Friday, October 13, 2006

East Asia

The popular narrative is that Iraq and Afghanistan have overextended our military forces so much that we are unable to even contemplate military alternatives with respect to Iran and North Korea.

With that in mind, take a look at this AP article on U.S. military capabilities on the Korean peninsula (hat tip: The Belmont Club).

It appears that South Korea primarily needs our air and naval assets to defend itself, which is precisely what we have - in spades - in east Asia. These are also the assets we are not using in Iraq right now, so the overstretch theory is not as valid as it first appears.

Much of the United States' ground combat might is tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the U.S. is reducing its infantry forces in South Korea. But American air and sea power in east Asia, a key to almost any imaginable military conflict with North Korea, has grown in numbers and reach. ... Michael Green, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a private research group, said in an interview Tuesday that short of a total collapse of North Korea, the U.S. military has what it needs to handle the problem. "The South Korean ground forces are strong enough to handle and deter a North Korean attack on the ground," said Green, who was senior director for Asia on President Bush's National Security Council. "What they need is help with air forces and naval forces, and that is not what we're using in Iraq right now."

Other random thoughts:
  • Japan, Okinawa, Guam, and Hawaii - these are the locations that will matter when and if conflict occurs in Korea (i.e. not Iraq)
  • Our sea-based missile defense capabilities are improving - so much so that President Bush was able to say that our military had a reasonable chance of shooting down the long-range missile used by North Korea in their infamous July 4 missile test
  • As a big advocate of naval power (and heavily influenced by the theories of Alfred Thayer Mahan), I am quite pleased with our carrier-based power projection capabilities halfway across the world - this type of situation seems to me like yet another good example of why a strong blue water Navy is so vital to our strategic success
  • Look for Japan and China to take the lead in confronting North Korea, although China's response will likely be more moderate than Japan's
  • There is a decent chance that the nuclear blast either did not occur at all, or semi-failed - so that is very very slightly heartening (but probably doesn't change the strategic calculus all that much)
  • I think the overstretch theory has more validity when applied to a potential conflict with Iran - so I'm not suggesting that it's flat wrong or anything (or that we don't have a large amount of military commitments around the world)

posted by JM @ 12:53 PM