[skinster]

If you want to argue that or anything, prove it. And if you want to comment on an article or film I post, try reading/watching it first.

I'm guessing a lot of countries around the world would be more like YANKEES GO HOME than anything else.

[fuser]

I fail to see how you think international waters becoming Chinese water is not a change of control.

The question was "how" in the context that this sending of warship can prevent this change of control how exactly? You literally said "if China was ceded control of the south China Sea" to which I asked how is it happening. I never said or implied that international waters becoming Chinese water is not change of control.

I never said China was evil, controlling the south China Sea would be tremendously positive for china and it's perfectly rational for them to claim them and protect them with military bases.

And I never said that US was evil, yet you took a dig at it, I was just returning the favor knowing fully well that you didn't said that China was evil.

These warships maintain the seas as international water and trading routes. By completely ignoring Chinese claims to sovereignty in a way that China is unwilling to prevent as it would require starting a war.

No, these warships don't do any of those tings. Diplomacy maintains the seas as international water, these stunts are just silly provocations. The narrative only fits well when arrogantly one is to believe that only US and her allies are capable of rational decisions while others like Chinese are not and will just close down the routes and what not if US warships don't enter those areas.

Would you suggest bombing the ships building these islands? That's a rather terrible idea given that you think even sailing through formerly international waters is a provocation to fill scale war.

Of course not and that was not even my point. It was about abandoning the allies to show that this is not a sacrosanct thing you seem to believe it to be.

As it stands ships sailing through ignoring China's claims in a way China is not willing to take the steps necessary to prevent maintains them as effectively international waters and unless China is utterly out of their minds they aren't going to be provoked to war over.

This is what a provocateur will think obviously but once again what maintains them as international water is diplomacy and not warships as all parties involved here are rational actor and US don't have monopoly over rationality. Its just laughable to think that without these silly stunts China would stop/control or whatever the trade route in the South China Sea.

[mikema63]

If you want to argue that or anything, prove it.

Well I'd point to Japan sending warships to train with the US in the south china sea as support from them.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 27206.html

Vietnam has direct territorial disputes with China quite regularly and views them as a direct enemy.

http://thediplomat.com/2017/05/vietnam- ... -us-visit/

Interestingly the issue has actually driven Vietnam and it's people to be one of the most pro-american, attitude wise, countries in the world. 3/4ths of the population views the US favorably.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... -key-ally/

The Philippines is more complicated because of duerte but they are quite friendly with the US generally. Though being a former colony of the US it's an interesting situation.

India is also sending military ships into the south china sea for drills with Singapore.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 786836.cms

etc. etc.

I'm guessing a lot of countries around the world would be more like YANKEES GO HOME than anything else.

On the contrary South Asia is an area where we are quite popular. According to the Asian barometer survey (http://www.asianbarometer.org/)

We are viewed positively by the populations of the Phillipenes, vietnam, myanmar, cambodia, korea, mongolia, singapore, japan, thailand, and taiwon with above 70% viewing the US favorably. Which isn't a perfect proxy for their opinion on US action in the south China sea specifically but it is instructive.

The question was "how" in the context that this sending of warship can prevent this change of control how exactly? You literally said "if China was ceded control of the south China Sea" to which I asked how is it happening. I never said or implied that international waters becoming Chinese water is not change of control.

If the US does not enforce international waters and China is able to control the SCS militarily then they are effectively chinese waters. I suppose the UN can send a strongly worded letter if it chose.

And I never said that US was evil, yet you took a dig at it, I was just returning the favor knowing fully well that you didn't said that China was evil.

I know, I was using it as an opportunity to bring up that I don't think either side is doing anything particularly moralistic.

No, these warships don't do any of those tings. Diplomacy maintains the seas as international water, these stunts are just silly provocations. The narrative only fits well when arrogantly one is to believe that only US and her allies are capable of rational decisions while others like Chinese are not and will just close down the routes and what not if US warships don't enter those areas.

Well I disagree on several counts. The first of which is that running ships through definitely maintains the SCS as international waters in effect. Diplomacy Is fantastic, but not alone. We can chatter at the Chinese all day and it wouldn't change military control of the SCS. China is perfectly rational and no I don't think they'd just close down trade for no reason but it gives them a lot of control over countries that rely on that trade that are quite concerned about China controlling those waters for good reason. The Chinese are perfectly rational as is the US. China will happily exert as much influence as possible on countries reliant on trade routes they control, the US opposing unilateral Chinese control let's those countries continue on without the same threat of Chinese influence.

Of course not and that was not even my point. It was about abandoning the allies to show that this is not a sacrosanct thing you seem to believe it to be.

I don't think it's sacrosanct, I think it's practical. The dominance of the west is built on the deals we built in the post world order. Simply throwing away japan, Korea, the Philippines, vietnam, and all the other countries that rely on those trade routes would be a blow to every alliance and deal we have. We also rely on those trade routes ourselves to a lesser degree and having allies in the region helps us with some pretty basic protections of those trade routes we use. Which is beneficial to us in a purely pragmatic way.

This is what a provocateur will think obviously but once again what maintains them as international water is diplomacy and not warships as all parties involved here are rational actor and US don't have monopoly over rationality. Its just laughable to think that without these silly stunts China would stop/control or whatever the trade route in the South China Sea.

Well, you can call them silly stunts all day long. But simply asserting that letting china have it's way with one of the most important trade routes in the world and an important region in the world and to the US specifically will be perfectly fine and China wont do anything despite it's geopolitical ambitions is quite frankly ludicrous.

[B0ycey]

I think more people need to challenge China on this. Under U.N. laws that China signed up to, artificial islands are not grounds to extend your borders. These waters are international waters so anyone has the right to sail there. I agree America are sailing their vessels here provocatively, but if they do nothing, then China would just build more islands and claim more sea. This will be an on going saga. Neither side will cede but neither side will be the aggressors either. I'm no fan of US foreign affair or their interference in Asian affairs, but I am sure Eastern Asian countries are welcoming this exercise to protect their interests and safe guard UN resolutions.

[Suntzu]

I think they are claiming they enlarged and existing island.

[fuser]

If the US does not enforce international waters and China is able to control the SCS militarily then they are effectively chinese waters. I suppose the UN can send a strongly worded letter if it chose.

They already are able to, that's the point. They build and controlled islands in the sea while US did nothing despite their allies pleas. These warships changes none of these dynamics.

The first of which is that running ships through definitely maintains the SCS as international waters in effect. Diplomacy Is fantastic, but not alone. We can chatter at the Chinese all day and it wouldn't change military control of the SCS.

What are you talking about? So before this incident SCS was not international waters? The more precise reason for China's displeasure is that these ships came 12 km to the disputed island with Chinese claim, this right there is just provocation nothing more specially when US secretary of state, Rex Tillerson says something like that US should go further by blocking Chinese access to the islands. see more

Things don't exist in vacuum, Diplomacy is the primary reason why SCS is international water with international trade, these warships are not. For all intent and purposes China does and can control South China Sea militarily and these warships would be of no use to contest that.

I don't think it's sacrosanct, I think it's practical. The dominance of the west is built on the deals we built in the post world order. Simply throwing away japan, Korea, the Philippines, vietnam, and all the other countries that rely on those trade routes would be a blow to every alliance and deal we have. We also rely on those trade routes ourselves to a lesser degree and having allies in the region helps us with some pretty basic protections of those trade routes we use. Which is beneficial to us in a purely pragmatic way.

Oh god, trade routes are not going to be evaporated and alliances don't work this way neither they had in post ww2 era.

Well, you can call them silly stunts all day long. But simply asserting that letting china have it's way with one of the most important trade routes in the world and an important region in the world and to the US specifically will be perfectly fine and China wont do anything despite it's geopolitical ambitions is quite frankly ludicrous.

Yes I like to call a duck, a duck and so on. Read carefully when your secretary of state talks about blocking China's access to an island and then ships are send 12 km within that island, its provocation by any definition.

These warships are not contesting militarily control of SCS by China, China for all intent and purposes already does as shown by her building of artificial islands in the region while no one was able to do anything. That's right there is definition of having one's way. At the end of the day it remains a silly stunt just to provocate China, nothing more.

[anarchist23]

North Korea says it has successfully tested a long-range "intercontinental" missile.
What next?

It is the first time North Korea has claimed to have successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), which could potentially have the range to reach the US mainland.
Earlier the US said a missile landed in the Sea of Japan but that it did not pose a threat to North America.
North Korea has increased the frequency of its missile tests, raising tensions.
An announcement on North Korea state television said a Hwasong-14 missile was tested on Tuesday, overseen by leader Kim Jong-un.
The announcement said the projectile reached an altitude of 2,802km (1,731 miles) and flew 933km before hitting a target in the sea.

Earlier the US Pacific Command said it was an intermediate-range missile.
While Pyongyang has appeared to have made progress, experts believe North Korea does not have the capability to accurately target a place with an ICBM, or miniaturise a nuclear warhead that can fit on to such a missile.

edit
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia ... ssile-test







.

[MB.]

Please provide a link and don't just say "BBC" when you post a source. Good for North Korea, now they can start their Juche socialist space program and put a women on the Moon, forever solidifying the people's worker solidarity with beloved marshal Kim Jong Un.

[Decky]

Good for them, socialism can't be built until the country is free from US aggression. Every weapon North Korea manufactures is a victory for the international working class.

[Deutschmania]

I don't necessarily feel that the DPRK should have nuclear weapons , but I also feel that other nations , such as the United States of America should first eliminate their own nuclear arsenal , before decrying North Korea . As even the Bible states ,  “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. " - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=NIV . And as this comedy sketch illustrates , the DPRK is mostly just trying to get attention , in order to intimidate , anyway

( starting at 2:54 ) .

[Suntzu]

Our tracking pretty much confirmed their report.

[ThirdTerm]

SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea claimed it test-fired its first intercontinental ballistic missile Tuesday following a launch that drew condemnation from President Donald Trump and sharply raised the stakes in the standoff over the communist state’s nuclear weapons program.

The missile test – the first in nearly a month – sent a powerful political message as it occurred on the eve of Independence Day in the United States and days after a U.S.-South Korean summit that focused on measures to stop the growing threat from the North.

If confirmed it was an ICBM, the launch would mark the communist state’s most successful in a series of missile tests as it continues to make progress in its efforts to develop a nuclear-tipped missile that could reach the U.S. mainland.

https://www.stripes.com/news/pacific/n- ... y-1.476504

The claim that it was an ICBM has not been substantiated. It looks too short and shabby for an ICBM but the Korean missile is a two-stage ballistic missile which can travel up to 7,000 km, reaching Alaska.

[Deutschmania]

John Pilger made a film about this, it's called The Coming War on China

This is also literally straight out of a Tom Clancy novel , and video game https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SSN_(novel) . So once again , real life might come to imitate art all too well .

[Igor Antunov]

North Korea's intercontinental ballistic missile test was a 'gift to American b**tards' on their independence day, Pyongyang's official news agency on Wednesday cited leader Kim Jong Un as saying.

The missile is capable of carrying a "large, heavy nuclear warhead" that can survive re-entry into the Earth's atmosphere, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) added.

After personally overseeing the launch, the KCNA reported, Mr Kim said American b**tards would be not very happy with this gift sent on the July 4 anniversary".

Breaking into peals of laughter, it said, he "added that we should send them gifts once in a while to help break their boredom".

The Korean Central News Agency quoted leader Kim Jong Un, who personally oversaw the test, as having inspected the Hwasong-14 missile and "expressed satisfaction, saying it looked as handsome as a good-looking boy and was well made".

http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-a ... tards-kcna

Babby's first proper ICBM of the intermediate range variety. Reportedly utilizing indigenous engine. This will fast-track all ballistic missile development going forward. Within ~10 years NK will have an arsenal of even longer ranged nuke tipped ICBM's.

Glad I'm not living in any major Australian cities. Don't nuke me kimmy bro.

[JohnRawls]

We need to put out the MadMan out of his misery. NK has turned from a non-issue in to a threat.

[Saeko]

This fat fuck needs to have a nuke shoved up his ass.

[neopagan]

An interesting aspect of this situation is the China-Russia qualification of their condemnation of NK. According to these "friendly nations," the development of a missile shield by the US, is a provocation to NK. It would be one thing for NK to say that, but the Chinese and Russians? That has to mean that their spies believe the US system will work. Of course they are going to call "No fair!" They need time to catch up. But that call shows how two faced they are in the so called negotiations with NK and the US. They don't give a crap whether NK develops nuclear ICBMs as long as they are aimed at the US or Japan. I think that is a very short sighted position.

[anarchist23]

It seems that tensions are rising but I can't see US/South Korea attacking North Korea. Unless they want South Korea and Japan to be hit, big time. It's sabre rattling that's all.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40503558


The US and South Korea have held a ballistic missile drill

The US and South Korea have held a ballistic missile drill, after North Korea tested a long-range missile experts believe may reach Alaska.
Self-restraint was "all that separated armistice and war" and could be changed at any time, the two allies said.
It would be a "grave mistake" for the North to think otherwise, they said.
China and Russia have urged the North to suspend its weapons programme in exchange for a halt to US-South Korean military exercises.
The launch, the latest in a series of tests, was in defiance of a ban by the UN Security Council.
The US has asked for an urgent meeting of the UNSC to discuss the issue. A closed-door session of the 15-member body will take place later on Wednesday.
Pyongyang claimed on Tuesday to have successfully tested an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).
However, most experts believe that the North does not yet have long-range nuclear weapon capabilities.
The two Koreas are technically still at war as the 1950-1953 Korean War ended in an armistice.
The allies conducted a ballistic missile fire exercise in the Sea of Japan.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in said the allies needed to demonstrate their missile defence posture "with action, not just a statement." Meanwhile in a joint statement Gen Vincent Brooks, commander of US forces Korea, and South Korean Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen Lee Sun-jin said the allies were maintaining patience and self-restraint, but this could change.
"We are able to change our choice when so ordered by our alliance's national leaders. It would be a grave mistake for anyone to believe anything to the contrary," it said.
Earlier, US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson called North Korea's move a "new escalation of the threat" and warned that Washington "will never accept a nuclear-armed North Korea".
Mr Tillerson said "global action is required to stop a global threat" and warned that any nation that provided economic or military benefits to the North, or failed to fully implement UN Security Council resolutions, was "aiding and abetting a dangerous regime".

[MB.]

DRPK is not going to attack anyone. This is all just imperialist lies from the capitalists who want to get rich on arms and munitions sales, and politicians needing an excuse and distraction so they can nationalize industries, to refinance their massive national debt obligations. The ROK government is even seeking reconciliation, they were skeptical about the THAAD missile deployment (although it looks like this ICBM test may have changed their minds). This is the result of Trump retardation and sabre rattling, we all know DPRK is the only country not controlled by the banking cartels and Rothschilds. The recent developments seem comically obvious to me. ROK and Japan are expected to solidify diplomatic support at the up-coming G20 summit this weekend.

‘Self-Restraint’ Is Only Thing Stopping War in Korea, U.S. General Says

By CHOE SANG-HUNJULY 5, 2017

Photo
A photograph supplied by North Korea’s state news agency purports to show the Hwasong-14, what the country called its first intercontinental ballistic missile, at an undisclosed location before its test launch. Credit Korean Central News Agency, via European Pressphoto Agency

SEOUL, South Korea — The top American general in South Korea said Wednesday that self-restraint was all that kept the United States and South Korea from going to war with North Korea, as the South’s defense minister indicated that the North’s first intercontinental ballistic missile had the potential to reach Hawaii.

The unusually blunt warning, from Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, the commander of American troops based in Seoul, came a day after North Korea said it successfully tested the Hwasong-14, its first intercontinental ballistic missile.

Washington and its allies confirmed that the weapon was an ICBM and condemned the test as a violation of United Nations resolutions and a dangerous escalation of tensions.

Although doubt remained whether North Korea had cleared all the technical hurdles to make the Hwasong-14 a fully functional ICBM, the launching prompted the United States and South Korea to conduct a rare joint missile exercise off the east coast of South Korea on Wednesday. The drill involved firing an undisclosed number of ballistic missiles into the sea.
Continue reading the main story
Related Coverage

NEWS ANALYSIS
What Can Trump Do About North Korea? His Options Are Few and Risky JULY 4, 2017
U.S. Confirms North Korea Fired Intercontinental Ballistic Missile JULY 4, 2017

ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story

“Self-restraint, which is a choice, is all that separates armistice and war,” said General Brooks, referring to the 1953 cease-fire that halted but never officially ended the Korean War. “As this alliance missile live-fire shows, we are able to change our choice when so ordered by our alliance national leaders.

“It would be a grave mistake for anyone to believe anything to the contrary.”

President Moon Jae-in of South Korea asked President Trump on Tuesday night to endorse the joint exercise, insisting that the allies needed to respond to the North’s provocation with “more than statements,” Mr. Moon’s office said.

The South Korean military said the missiles, which had a range of about 185 miles, were fired to test their ability to launch “a precision strike at the enemy leadership” in case of war. The military did not say how far the missiles traveled.

Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, Yoshihide Suga, said on Wednesday that Japan and the United States had agreed to take “specific actions to improve our defense systems and our ability to deter North Korea.”
Photo
Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, right, the top American commander in South Korea, with Vice President Mike Pence. “Self restraint, which is a choice, is all that separates armistice and war,” the general said on Wednesday. Credit Lee Jin-Man/Associated Press

Mr. Suga did not say what those actions were, but a spokesman for the Defense Ministry said the government was considering buying ballistic missile defense systems from the United States.

Japan is considering Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or Thaad, a system that the United States recently deployed in South Korea, the spokesman said, as well as another known as Aegis Ashore, which is similar to those that Japan already deploys aboard naval destroyers.

The Japanese news media has reported that the government was also discussing buying Tomahawk or other cruise missiles, which would give Japan the ability to strike North Korea.

Yasushi Kojima, the Defense Ministry spokesman, denied those reports, which would face strong opposition in Japan. But an American official familiar with the discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said the purchase of cruise missiles was being discussed.

North Korea remained defiant on Wednesday. Its leader, Kim Jong-un, said that the missile test was intended to “slap the American bastards in their face” and was a Fourth of July “gift package” for the “Yankees.”

The North Korean missile, launched at a steep angle, flew a horizontal distance of only 578 miles but reached an altitude of more than 1,700 miles, according to North Korean, South Korean and Japanese officials.
The Interpreter Newsletter

Understand the world with sharp insight and commentary on the major news stories of the week.

See Sample Privacy Policy Opt out or contact us anytime

Speaking to the South Korean National Assembly on Wednesday, the defense minister, Han Min-koo, said that the Hwasong-14, if launched on a standard trajectory, could have a range of 4,350 to 4,970 miles, enough to hit Alaska and possibly Hawaii.

Analysts had said on Tuesday that the missile appeared to be capable of striking Alaska. Hawaii is farther, about 4,780 miles from Kusong, the North Korean town where the missile was fired.

A ballistic missile is considered an ICBM when its range is greater than 5,500 kilometers, or about 3,420 miles, according to military analysts.
Photo
The United States and South Korea conducted a rare joint missile exercise off the east coast of South Korea on Wednesday in response to the launch by the North. The drill involved firing ballistic missiles with ranges of 186 miles. Credit United States Forces Korea, via Getty Images

But Mr. Han said although the Hwasong-14 was developed as an intercontinental missile, it was still too early to conclude whether North Korea had mastered long-range missile technology, especially the re-entry capability that allows an ICBM warhead to survive the intense heat and destruction of its outer shell as it plunges from space through the earth’s atmosphere.

On Wednesday, North Korea said the test showed that it had mastered the technology of operating and separating the missile’s two propulsive stages, and guiding the warhead to its target in the waters west of Japan. The warhead proved structurally safe during “the harshest atmospheric re-entry environment,” the government said, according to KCNA, the North Korean news agency.

But Mr. Han said that the real test was whether the warhead “performed its military function” after it re-entered the atmosphere.

“Even if we have more time to analyze, it’s hard to say that North Korea has succeeded in the re-entry technology,” he said.

North Korea carried the missile to its test site on a 16-wheel truck, believed to have been imported from China and reconfigured for military purposes. But the missile was launched from a platform, indicating that the country had not developed the ability to launch the missile directly from the vehicle, South Korean officials said. A missile fired from a vehicle is harder to counter because it requires less time to prepare to launch, they said.

North Korea also said its missile was capable of carrying a “large-sized heavy nuclear warhead.” Some analysts say that North Korea is probably still years away from developing nuclear warhead small and light enough to fit into a long-range rocket that could reach the continental United States.

If North Korea successfully develops an ICBM, it would drastically change strategic calculations by the United States and its allies, analysts said. Such a missile would give decision makers in Washington reason to pause before deciding to strike the country, they said.

“This new tier complements North Korea’s well-developed escalatory posture towards its neighbors,” Gabriel Dominguez and Neil Gibson, analysts affiliated with IHS Markit, said in a commentary. “The Communist country is already able to field conventional, chemical and, possibly, nuclear weapons against Seoul and Tokyo. As a result, a danger of increased North Korean military confidence is that it raises the risk of increased belligerence.”

The United States secretary of state, Rex W. Tillerson, issued a warning that any country hosting North Korean guest workers or providing any economic or military benefits to the North was “aiding and abetting a dangerous regime.”

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/ ... 32375.html



https://www.voanews.com/a/thaad-remains ... 17723.html

THAAD Remains Contentious Issue for US-South Korea Summit
June 27, 2017 4:37 AM

Brian Padden

FILE - Protesters attend an anti-THAAD proest in Seongju, South Korea.
FILE - Protesters attend an anti-THAAD proest in Seongju, South Korea.
Share

See comments
SEOUL —

South Korean officials are voicing support for the controversial U.S. Terminal High Altitude Defense (THAAD) missile defense system in advance of President Moon Jae-in’s summit this week with U.S. President Donald Trump, but it remains a contentious issue as lawmakers in Washington voice concerns over deployment delays.

THAAD is an advanced anti-missile battery that uses high-resolution radar, infrared seeking technology and interceptor missiles to basically shoot down incoming ballistic missiles.

In 2016 Washington and Seoul agreed to deploy THAAD to help defend South Korea against North Korea’s increasing ballistic missile and nuclear capabilities.

Protecting U.S. troops

THAAD would also be used to protect the 28,000 American military personnel in South Korea.

Republican Senator Cory Gardner from Colorado and Democratic Senator Bob Menendez from New Jersey recently sent a letter to President Trump urging him to prioritize the THAAD deployment in his talks this week with President Moon.

“We ask you to reiterate to President Moon that the decision to deploy THAAD was an alliance decision and protects both U.S. troops and millions of South Korean citizens, while not posing any threat to South Korea’s neighbors,” said the letter to the president.

Rushed deployment

The THAAD deployment was agreed to by President Moon’s conservative predecessor, Park Geun-hye. However in March, Park was impeached for her alleged ties to a multi-million dollar corruption scandal.

Soon after the progressive South Korean leader took office in May, Moon ordered that the full deployment of THAAD be delayed until an environmental impact study is completed.

On Monday, Kang Kyung-wha, the South Korean Minister of Foreign Affairs, reiterated the Republic of Korea’s (ROK) support for the eventual THAAD deployment.

“My government has no intention to basically reverse the commitments made in the spirit of the ROK -US alliance. Going through the environmental-impact assessment is an issue of domestic due process. It does not mean that we will cancel or reverse the decision to deploy THAAD,” she said.

China retaliation

President Moon is also trying to manage THAAD objections from China and vocal opposition at home.

Beijing has objected to THAAD’s powerful radar, which could potentially monitor China’s military activities, as a threat to its security, and had reportedly imposed informal economic restrictions on South Korea as retaliation.

The Hyundai Research Institute said if sustained, China’s curbs on travel, cosmetics and entertainment could cost South Korea over $7 billion this year. However in the wake of Moon’s decision to suspend the THAAD deployment, there are indications Beijing has been easing its selective ban on bilateral trade.

To resolve the issue, Zhang Tuosheng, a foreign policy analyst with the Beijing-based China Foundation for International and Strategic Studies (CFISS), urged South Korea and the U.S. to take measures to reassure China about its legitimate security concerns.

“For example, the THAAD radar system can be changed, locking the radar to deployment mode and the direction of the radar, where the latter is more important, and proactively providing China with technological materials and data regarding the THAAD system,” Tuosheng wrote this week in an article for the East Asia Foundation.

Embassy protest

Over the weekend, anti-THAAD demonstrators peacefully marched outside the American Embassy in central Seoul. Organizers say over 3,000 protesters participated.

Some THAAD opponents in South Korea argue it is not worth provoking Beijing and Pyongyang. Analysts say the high altitude missile defense system would be essentially ineffective against a massive North Korea artillery attack that could target 25 million people living in Seoul and other areas in near the border. Others living near the deployment site are concerned the radar system could cause health and environmental problems.

[Potemkin]

They don't give a crap whether NK develops nuclear ICBMs as long as they are aimed at the US or Japan. I think that is a very short sighted position.

Short sighted in what way? If NK were a traditional ally of the West and they were pointing their ICBMs at China and Russia, would you care? Probably not. And why should you? Every so often, you gotta look at things from your enemies' point of view....