s Defence Minister, Song Young-moo, has ordered a special forces “kill brigade” of crack commandos to spearhead the group. Fighter planes and guided missile destroyers would provide whatever support they needed.’
“The ministry cited the successful test-firing of a German-made Taurus missile at a target off the south-west coast as an example of the weaponry that might be deployed in an attempt to kill the North Korean leader.
“The missile, with a range of 310 miles, flew about 150 miles, hitting its target in the Yellow Sea.”
South Korea of course is not threatened with being wiped off the face of the earth for test firing a missile into the sea, as is its northern neighbor.
Think about the words “decapitation unit” - the horrific image which leaps into any even semi-normal mind. This kind of plotting dwarfs even the horrors of deranged criminals literally decapitating in the Middle East. But then swathes of them too are US-backed.
Perhaps “decapitation” is now casual verbal currency in US dominated political and military circles.
Chilling Principles of Defence Secretary Mattis.
It should also not be forgotten that in the Trumposphere, where General James Mattis is now Defence Secretary the General has some pretty arresting principles. Life is clearly very cheap and killing the most casual of undertakings:
A few of his views (2) include:
“The first time you blow someone away is not an insignificant event. That said, there are some assholes in the world that just need to be shot.”
“Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.”
“Find the enemy that wants to end this experiment (in American democracy) and kill every one of them until they’re so sick of the killing that they leave us and our freedoms intact.”
Precisely the “experiment in American democracy” inflicted most recently on Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, with North Korea and Iran in their sights.
With thanks to William Blum, the list of US mass slaughtering “democracy” projects since 1949 is at (3.)
Talking of Afghanistan, here are General Mattis’ thoughts on democracy- spreading there:
“You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling.”
In the real world these are surely views which might well find the holder in a secure psychiatric unit, if not a maximum secure prison.
Diplomatic Overtures Ignored.
Contrast this to an ignored approach (4) from the Korean Peninsula, where both Australia and North Korea have Embassies in Seoul.
On 28th September: “The Embassy of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) in the Republic of Indonesia presents its compliments to the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia and has the honor to inform that the Foreign Affairs Committee of the DPRK Supreme People’s Assembly sent the open letter to the Parliaments of the different countries.
“ … the Embassy of the DPRK has further the honor to enclose hereby the above-mentioned letter.”
The preamble ends with diplomatic courtesies and “highest considerations.”
The letter in part (full document at 4) written in the third person, reads as follows:
“Open Letter to the Parliaments of Different Countries.
“The letter noted that Trump, President of the U.S., styling itself ‘the superpower’, denied the existence of the DPRK, a dignified sovereign state (and threatened) ‘total destruction’ at the UN …
“The Foreign Affairs Committee of the DPRK … mission (is to) promote friendly and co-operative relations with the parliaments and peace-loving people of the countries around the world … based on the ideas of independence, peace and friendship, bitterly condemns the reckless remarks of Trump as an intolerable insult to the Korean people, a declaration of war against the DPRK and a grave threat to the global peace …
(From his first day in office, the President): “has engaged in high handed and arbitrary practice, scrapping international laws and agreements (putting America first) at the expense of the whole world.”
Threats of annihilation and sanctions have denied the people of the DPRK “normal economic development, in breach of the UN Charter …”
Trump, the letter states: “threatened to totally destroy the DPRK, a dignified, independent and sovereign State and a nuclear power. It is an extreme act of threatening to destroy the whole world.”
The correspondence concludes with the: “… belief that the parliaments of different countries, loving independence, peace and justice will fully discharge their due mission and duty in realizing the desire of mankind for international justice and peace (and with vigilance) against the reckless moves of the Trump Administration trying to drive the world in to a horrible nuclear disaster.”
With Trump threatening that his finger is hovering over the nuclear button, few could surely disagree with much of the DRPRK’s sentiments.
Donald Trump of course boasted menacingly to “totally destroy” North Korea in his address to the UN General Assembly on 19th September, the UN Charter’s fine founding words clearly unknown to him.
There has been a deafening silence from world governments regarding the above letter. Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, who visited South Korea in August, instead of reacting to a hand held out commented: “I read this as showing that the collective strategy of allies and partners to impose maximum pressure and diplomatic and economic sanctions on North Korea is working … So I think that this shows they are feeling desperate, feeling isolated, trying to demonise the US, trying to divide the international community.”
However, Australia’s Lowy Institute Director of International Security, Euan Graham, was more positive, commenting:
“This is effectively an invitation to have high level access, to send an (Australian) delegation from Seoul.”
“Now would be a good time for Australia to exercise its still existing, even if on-off, diplomatic relations with the North.” (Sydney Morning Herald, 20th October 2017.)
North Korea the Aggressor?
For anyone reading most of the Western media where the DPRK is the latest nation to be demonized, the best and most succinct summary of endless US betrayal since the armistice of July 1953 is at (5.) Here is an excerpt from the early 1990’s onwards.
Remember too that the US had nuclear weapons in South Korea from the late 1950’s until 1991.
“In January 1993, president Bill Clinton announced the largest military war games ever (in which all sorts of nuclear weaponry featured).
“These took place in and around Korea’s shores in March. The DPRK reacted to a more belligerent environment by giving notice of intention to withdraw from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which it had joined in 1985. The North also demonstrated the viability of a medium-range missile, the Nodong 1, in May 1993.” If ever cause and effect were starkly demonstrated here is a prime example.
“Kim Il Sung died in July 1994 and his son, Kim Jong Il, replaced him as leader.
“In the early summer of that year the US government concluded that a military strike on Yongbyon - under serious consideration - would start a war with the North.
“But instead of war, influenced by a voluntary shutdown by the North of the Yongbyon reactor, talks led to the October Framework Agreement of 1994.
“Under this agreement, the North agreed to continue the reactor’s shutdown in exchange for light water reactors and a new relationship with the US.
“Loans and credits were to ease the agreement, and the US undertook to supply heating oil to tide over the North’s heating problems in the short term.
“The agreement called for full diplomatic relations and a US pledge not to threaten or target the North with nuclear weapons.
“Eloquently, no missile testing by the North proceeded between May 1993 and August 1998.
“In June 1998 the Pentagon staged simulated long-range nuclear attack drills against North Korea, and in October that year a US Lieutenant General spoke publicly about plans for replacing the North Korean regime, and of even beginning the project preemptively if there were solid grounds for expecting an attack.
“These developments hardly confirmed US commitment to developing a more co-operative relationship with the North.
“George W Bush’s ascension to president in 2001 produced a declaration from his advisers that the 1994 agreement was dead in the water. (Thus)
in December 2002, the DPRK expelled the IAEA inspectors, restarted the Yongbyon reactor and withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
“Bush meanwhile, declared his intention of dealing with North Korea after Iraq.
“In spring 2003 the North made another offer to the US: it would scrap its nuclear development if the US would normalise relations and provide basic security guarantees.
“Six years later, in 2009, substantive talks involving Russia and China as well as Japan, the US and both Koreas had goals which included the normalising of diplomatic relations, an end to trade sanctions and acknowledgement of the North’s right to use nuclear energy.
“But these talks collapsed after both the US and the ROK rejected the North’s gradual dismantling of its nuclear weapons.
“In 2011 Kim Jong Il died and his second son, Kim Jong-un, became the North’s new leader.
The summary concludes: “During these past three months the risk of war, indeed of nuclear war - not necessarily restricted to the Korean peninsula - has increased dramatically.”
General Mattis Visits South Korea.
General Mattis is, at time of writing, in South Korea, where he has delivered a near dead ringer copy of the run up to the illegal invasion of Iraq. Washington’s mantra was that Iraq “threatened it’s neighbours” though even hostile neighbours responded that it did not. Iraq of course could destroy parts of the West “in 45 minutes.” It was a pack of lies.
“North Korea has accelerated the threat that it poses to its neighbors and the world through its illegal and unnecessary missile and nuclear weapons programs …” The situation had developed a “new urgency.”
Next month Trump is to visit South Korea, the man who has threatened to unleash on the small nation “fire and fury like the world has never seen.”
This is the man of whom twenty seven eminent psychiatrists and psychotherapists have written in a just published book, “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump”: “We collectively warn that anyone as mentally unstable as this man simply should not be entrusted with the life-and-death powers of the Presidency.”
It is time for the world’s diplomats to respond to North Korea’s letter and rise to the urgent occasion, before it is too late for the region and very possibly the planet.
FELICITY ARBUTHNOT—Next month Trump is to visit South Korea, the man who has threatened to unleash on the small nation “fire and fury like the world has never seen.” This is the man of whom twenty seven eminent psychiatrists and psychotherapists have written in a just published book, “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump”: “We collectively warn that anyone as mentally unstable as this man simply should not be entrusted with the life-and-death powers of the Presidency.”
^0The corporate media will never present you with this kind of information.
Nothing that contradicts the empire's lying narrative is allowed.
Support our citizens media. The only media you need.