Kim Jong-Un v. Trump: The Dynamics and Statics

BACKGROUND DRAMA

Recent media drama centered around North Korea's mandatory celebration of its founding leader's 105th birthday with the ususl parade of military armanents and expectation of yet another nuclear test and/or missile launch.  The drama was conveniently described as a clash between two hardliners, Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump.  Kim even threatened nuclear devastation to South Korea, Japan and the U.S. mainland.  The media covered their entire week-long, fake news drama.

REALITY #1:   Would Vice President Pence visit the DMZ amid the hazardous strife portrayed by the news media? No, he conducted routine policy visits with our allies.

REALITY #2     "Why Did Trump's 'Armada' Sail in the Opposite Direction?" 

As a distraction? No.  To avoid provoking Kim to attack? Yes.

Are Kim's threats hollow? No.  Are Trump's warnings to Kim bluffs? Right now, who knows?

Will trump succeed in de-nuclearizing North Korea?  Yes.  How? The stage has now been set for a coup d'etat in North Korea after Kim loses major face with his military.  When will that happen?  As failures in his ballistic launch capabilities proliferate, which will only be quickened by his promise of frequent tests and launches.  No fortune tellers here, that is all on Kim. 

Kim's military recently boasted it can devestate the U.S. in its own way.  NK's populace are familiar with the boast. Should it prove hollow, Kim would be humiliated and high-ranking military officers will be capriciously executed.  Some already are not completely loyal to Kim and are ready to support a leader who does not import luxuries for his personal consumption as so many countrymen starve.  Some are also undercover spotters for South Korea, keeping regular tabs on movements of high-ranking officials. A very few of them are highly ambitious in their own right and have been awaiting a better opportunity to form a new government with help from mainland _ _ _ _ _.  

Kim Jong-un is the last in his dynasty. Wait and see things unfold against his regime.

Be patient, remember that executions in North Korea do not filter through global news without time for the North Korea public to thoroughly digest the internal cover stories that will result.   

We envision the loss of another North Korean submarine sometime sooner.

Submarines are always silent and strange. 

Faithful Readers Expected this "Cock a doodle coup" Play

Background

From Molten Eagle over a year ago .....  February 11, 2016

and Today April 11, 2017 ... "US Navy carrier strike group sets its sights on North Korea"

"That warship, the USS Carl Vinson, is the flagship of the Navy’s Carrier Strike Group 1, and often called "America's Favorite Aircraft Carrier." The strike group, established in 2009, includes the ship’s Carrier Air Wing 2, and embarked Destroyer Squadron 1 deployed with Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Lake Champlain, as well as Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers USS Michael Murphy and USS Wayne E. Meyer."  FoxNews

Now we would all like to know which SSNs are screening  for the Strike Group, which SSBN is patrolling the box, and which SSGN is already loitering undetected off the littorals.

Submarines are always silent and strange. So very few will ever have most of such answers!

But what can be told is that despite his boastful claims young Kim Jong-un is suddenly very, very worried about the loyalty of his military leaders and body guards.  The ideal goal of our U.S. strategy has been named "Cock a doodle coup" in deference to the tentative leadership of a certain cocky leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. 

Kim Jong-un is trapped by his own paranoia. Heeding the advice of his predecessors, he is desperate to reinforce his rule by executing an allegedly disloyal military officer of high rank.  Advice about threatening the U.S. will no longer avail.  And an actual attack against Japan, Guam, South Korea, or the Strike Force is likely not only to end his family dynasty, but his life as well.  What would you do?  Expect another nuclear "test".

 

The Cake Icing for Australia's Submarine Selection

Background 

Aside from submarine performance criteria, shifted political winds and related labor participation mandate for domestic build economics, was there another, especially enticing incententive, for selecting DCNS?  Quite possibly .... Here are some leading opinions.

Headlines

Consider 5 excerpts from some recently published opinions [color emphasis mine]:

May 6, 2016  |  Japan's Failed Australian Submarine Bid: Is America at Fault?
"The widely understood sticking point for the European bids, namely U.S. reluctance to share the details of its AN/BYG-1 Combat Management System with European firms has evaporated. President Obama is reported to have indicated as much to Prime Minister Turnbull, with a “senior source” suggesting that there would be no implications for the alliance, no matter which bidder won.  ... If an overture to Pyongyang is in the offing, with China, South Korea, and Japan onside, was the scuttling of the Japanese submarine bid part of the price, unbeknownst to Japan until very recently of course? All it would have taken, as the French bid which promises a full Australian-based build is both politically and economically attractive to the Australian government, was the hint that “Option J” was no longer necessarily an American preference."  - Zac Rogers in The National Interest
 
May 6, 2016 | Australia’s Submarine Superiority: Strange Strategies and Overspending
"Given Australia’s relatively benign strategic environment, the very high projected cost for the 12 Shortfin Barracuda boats is probably not justified, especially since the primary practical missions of the submarine fleet will be covert operations and intelligence collection.  ...  The country probably needs a regionally superior cyber-enabled and balanced military force across all services before it needs a force of 12 submarines. We can expect that the Australian government will come to see that. In the absence of a direct military threat to the Australian mainland, the projected submarine spend of A$50 billion is almost certainly unsustainable in political terms. The eventual build through the 2020s and 2030s of new Australian submarines will almost certainly be closer to six boats than 12." - Greg Austin, in The Diplomat
 
May 10, 2016 |  Why DSCNS Won - Some reasons not yet covered in the media.
"It still needs to be said that   TKMS can offer no nuclear option   if Australia changes its mind and (say, in 2025) actually wants "regionally superior" submarines, especially if China and/or Putin become threatening. - this might mean Australia would want the Barracuda SSN for the first batch of 6 (2030 - 2040) and/or for a second batch of 6 (2040 -2050) Nuclear Barracuda option for second batch." - Peter Coates in Submarine matters
 
May 11, 2016 |  Superannuation change means that savers can no longer trust governments 
 [see "Submarine facts"]
"The submarine program is the most complex defence procurement ever undertaken in this country. The commercial discussions will require the Defence Department to negotiate a number of contractual arrangements to ensure we get the right capability while maximising Australian industry involvement. Once we conclude negotiations with DCNS and select a combat system integrator, work to design the new submarine and combat system will begin in Adelaide this year, not sometime after 2019.   ...  Most disappointingly, Gottliebsen repeats the incorrect claim that the government selected DCNS of France as the preferred partner to enable nuclear propulsion for the future submarine, despite being advised that this is not the case after he incorrectly reported the same thing last week." -  Marise Payne, Minister for Defence, Canberra, ACT in The Australian.com
 
May 11, 2016 |  Should we rush to smooth Japan's ruffled feathers?
"We must be realistic about the challenges posed by China's behaviour, particularly in the South China Sea. We should forthrightly tell Beijing that continued aggression could, eventually, result in the formation of anti-China alliance. But we should not be eager to reach this outcome. For now, closer defence ties between Japan and Australia are likely to worsen, not improve, security in Asia." - Iain Henry, PhD candidate at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University's Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs. in The Sydney Morning Herald

Submarines are always silent and strange 

Tuesday Submarine Tidbits 15 MAR 16

Background

The latest M.E. posting related to each topic is linked by (item number).

The Tidbits

(1)

"S. Korean military refuses to confirm on missing DPRK submarine"    South Korea's military on Monday refused confirmation on a Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) submarine, which United States media reported had gone missing for days.   ... Seoul's Defense Ministry spokesman Moon Sang-Kyun told a regular press briefing that the intelligence authorities of both South Korea and the United States maintain a position that they cannot confirm the relevant report.

M.E. Comment (a):  Obviously, neither S.Korea, the U.S. or other suspect nations (China, Japan, Russia, [Some rogue element of DPRK,s own military) can be foolish enough to state conclusively the fate of Kim Jong Un's missing sub (an 8-man,  70-ton Yugo class sub used in espionage operations, according to Yonhap.) without raising suspicion of their own guilt in the matter. However, they are free to speculate in a manner that disparages North Korea's readiness.  For EXAMPLE:  "Because these subs are very old, they are susceptible to mechanical breakdowns and due to North Korea's economic situation, it is not likely that they have been well maintained," the military official told Yonhap.
M.E. Comment (b):  An 8-man espionage sub would be a perfect target for a counter-espionage operation.

(2)

"Iran says it recovers information from US sailors' devices" TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran has retrieved thousands of pages of information from devices used by U.S. Navy sailors who were briefly detained in January, the country's state television reported Tuesday. The report quotes Gen. Ali Razmjou, a naval commander in the powerful Revolutionary Guard, as saying that information filling about 13,000 pages was retrieved from laptops, GPS devices and maps.

M.E. Comment (a):  U.S. taxpayers should have expected this administration to have fired another admiral (or general) by now for his poor planning / execution of the embarrassing capture 2 months ago of ten U.S. sailors, including one female.  No such firing at the U.S. Navy's Bahrain-based 5th Fleet, which is responsible for American naval forces in the Gulf, nor in a higher authority has yet come to pass. Obviously then, the quick "catch and release" may have been a nefariously pre-arranged excuse to either plant false information with an enemy, or to share accurate information with Iran's government.  

M.E. Comment (b): Hmmm!  The truth is out there, but acts of espionage are typically not divulged for at least 3 decades.  So, is this why no one has fallen on his sword?

(3)

"2 plane parts to be examined in Australia for links to MH370" KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia (AP) — Malaysia's transport minister says two plane pieces found in Mozambique will be sent to Australia to verify if they belong to Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.

Transport Minister Liow Tiong Lai said Monday both pieces will then be sent to Australia to be examined by an international investigation team. The plane vanished March 8, 2014, with 239 people on board while flying from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing. The search is ongoing in the southern Indian Ocean.

M.E. Comment:  Forsenics is an intriguing process, and as time progresses more and more Boeing 777 variants like the MH-370 (a 777-200ER) have been delivered worldwide (1372 to date).  If undisclosed evidence of foul play were not involved, the course of the forensics would not involve such inordinate delays. At this stage, M.E. cannot be critical of the process or non-disclosure of actual evidence in hand.  Why? Remember what was stated in (2) above: "acts of espionage are typically not divulged for at least 3 decades".  

Submarines are always silent and strange.

Sun Tzu Takes on the North Korea's Missing Sub

Background

The following script is from concluding dialogue in 1990's film  The Hunt for Red October ...


 Ambassador Andrei Lysenko:  "There is another matter... one I'm reluctant to..."

 Dr. Jeffrey Pelt:  "Please."

Ambassador Andrei Lysenko:  "One of our submarines, an Alfa, was last reported in the area of the Grand Banks. We have not heard from her for some time."


Dr. Jeffrey Pelt:  "Andrei, you've lost another submarine?"

The Current Reality Mix

In 2010 the ROK Navy corvette Cheonan was presumably torpedoed by a North Korean midget sub killing 46 sailors.  North Korea denied any responsibility for the sinking.

To have a better inkling of the reality afoot in the Sea of Japan these days, imagine Secretary of State John Kerry saying,  "Andrei, you've lost another submarine?"

The unconfessed loss of one of North Korea's vaunted sub fleet (more than 50 of which had swarmed last August in waters off South Korea) is hugely embarrassing for the Kim Jong Un regime.  The most innocent cause for his sunken sub (deplorable maintenance) can never be admitted to DPRK's populace.  A public show of force may only be as good as its weakest link. So the North Korean public will suspect foreign foul play and Kim will play along. But what else is possible?

• Would South Korea wish to sink a Nork sub in retaliation for the Cheonan incident?  Since the incident, the South Korean government has been reluctant to engage in further diplomacy with North Korea over disputes such as North Korea's nuclear weapons program.  On 2 May, it was reported that South Korea's naval minister had vowed "retaliation" against those responsible.  And at a televised funeral for Cheonan's dead crew members, Admiral Kim Sung-chan stated, "We will not sit back and watch whoever caused this pain for our people. We will hunt them down and make them pay a bigger price."  

• Would Russia (think of the Ukraine intrusion). who recently condemned North Korea's 'nuclear bomb test' as a 'threat to national security' stoop to such mischief if it could be carried out anonymously? 

Might other players have such motivations? Yes, and some surprises among them.

• China - North Korea has become China's ostensibly uncooperative proxy.  Once useful as its bad-boy proxy, the succession of dictators in the DPRK has become increasingly incorrigible and transparently useless to China (which has no military base there).  A sunken sub just might be the appropriate reminder for an arrogant, life of luxury in an impoverished regime leader to remember who ultimately is boss. About Sun Tzu here.

•  North Korean military leader -  Due to incidents like Gangneun In 1996:  "The accident by itself was the result of a North Korean submarine running aground on the South Korean coast. The mysterious part, however, was that the submarine was initially intended to collect North Korean commandos who were collecting intelligence in the South.
  
  The commandos are said to have executed the submarine crew for their mistake, and were killed by the South Korean military, with one captured, while trying to exfiltrate to the North. After the incident, South Korea's consul in Vladivostok was killed in a mysterious poisoning, which was said to have been done by the same poison as the kind found inside the submarine."

• Japan - for much needed practice

• U.S. -  Prior to the Obama administration, such espionage might have been expected.  Although provocations certainly exist, the act is considered highly unlikely.

• Who or what was behind the missing (for 2 years) MH-370? Parts are being forensically examined for quite a long time.  Was more foul play afoot there, as well?  Who, then?

 Submarines are always silent and strange.

 

Update V: Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) Power

Background

The pace of interest has been increasing 

The 1989 Fleischman - Pons experiment was eventually debunked and since then the term cold fusion has become almost synonymous with scientific chicanery. 

 I.   27  JUN  2005 - "Cold Fusion Revival and The US NAVY"

II.  27 MAY 2010 -  "Navy Scientists Zip Lips LENR"

III. 17 AUG  2012 - "Something real is happening." 

IV. 06 NOV 2014 -  "Periodic Update for LENR power (Cold Fusion)"

"The scientists trying to replicate the work of Fleischman and Pons were mainly looking for nuclear signals, like radiation, which generally are not present. They missed that heat was the main by-product. In addition, I learned that there have been nearly 50 reported positive test results, including experiments at Oak Ridge, Los Alamos, EPRI, and SRI." - Tom Darden, founder and CEO of the $2.2 billion private equity fund Cherokee Investment Partners.

UPDATE V

August 2015 - After a lapse of two decades, the Japanese government has issued a request for proposals for low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) research.  "The budget for this program this year is $27 million".  

September 2 015 - Scientists get locked into paradigms until the paradigm shifts. Then everyone happily shifts to the new truth and no one apologizes for being so stupid before.  It’s like when physicists say that according to the laws of aerodynamics bumblebees can’t fly but they do.

Rossi was awarded an important U.S. patent recently... This is one of very few LENR-related patents to date. But let me make one thing very clear. We don’t know for sure yet whether it will be commercially feasible. We’ve invested more than $10 million so far in Rossi’s and other LENAR technology and we’ll spend substantially more than that before we know for certain because we want to crush all the tests. (Recently, we have been joined by Woodford Investment Management in the U.K., which has made a much larger investment into our international LENR activities—so we are well funded.)  - Tom Darden

 January 2016 -  After 25 years of experimentation, several research groups have produced evidence that real nuclear reactions lay behind the results claimed by Profs Fleischmann and Pons.  The problem according to Professor Huw Price, a philosopher of science at Cambridge university, is that cold fusion became a “reputation trap” which most researchers avoid because they know the scientific world will not take their work seriously. 

*****

Submarines are always silent and strange.