This is what Tal Inbar, head of the "Center for Space Research and UAVs" at the Fisher Institute, says in an interview with the website Hedaan following the meeting that took place on Friday, 27/4/18 between North Korean President Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Ji In
Unbeknownst to us, a historical event took place the other day, which is somewhat reminiscent of Sadat's visit to Jerusalem. North Korean President Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Ji In met at the border between the two countries.
In the joint statement of the two presidents, it was said that the countries will sign a peace agreement formally ending the Korean War that led to the split, and will simultaneously dismantle their nuclear weapons.
"There is no chance that North Korea will break away from its nuclear weapons and missile program, nor from its space program." This is what Tal Inbar, head of the "Center for Space Research and UAVs" at the Fisher Institute, says in an interview with the Hidaan website following the meeting that took place on Friday, 27/4/18 between North Korean President Kim Jong Un and South Korean President Moon Ji In.
"The North Korean regime's means of survival are nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them to main enemies (surface-to-surface missiles). As soon as the country has a nuclear capability and the possibility to launch the nuclear bombs in the intercontinental range, the international community talks with North Korea and does not attack it. It should be remembered that Gaddafi was also close to an initial nuclear project - where is Gaddafi today and where is Saddam Hussein?"
"We saw that it is possible to produce sensitive systems even outside your country. The most striking example is the Syrian reactor that was built on Syrian land with Iranian money and operation and which was attacked and destroyed by the Air Force. This reactor was supposed to produce plutonium and not for Syria because it had no nuclear program but for Iran."
Everything could change tomorrow morning. There were already two summits between Kim's father, Kim Jong Il, and the presidents of South Korea in 2000 and 2007, yet the tense situation returned to normal. You can say a lot of things about Kim, but you can't say that he's stupid and therefore won't dare to part with the only assets that are a guarantee of his security.
The unification of Korea under two methods like China cannot happen either. The central doctrine of the Communist Party is that Korea should be unified, but under the dictatorial rule of the North.
If North Korea's military missile program is canceled, space will become a single channel for development in the field, what is more, a missile that flies into space is not XNUMX percent equal to a ballistic missile, it has common components. But that is another very distant discussion. If the ballistic missile array is eliminated and North Korea is approved to possess certain capabilities to launch satellites, the importance of this to the North will be for the preservation of knowledge - both human and technological.
Ed Griffith, Senior Lecturer in East Asian Studies at the University of Central Lancashire in the UK Analyst on THE CONVERSATION website the reasons for the turn in North Korea's foreign policy. Some believe that North Korea fears that increased economic sanctions could pose an existential threat. Others say that the cause of this is the collapse of North Korea's underground nuclear testing site that occurred during 2017. A third theory holds that Kim Jong-un is afraid of the unexpected approach of US President Donald Trump and this made him rush to reach this historic agreement.
![South Korean President Moon Jen-in (right) and North Korean President Kim Jong Il at the Peace Pavilion in North Korea, at the summit conference held on 27/4/18. By Cheongwadae / Blue House [KOGL (http://www.kogl.or.kr/open/info/license_info/by.do)], via Wikimedia Commons](https://www.hayadan.org.il/images/content3/2018/04/1024px-2018_inter-Korean_summit_011.jpg.webp)
Curtis Melvin, Researcher on North Korean affairs at the US Korea Institute in Washington He told the NK Pro website on March 20 that we do not know what these buildings are, but it is likely that it is an extension of the satellite control center.
David Wright, DAVID WRIGHT Physicist and director of security (including nuclear weapons and space programs) at UCS - Union of Concerned Scientist Analyzes on his blog at All Things Nuclear the moves that led to the meeting between the leaders of the two Koreas.
Among other things, he analyzes North Korea's demands from the West, as part of the peace agreement with South Korea. "North Korea has said in the past that it wants to use space the way other countries use it - for communication, ground monitoring, mineral detection, weather forecasting and more, and it has also developed the ability to launch satellites and has even launched several satellites. A domestic space program could be accepted sometime in the future when the international community builds more trust with the North Korean regime, but this is unlikely to happen in the near future.
There are several approaches to the interim period, or even to the elimination of the North Korean space program. One approach is for the international community to provide North Korea with access to satellite services and help develop the knowledge needed to use them, thus reducing the need for North Korea to operate an independent satellite program.
A second approach would be to establish a consortium to help North Korea develop technical expertise in satellites. The international community will subsidize satellite launch services as compensation for closing the country's launch capacity. In any case, it is important to integrate North Korea in international and regional forums in the fields of space and satellites.
Wright fears that misunderstandings may arise due to different interpretations by the United States and North Korea of the terms "denuclearization" because, in the opinion of the North Koreans, this includes not placing American nuclear weapons systems on South Korean soil. And as mentioned, there may be a dispute regarding the space program.
"The position of Pyongyang and Washington on the launch of their satellites is completely different, so a crisis may arise again, and it is impossible to guarantee that it will not end in war" he said Cheung Sung-Chang, senior researcher at the Sijong Institute to the news site. NK News.
- More of the topic in Hayadan:
-
The attack on Sony attributed to North Korea is a legal "game-changer" in cyberspace
10 תגובות
Yosef
You need to check your history. How exactly did Obama get a Nobel Prize for something that happened six years later?
Obama received a Nobel Peace Prize for the Iranian nukes, ignoring the chaos caused in the region and the dangerous situation.
Trump receives a flood of negative criticism from the press. how is it.
Obviously, Korea won't completely break up, but something made Kim blink first.
Obviously not and the Arabs will never stop fighting Israel until they get everything or a transfer. Every country that denuclearized voluntarily or by force was invaded like Libya, Iraq, Syria, Ukraine. The nuclear is Israel's only guarantee
In my opinion, a technological scientist does not have the tools to analyze the actions of a dictator who murdered all his family members to protect his position, including a brother who fled and an uncle who helped Kim seize power, including his cousins. Here you need an expert and experienced psychiatrist.
In my humble opinion (however, not a psychiatrist…..) Kim will act in a way that he thinks will prolong his life and his reign. Any demand from him should be accompanied by a real threat to his life. That's the only way it has a chance to fold.
The matter of the collapse of the nuclear test center really does not matter, it is Kim's cynical use of what happened. There are many mountains available in North Kora for conducting experiments. But if he has a hydrogen bomb design that has been tested and acted as planned, no more testing is really needed. But his cynical use of collapse shows that he intends to throw crumbs in the form of a ceremonial closing of the mountain, and not actually hand over all the plutonium and bombs and fill the reactors with concrete....
So I will summarize:-
Thanks to my father for interviewing Tal and presenting us with the interesting article, and thanks to Tal for the interesting analysis, and also thanks to A. Ben Ner for raising before us the possibility of Chinese pressure on Kim, which is very reasonable and also raises the hope that this is not a northern exercise of Kim's megalomania. In short, interesting.
I just asked: - Maybe the Chinese will activate their connections in the Middle East as well??
Please respond gently
Yehuda
To my father Blizovsky.
To my surprise, the conclusion I came to in analyzing the question presented in the article is the exact opposite of the one presented by Tal Inbar, head of the "Center for Space and UAV Research", at the Fisher Institute.
I went somewhere and browsed the Fisher Institute website and realized that this institute, with its three research centers: the Center for Space and UAV Research, the Center for Air Force Research, and the Center for Aviation Research, is an institute with a distinct technological orientation.
On the other hand, in the question under discussion in this article, the technological issue is secondary.
The main issue discussed here is of an international strategic nature, and in my humble opinion it should be discussed (also and mainly) from the perspective of political science and international relations.
Therefore, I suggest, as much as you can, to conduct an interview, on the very same issue, with an expert in the field of international relations, and in particular an expert on China, Korea and the Far East.
I estimate a high chance that his reasons and conclusions will be very different from those proposed by Tal Inbar.
And the actual content of the article;
There is a possibility that what is said in the article misses the point and is completely wrong in understanding the matter.
The main question under discussion here is: What is the reason that motivates North Korea to change its foreign policy towards South Korea, towards the Western countries and the USA in particular, and towards the issue of nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula?
The article suggests 3 possible reasons:
1- The fear of worsening the economic sanctions.
2- The collapse of the nuclear test site
North Korea's underground during
2017.
3- The fear of the unpredictable nature of a president
USA Donald Trump.
In my opinion there is another explanation, (4-) and although it is the most likely explanation for the issue, to my surprise I did not find it in any of the commentaries I have read so far, including the article before us.
Details:
4-The reason is: China.
Remembered for all his dramatic trip on a secured train, of North Korea's ruler Kim Jong Il, but about a month ago, at the end of March 2018, to China for a meeting with China's ruler Xi Jinping. It was a visit conducted under the dictates of the Chinese government, which began to sense and fear that it was losing control over its patron state, North Korea. This was Kim's "walk to the penalty".
It seems that the Chinese ruler "guaranteed" the ruler of North Korea the stability of his rule on the one hand, and on the other hand obliged him to calm relations with South Korea and the USA, and disarm nuclear weapons within a limited time.
one must remember;
Security and economic stability is a supreme existential interest of the Chinese leadership, which is faced with the existence and prosperity of a huge population of approximately 1.5 billion inhabitants.
The Chinese government cannot endanger the security and economy of its residents because of the North Korean ruler's "walking on the edge" policy, which could at any moment get out of control and cause a nuclear war to break out.
China is therefore both the reason for the change in North Korea's foreign policy and the factor that guarantees (with a very limited guarantee of course!) the survival of the regime of the Kim dynasty in North Korea.
Lesbadramish Yehuda
You write "Thanks to Tal for an interesting article.."
But please note:
The article was written by Avi Blizovsky. Yes?
You should have written: "Thanks to Abi Blizovsky for an interesting article."
This is what I do and write; Thank you my father for an exhaustive and interesting article written briefly and clearly.
Don't mix science and politics, it's just tracking progress
Thanks to Tal for an interesting article. Unfortunately, apparently Tal is right in analyzing the facts and the conclusions.