South Korean Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

SamuraiBlue

Captain
After the very long feet dragging, it looks as if SK finally agreed.

U.S. to deploy advanced missile defense system in S Korea


South Korea and the United States said on Friday they will deploy an advanced missile defense system with U.S. military forces stationed in South Korea to counter North Korea's missile threat, drawing sharp and swift protest from neighboring China.

The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile system will be used only to counter the threat from the North, the South's Defence Ministry and the U.S. Defence Department said in a joint statement.

The selection of the location for the system could come "within weeks" and the allies were working to have it operational by the end of 2017, a South Korean defense ministry official said.

"South Korea and the United States made an alliance decision to deploy THAAD to USFK as a defensive measure to ensure the security of the South and its people, and to protect alliance military forces from North Korea's weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile threats," the joint statement said.

USFK stands for U.S. Forces Korea, which includes 28,500 U.S. troops based in South Korea..... to read more
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Beijing is certainly not going to like this but I guess with sales down of various SK products in mainland China, SK doesn't see much incentive any more in holding back THAAD for the sake of economy.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
After the very long feet dragging, it looks as if SK finally agreed.

Beijing is certainly not going to like this but I guess with sales down of various SK products in mainland China, SK doesn't see much incentive any more in holding back THAAD for the sake of economy.

Which SK product sales down in China? are you sure it's not mistaken of Japanese products ? have you googled it yet?;)
 

Brumby

Major
For China, a Missile Defense System in South Korea Spells a Failed Courtship
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


BEIJING — However isolated
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
may be, it has long had one major ally:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. But for two years, China’s leader, President Xi Jinping, seemed to be favoring Pyongyang’s neighbor and nemesis to the south.

He spent much political capital wooing
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
’s president,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, in hopes of drawing the country away from its longtime ally, the United States. He made an elaborate state visit to Seoul while shunning North Korea and its young leader,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, whom he has yet to meet. Ms. Park returned the favor last year, coming to Beijing for a major military parade at Tiananmen Square, the only leader of an American ally to attend.

But on Friday, it became clear that Mr. Xi’s efforts had fallen short. In
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on South Korean soil, Ms. Park’s government showed that it was embracing its alliance with Washington more than ever, and that it would rely less on China to keep North Korea and its growing nuclear arsenal at bay.

In Beijing, the decision was seen as a major setback, one that went beyond its interests on the Korean Peninsula to the larger strategic question of an arms race in Northeast Asia that could impel China — and Russia — to develop more sophisticated weapons.

Analysts said the deployment of the so-called Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense system, or Thaad, would reinforce the already high level of mistrust in United States-China relations as the Obama administration nears its end, adding to the raw nerves over disputes in the South China Sea and differences over American business access to the Chinese market.

And North Korea, an issue on which there had been some common ground between the two powers — at least when it came to the latest round of United Nations sanctions — is likely to become a greater source of irritation, as China loses an incentive to be tougher on the regime.

In announcing the new missile system, which has been under discussion for several years, the top commander of the American military in South Korea, Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, said on Friday that it was needed to protect South Korea from the North’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

But Chinese officials have repeatedly said that they do not believe the North Korean threat is the true reason for the American-initiated deployment. Rather, they say, the purpose of the Thaad system, which
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
at high altitudes, is to track missiles launched from China.

Now that the system’s implementation has been confirmed, China will almost certainly consider developing more advanced missiles as a countermeasure, said Cheng Xiaohe, an associate professor at Renmin University in Beijing and a North Korea expert.

“A way to deal with Thaad — a shield — is to sharpen your spear,” Mr. Cheng said.

The possibility of the Thaad deployment has bedeviled relations between Washington and Beijing for more than a year. The Chinese renewed their objections at the recent
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, a meeting of American and Chinese senior officials that was attended by Secretary of State John Kerry.

Last month, Mr. Xi and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia made a point of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
during Mr. Putin’s visit to Beijing, equating it with the American-built Aegis Ashore ballistic missile defense system deployed in some NATO countries. The implicit message was that the United States was trying to encircle China in the same way that, according to Mr. Putin, it was trying to contain Russia.

Before Mr. Putin’s visit, China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, expressed the Chinese view that the Thaad system is a strategic game-changer in Northeast Asia.

“The Thaad system has far exceeded the need for defense in the Korean Peninsula and will undermine the security interests of China and Russia, shatter the regional strategic balance and trigger an arms race,” Mr. Wang said. China understands South Korea’s “rational need” for defense, he said, “but we can’t understand and we will not accept why they made a deployment exceeding the need.”

Chinese analysts have said that they expect Japan to eventually deploy Thaad as well, in what they say would be an American attempt to draw it closer into a three-way alliance with South Korea. So far, Japan has shown little interest in the Thaad system, but Washington and Tokyo are jointly working on a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that is expected to start production in 2017.

Talks between Seoul and Washington on the Thaad deployment picked up speed after
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in January. After that test, which Pyongyang claimed was of a hydrogen bomb, Ms. Park tried but failed to reach Mr. Xi by telephone, according to South Korean news reports that were later confirmed by Chinese officials.

The nuclear test left Ms. Park convinced that Mr. Xi could not do enough to rein in North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, and that China was uninterested in supporting her
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of finding ways to engage with the North while responding strongly to provocations, South Korean officials said.

In March, South Korea and the United States began formal talks on the Thaad deployment. China tried to persuade Ms. Park to accommodate Beijing’s interests by asking for technical adjustments to the system, under which its radar would penetrate less deeply into China, according to Wu Xinbo, the director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai. But those adjustments were not made, he said.

Mr. Wu said Beijing was unlikely to take such measures in this period of slower economic growth. But he said the debate over North Korea among senior Chinese leaders would almost certainly be reshaped, with officials who favor better relations with Pyongyang gaining more influence, after two years of Mr. Xi keeping its isolated neighbor at a distance.

“The school in favor of a more balanced approach to North Korea will get more sway,” Mr. Wu said.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
I tend not to see it as a very big deal from the long term and strategic stand point, except tactical impact.

Every country has the rights to go their way and take their own relevant measures, SK does, so do China and Russia. Every one will pay the cost for their acts, China and Russia will, so will SK.

Quote from the late Chairman Mao's word "天要下雨,娘要嫁人,随她去吧", literally translates to "Sky will rain, Girl will marry someone, let it go." The under tone is, so be it, no big deal.

Regarding SB's notion of economical impact on SK being ignorable now or future, I'd say money is not the only concern of SK (not even the no.1), even less for China. I am sure if there is any response from China, it won't be in economical arena. The big concern for SK is right next to its north, and THAAD is an overkill for its safety, PAC-3 and others are just adequate for that purpose. THAAD is not for SK, it is for U.S. and Japan because of its long range radar which none of the other systems (PAC-3) has.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
I don't see the deployment of THAAD as a failure of Chinese policy to SK, but more of a reflection of the limits of Chinese policy to NK instead.

Realistically I think the Chinese would recognize that NK's advancing missile programme is increasingly a threat to SK, and that SK does have a legitimate self interest to deploy defensive systems... but at the same time China has a limit as to how far they are willing to punish NK due to the risk of pushing them over the edge into collapse.

So overall I think that NY Times article is exaggerating the effects of the THAAD deployment for Sino-SK relations. More importantly, the idea of China seeking to establish closer ties with NK in response to the THAAD deployment is also a little bit laughable considering China is against NK developing ballistic missiles and nukes to begin with and it is that programme which resulted in the THAAD deployment in the first place, so I see no reason China would want to reward Kim Jong Un's behaviour in the last few years by giving him cooperation.


However, the paragraph near the beginning of the article is relatively correct in that I do think the THAAD deployment will have a slight affect on the overall relationship between China and the US by adding another decent sized thorn in the side of it -- and that is probably the way in which this development can most accurately be framed. That is to say, Sino-SK relations will suffer a minor annoyance, but from the Chinese side, the "source" of the development and the target for their animosity (and thus the relations which will suffer the most) will probably be seen as the US rather than SK.

So I think saying China's policy to SK is a "failed courtship" is probably a massive exaggeration, and it's also jumping the shark to suggest that China would respond to THAAD by favouring its relationship with NK over SK at this stage as well.
 

Brumby

Major
THAAD is an overkill for its safety, PAC-3 and others are just adequate for that purpose. THAAD is not for SK, it is for U.S. and Japan because of its long range radar which none of the other systems (PAC-3) has.
Can you provide some form of technical reference in support of your assertion that THAAD is not for SK and that PAC-3 is sufficient?
 

SamuraiBlue

Captain
PAC-3 is basically a point defense system trying to shoot down the target at it's terminal stage that can only cover 10Km in radius as a last ditch effort and will not cover a more large area.

THAAD on the other hand shoot down the missile at a much high altitude which gives a much larger area that can be protected.

Basically you deploy both systems so to obtain a two layer protection so that THAAD shoots down the majority and PAC-3 shoots down anything that comes through protecting the high asset area.
 

Brumby

Major
PAC-3 is basically a point defense system trying to shoot down the target at it's terminal stage that can only cover 10Km in radius as a last ditch effort and will not cover a more large area.

THAAD on the other hand shoot down the missile at a much high altitude which gives a much larger area that can be protected.

Basically you deploy both systems so to obtain a two layer protection so that THAAD shoots down the majority and PAC-3 shoots down anything that comes through protecting the high asset area.

A layered defense is intuitively obvious besides the benefit of shifting (as much as possible) the kill zone to the left side of the curve while the ballistic missile is still in ascendency.
Since a forum member thinks PAC-3 is somehow sufficient, it would be educational to get some technical studies that we are ignorant of.
upload_2016-7-9_14-1-27.png
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Can you provide some form of technical reference in support of your assertion that THAAD is not for SK and that PAC-3 is sufficient?
I think there are plenty of description of THAAD and PAC-3's mission and capability all over internet, wiki is a good start. In short, THAAD means "Terminal High Altitude Area Defense". PAC is serving the lower altitude. THAAD can and is to intercept missiles while they are still outside of the atmosphere at its descending or ascending part of trajectory, including high atmosphere. After that, PAC takes over till impact. You don't need numbers, their names are good enough to know want purpose they serve.

Besides the difference of altitude, is the long range radar that THAAD provides that PAC doesn't. It can see what is going on in China and Russia. PAC can not. What is the point for SK or US to look at them if the sole purpose is to watch NK?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
operational altitude up to 24km
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
highest altitude 150km

When getting to specifics in SK, if a missile is outside of atmosphere over Seoul (the highest value area) of SK, where do you think it will land? Maybe southern tip of SK and Japan, that doesn't serve SK much, it serves Japan and US troops in Japan.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
I don't see the deployment of THAAD as a failure of Chinese policy to SK, but more of a reflection of the limits of Chinese policy to NK instead.
....

So I think saying China's policy to SK is a "failed courtship" is probably a massive exaggeration, and it's also jumping the shark to suggest that China would respond to THAAD by favouring its relationship with NK over SK at this stage as well.

well said,

The whole THAAD thing is about to put a wedge into the SK-China relationship, just like the "Japan buying Diaoyu islands". They serve the purpose to slow down (in SK) or reverse (in case of Japan) the accelerating approachment of the EA three. Same thing has been played out in Europe.

This particular article we are talking about is just doing the propaganda part of the whole package.

What China should and will do is to stick to the principles and deal with SK and NK and others on the specifics. Nuclear free Korean peninsular and THAAD free. Of course, the priority can be adjusted but that does not indicate tolerating any side for their "wrong".
 
Top