Hudson Institute senior fellow Michael Horowitz says the end is near for Kim Jong-il. How near? Within a year:
Hudson Institute senior fellow Michael Horowitz, a key conservative figure connected with North Korean issues, said Thursday that the regime would implode within a year.
In a lecture entitled “It Ain’t Christmas in Pyongyang: Will the Kim Jong-il Regime Last?” Horowitz said, “North Korea will implode before next Christmas and Kim Jong-il shall not enjoy Christmas next year.”
The scholar had recently visited South Korea, where he criticized Seoul policies toward North Korea and called for regime change in Pyongyang. He said the collapse of North Korea’s communist regime was historically inevitable, and that such a collapse would happen automatically and without much delay.
Just for the record, if I actually had a reputation, I would never stake it on such a claim. That’s not to say Horowitz is smoking crack — the Guardian reported today that European leaders policymakers are being told to prepare for a sudden change in North Korea — and I sure as hell hope that he’s right, but Nick Eberstadt is still catching flack for predicting the end of North Korea, and he didn’t even give it a deadline.
Horowitz also suggested we find ourselves a dissident general, especially because he’s convinced the Chinese have found theirs:
He also mentioned the possibility of a coup occurring in North Korea. He said that if the United States discovered generals it could trust to close North Korea’s “concentration camps” and shut down its nuclear program, Washington could send a message to them that it would support such moves.
He said he was certain that China has already chosen a general to succeed Kim Jong-il as the political costs of propping up the North Korean regime increase over time. He claimed the Chinese have reviewed a scenario in which their favored general seizes power in Pyongyang, declares a state of emergency and requests that Beijing dispatch 200,000 troops to North Korea to seal the deal.
I think both scenarios are worth considering, especially the later, although I’d really have to wonder how the Chinese would have “selected” their general, and how Horowitz could be so certain that China has a man in the KPA. A little Clancy-esque a scenario, but one I’ve been hearing enough of, and it does make sense in theory.
Like he did in Seoul, the scholar felt compelled to take a shot at President Roh:
He also said that South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun’s comments during his recent tour of Europe concerning how Kim would remain in power for a long time were perplexing for a “great nation” like South Korea, and stressed that Roh’s approval rating was no more than 19 percent in December.
Just to update this, Roh’s approval rating has clawed its way back to a lofty 38 percent — virtually the upper stratosphere as far as this president is concerned. Moreover, his unpopularity generally stems from things other than his North Korea policy, which does seem to enjoy a fair degree of support. Heck, even the Grand National Party has adopted a unification strategy that one blogger accurately described as “Sunshine Lite.” What this would suggest is that if the neocons are waiting for South Korea’s “silent majority” to speak up, I pray they aren’t holding their breath.
Sphere: Related Content
26 Comments
Serious & important stuff, thanks. As one myself who started publicly predicting the collapse of the North Korean r??gime “real soon now, they can’t continue like this” in 1986… I’m pretty wary of such predictions… But it COULD happen just any random day, probably real quick and probably taking as all by surprise.
But Horowitz IS ’smoking crack’ if he thinks that the United States authorities can link up with “generals it could trust to close North Korea?€™s ‘concentration camps’ and shut down its nuclear program’ — I’m really cannot imagine how “we” could contact him/them with any confidence of authenticity, and could develop such “trust”…
And as for:
> He said he was certain that China has already chosen a general to succeed Kim Jong-il
> as the political costs of propping up the North Korean regime increase over time.
This seems a good bet. But,
> He claimed the Chinese have reviewed a scenario in which their favored general seizes
> power in Pyongyang, declares a state of emergency and requests that Beijing dispatch
> 200,000 troops to North Korea to seal the deal.
Some of you may remember that this question first publicly came up in the early Kim Young-sam administration, and the Foreign Ministry made a public declaration that South Korea would not tolerate Chinese soldiers in North Korea; that in the advent of “chaos in the North” the South considers it to be entirely its own domestic affair and no other nations would be permitted to interfere. And that Chinese troops crossing the Yalu River would be regarded as hostile, and would be attacked by ROK forces to drive them out.
This obviously brought up the question of the role of the United States forces in Korea in that situation, and either the USFK Commanding General or the US Embassy hastened to issue a statement that the role of the UN Command here is only to protect South Korea against North Korea & Allies — NOT to protect North Korea against China or anybody (regardless of the fact that the ROK Constitution declares that the entire Peninsula is its territory, and therefore defending the ROK means defending North Korea against a foreign invasion…). Potentially a very sticky situation for the American leadership, for sure; would they just passively sit it out if South Korea went to war against China for control of North Korea…?
I have no sources on this to cite, it’s all from my memory; if anyone can correct me please do so. It disappeared from the newspapers immediately afterwards and has never reappeared — too sensitive of a subject, as South Korea tries to be friends with China. But every time I have discussed this with ROK government officials ever since, they have confirmed to me that “military resistance against any Chinese troops in NK” is indeed the general policy…
Of course an actual such situation nobody can predict what would really happen, things would be random and chaotic. But I do wonder if by now either the ROK or the USA has changed their secret official policy on this… After decades of frustration, at least some in the ROK might welcome Chinese intervention in and takeover of NK, as an alternative to catastrophic war and/or catastrophic sudden-reunification with a flow of millions of starving refugees…
I’d be very interested to hear any update on these policies — as we do seem to be coming ever closer to the actual situation arriving some midnight…
“After decades of frustration, at least some in the ROK might welcome Chinese intervention in and takeover of NK, as an alternative to catastrophic war and/or catastrophic sudden-reunification with a flow of millions of starving refugees?€?”
Don’t bet on that. I know of no Korean who would even think of entertaining that ideal.
for any beijing offical who might visit this blog:
your troops in korea, north or south, will mean war. don’t make the mistake of thinking south koreans will consider economics first; they won’t be able to stand by and watch chinese folks brutalizing koreans.
first japan, now china? no way. you cross the border, you get war. you mingbai?
Dear Maripkan,
I do not think that people in Beijing read this blog - they are too busy thinking what to do with Korea. Thus, I would like to make few remarks. First, all talks of war is a wishful thinking, pure and simple. China has population which is 40 times larger, GNP which is 5 times larger, nuclear weapons etc. I can still believe that South Koreans is able to give a decent fight if territory is invaded (after all, Koreans have produced surprisingly good guerrilla fighters). But we are talking about marching North, about an offensive war - and if Chinese want, they will throw Korean forces from the North like kittens, inflicting serious damage not only on them, but on entire Korea. Of course, no sane Americans government would support such undertaking. Washington and Beijing are geopolitical rivals, but the future regime of North Korea is not a problem which might result in conflagration neither side really wants. If South Korea moves alone, it will end up heavily beaten, and we are talking war here ?€“ many dead people, that is. Something no 386er ever imagined (apart from computer games, of course). Fortunately, Seoul government understands this and probably will limit itself to rhetoric.
Second, there will be no ?€œinvasion?€? in a strict sense. It will be a bit like what we (Russians) did in Czechoslovakia and what Americans have been doing in Latin America for a century: a surgical strike which will bring to power a ?€œright?€? person(s) who later might invite foreign troops. In 1968 in Prague the city airport was secured by a brilliant commando raid, then the paratroopers arrested the Czech government and next day Czechs had another government which had right ideas about friendship with Moscow. The world cried about invasion, but Moscow could only say: ?€œwhat are you talking about? Which invasion? Czech people made a new choice which we support wholeheartedly?€?
Third, having said this, I still believe that taking control over the North will be a bad decision. Bad for China, I mean ?€“ and pretty much for everybody else. Recently (10 days ago) I spent an hour talking to a very prominent Chinese ?€œscholar-official?€? on this topic and now I repeat what I?€™ve said. China has to measure pros and contras. On one hand, by saving North it will keep a buffer state which marginally improves China?€™s security. But if it takes responsibility for Korea, there will be serious shortcomings. The new regime will need money, a lot of money which will have to flow from Chinese coffers. The Chinese action will alienate all neighbors, just in time when they began to look at the Rising Dragon with less unease. Koreans will hate China, and for decades to come all wrong things which will happen in North Korea will be blamed on its Chinese supervisors. I reminded him of the ?€?aftertaste?€™ of the Soviet adventure in East Europe which has made East Europeans so hysterically anti-Russian. Does the additional (and largely psychological) benefits of the operation overweight these dangers? I doubt it. But who knows ?€“ countries have done much more unreasonable things.
“On one hand, by saving North it will keep a buffer state which marginally improves China?€™s security.”
I don’t understand this. How is a unified Korea on the Chinese border a threat to Chinese security? Korea would not invade China, so it can’t be physical. They might not like a thriving, free-market country right next door, but they already are dealing with Hong Kong and Taiwan, and China is just going to keep moving to a free market someday, instead of going back.
What do you mean?
QUOTE ?€œOn one hand, by saving North it will keep a buffer state which marginally improves China?€™s security.?€?I don?€™t understand this. How is a unified Korea on the Chinese border a threat to Chinese security? END OF QUOTE
Americans. They assume that unified Korea will have US military presence and/or will remain an ally of the USA, and they want to keep Americans further away from their borders. I understand them. But in the modern age this is much less important than it used to be in 1950 - and I doubt that there will be any military confrontation between US and PRC. On the other hand, costs associated with such an imperialist adventure in North Korea, financial and political, are too large. I hope that Beijing will be reasonable and let North Korean go where it belongs…
Oops, typo. Wanted to say: “I hope that Beijing will be reasonable and let North Korean government go where it belongs?€?” (hell or merely wastebin of history, whichever you like - AL)
thank you for your comments, lankov. the chinese ain’t going to invade, anyway. i’m sure they see that in every scenario, they come out the losers. either the’re going to get a war with a vietnam ending or they’re going to get an afghanistan with a technologically advanced society on it’s borders with a population that will going ape shit over a chinese occupation of the traditional korean homeland.
china cannot win.
Various sources indicate big changes in North Korea
Heres the overview: Michael Horowitz, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, says the regime of Kim Jong Il will implode within a year. A European delegation just returned from Pyongyang, obviously disturbed by what they saw and heard (or didnap…
Dear lirelou,
> btw, lankov, million man north korean army will be
> fighting too. on the side of koreans.
By ?€?Koreans?€™you mean South Koreans, do you? Hm?€? The problem is that, as I have said, there will no ?€œinvasion”. The Chinese come (if they come) formally INVITED by a new North Korean government which will at all probability conist of the top brass of the KNA. Are you suggesting that NK army will fight its own generals? And colonels? Such things happen (seldom), but in such a case we cannot talk about an ?€?army?€™, only about ?€™some elements of so-and-so army?€™. And if Chinese know that they will encounter resistance of the NK army as well, they will not invade, of course. They are not that stupid. I hope that they are reasonable enough not to play with an idea of puppet military government as well.
> killed like kittens? don?€™t think so. you don?€™t
> seem to know koreans. rhetoric only? you?€™re wrong.
May be. I?€™ve been dealing with Korea/Koreans for 22 years of 41 years of my life. More or less on daily basis?€? Perhaps, I do not know many things every Korean knows, but an outsider?€™s position gives me a lot of additional opportunities, including freedom from such a powerful mind-altering drug as nationalism (great stimulator sometimes, but makes person see a seriously distorted picture of the world).
> you remember afghanistan, don?€™t you?
I do, of course. But do you remember that there were some 13,000 killed Russians, and about 1 million killed Afghans (largely civilians)? 1:70, that is. And all this mess which is Afghanistan now… Do you believe that people in an industrial and educated nation are willing and able to accept such a ratio of losses?
But once again. If it happens, it will not be an all-Korean struggle against invaders. It will be a pro-Chinese semi-puppet North Korean government, supported by some North Koreans vs. South Koreans and, perhaps, some resistance forces. It may be compared with Afghanistan, but definitely not with Vietnam.
OOPs again
the previous was for Maripkan, not for Lirelou…
Dear Lirelou,
By statement I actually meant not the recent past, but more distant times. However, the ?€?red?€™ guerrillas of the Korean War were remarkably efficient for such a guerrilla-unfriendly terrain. But I meant the resistance of the early 1900s which was quite strong, and even resistance to the Japanese in the 1590s when the guerrilla detachments were one of the three major components of victory, together with the Chinese troops and Korean navy. And Korean units fought very well during the Civil War in Russia where they supported the Reds against Whites and the Japanese. Very high level of participation: about 20-25% of all Russian-Korean adult males joined the guerrillas in 1918-1922.
Re anti-Japanese resistance. There was indeed very little resistance from the late 1920s. Most stories are fabrications or exaggerations. To an extent, the Roh government felt into trap it created itself: the Korean nationalist Left came to believe its own propaganda myth. However, there was serious resistance in the 1910s. In the 1930s Koreans did not fight because there was virtually no hope. Japan appeared invincible, and fight against it was clearly suicidal and useless. And between 1919 and 1937 the colonial regime was relatively tolerant, it allowed some freedom of national expression.
btw, lankov, million man north korean army will be fighting too. on the side of koreans. killed like kittens? don’t think so. you don’t seem to know koreans. rhetoric only? you’re wrong.
you remember afghanistan, don’t you? how about billion man china fighting the vietnamese? and let’s not forget the most shameful defeat of all, vietnam and the us.
jusr an aside:
go to the boston globe to see how bush thinks nothing of torture. bushie makes me proud to be an american.
how about you, paul?
Dr. Lankov,
Reference your remark that Korea has “produced some surprisingly good guerrilla fighters”. My impression is that guerrilla operations have never succeeded in Korea, perhaps because of its nature as a narrow peninsula, and that the best korean guerrillas have generally been employed as Soviet partisans were, i.e. in support of approaching or nearby conventional forces. Kim Il-sung appears to have had no real success in Manchuria in that they were pushed out into the Soviet Union and their best counterguerrilla opposition tended to be Koreans fighting for the Japanese. (Thus bringing his support among the population into doubt.) His real genius appears to have been in cross-border reconnaissance operations, and can probably be measured by some 54 years of REBU experience. My impression, again just that, is that the real success of Nork guerrillas in the 1950-53 period owed a lot to former KVA veterans who’d come into KPA ranks from the Chinese PLA, and who had been exposed to Chinese guerrilla tactics under Lin Piao in Manchuria from 1946-48. Again, that is just my impression based on readings in English, not Korean, Japanese, Chinese, or Russian.
As for U.S. operations in Latin America (I participated in Grenada, Central America, and Panama myself), we went in a lot for nation building during the “Banana Wars”, so the single strike model did not apply. Also, during both periods, we often had no idea who the “right party” would be. Rather, we knew who we wouldn’t accept, and only a general idea of who we would. Our experience in the Dominican Republic in 1965 is an extreme example of how not to do it. The French, on the other hand, certainly used your model in deposing Bokassa of the Central African “Empire”. Would that all our interventions had been so clear. But then, reluctant imperialists are probably the worse kind.
nulji maripkan
I doubt Korea would mount any vietnam like resistance movement.
Japan occupied Korea with only 7000 or so troops. During the occupation there was little resistance. In fact there were more Koreans fighting for Japan during WWII than feedom fighters fighting against Japan during the entire occupation.
Yes everyone says their grandfather or great grandfather was a resistance fighter but if that was true Korea might have mounted a resistance against Japan.
I see nothing in the Korean character today that would indicate Korea is capable of the sacrifice needed to mount such a resistance except by anti WTO Korean farmers ready to commit suicide to keep Korea’s markets closed. I just don’t think that would be enough against China.
“…go to the boston globe to see how bush thinks nothing of torture. bushie makes me proud to be an american. how about you, paul?”
Nulji, I’m looking forward to reading about the POW operations of the combined ROK/DPRK forces, after the upcoming Chinese invasion is repelled.
I’m sure the proper decorum and deportment Koreans will display toward their Chinese prisoners will cause Bu$hbots like me to hang our heads in shame.
‘free of nationalism…’
that’s why you can’t understand what the koreans will do. and please don’t tell me what koreans are not capable of doing; i’ve heard it all before:
stick to farming, you can’t build ships! stick to ships, you can’t build cars! stick to cars, you can’t do hitech!
and i never said koreans won’t suffer. btw, your comments are discounted since you’re a russian; first
euros to be defeated by non euros. you remember your people’s reaction to the declaration of war from japan, don’t you? you all laughed. then, two weeks later, you all cried. still further, though i’m sure your heart is warmed at the idea of killing more afghanis than afghanis killing you(russians), you still were defeated by a bunch of guys in dresses wearing towels wrapped around their heads. china should take heed.
********
paul, instead of smart comment, why not tell me why you think it’s ok for bush to torture.
*********
All this Chinese Invasion stories are nonsense. Korea (both North AND South) is the most pro-Chinese nation that borders China. Russia? Mongolia? Vietnam? Afghanistan? Sikkim? Need I say more?
Every Korean businessmen are jumping up and down at the mere thoughts of factories in Shandong. All the Korean media paparazzi go out of their way to sinocize all the Korean products—go watch the syrupy pro-China film, “Musa” (warrior).
The Chinese know their popularity in Korea and going into North Korea is the Numero Uno dumb thing they can possibly do. If South Korea takes over all of Korea, they are guaranteed to have a somewhat pro-Chinese government on their border—and I really doubt that Hu Jin Tao or Jiang Ze Min is really worried about Korean artilleries on Apdong river. On the otherhand, if China, not very well known for “nation-building” goes into North Korea, they will in all likelihood, create the most anti-Chinese nation on their border. (The U.S. has this much trouble in Iraq, how much moreso would the Chinese have in North Korea)
Korean resolve to fight against China? The past 50 years of Korean education can be summed up like this: Valiant Korean freedom fighters fought evil Imperialist foreigners–we must be proud of our glorious heritage. All those Hanchongryun kids will strap on a C4 and charge and pull a allahu akbar on the Chinese.
I as a prejudiced Korean American can say that my “biased” lens tells me that Korean people are indeed crazy enough to fight the Chinese. I mean, come on. It’s crazy and stupid to mangle Korean alliance with the United States and that’s exactly what No Moo Hyun accomplished–and why? The Mob that voted for him wanted it that way and No had to follow his constituents.
China doesn’t have to do jack crap. They can sit tight and watch North Korea implode and send back all the refugees to South Korea when the dust settles. Afterall, most North Korean refugees will opt to live in South Korea rather than the frigid unforgiving landscape that is Manchuria.
Greetings.
I follow Japan more than the Korean peninsula, but an article in the Guardian a few days ago caught my eye when it said that big changes might soon be on the way in North Korea. I’m pretty skeptical about Horowitz’s speech, but it has gotten a lot of press in Asia even if not many people in the U.S. noticed.
One thing about Horowitz’s speech did strike me as interesting. He mentioned that China has chosen a general to replace Kim. This could be wishful thinking, but it seems to line up with something that a columnist for the Asahi in Tokyo named Funabashi Yoichi wrote not long ago, that the Chinese were according a certain high ranking defector an unusual level of respect. Usually they make defectors leave the country, but in this case they have broken from their usual policy and the defector is still in Beijing. So as wacko as Horowitz’s claims sound there may be a grain of truth to them.
I’m new to this topic so I’d appreciate any information people might be able to provide. Has there been any news of a high level defector who is being cultivated by Beijing? Thanks.
Dear Marypkan,
You know, I am not a nationalist, so my heart is not warmed by idea that we killed many Afghans and tried to force on them the way of life they did not want. Imperialist adventures of this kind are always immoral and usually irrational as well. I am different from you and your fellow nationalists of all kinds and colours. You see, I do not like when people are killed, especially to satisfy somebody’s urge for “greatness”. I suspect it?€™s very difficult, even impossible for you to believe that somebody does not like massacres, let alone understand such a strange opinion, but it?€™s true?€?
All other parts of your post can be easily discarded as usual set of hysterical nationalist chants. I am pretty sure that very similar chants will be yelled by the Chinese if their government will foolishly decide to mingle in North Korea (and last time I checked, China was in Asia, too, so all your remarks of Asian glory are somewhat funny).
But generally, I?€™d better leave you beat your drums and delusion oneself. It’s very comfortable to live in the world of self-induced intoxication, I presume. But do not be surprised if normal people do not talk to you as long as you are in such a state…
But nationalism is as bad as heavy drugs. From my own experience: I?€™ve seen a dozen of cases when my friends and classmates back in Russia became ardent nationalists, and only two cases when people eventually returned from this state to normality (in one case, by the way, it was the participation in the Afghan war which made the person an enemy of all imperialisms and staunch if moderate critic of Russian nationalism). But in general it?€™s like heavy drugs: once you are in the habit, you chances of becoming sane again are quite small.
Not for Mr.Marypkan: over last month I had three talks with Chinese officials and scholar officials which left an impression that some actions in North Korea might indeed be considered in Beijing. I hope that Chinese government is sane enough to realize that long-term costs of such a move will outweigh its short-term (and doubtful) benefits. But who knows, they might follow Mr.Marypkan line and decide that laws of nature and politics do not apply to China as the embodiment of Asian greatness. If it happens, it North Korea will remain a sorry mess not for a couple of decades, but for much longer period of time.
Dear ?€?virtual wonderer?€™,
Agree with everything what you say - with probable exception of ?€œAll those Hanchongryun kids will strap on a C4 and charge and pull a allahu akbar on the Chinese?€? (you know, they soon discover that the Chinese security guys are very different from the nice and gentle Seoul police - and this makes a difference).
Indeed, for China its inavsion will destroy its highly positive image in Korea. Instantly and for a very long time. In exchange they will probably (just probably) keep Americans further from their borders - and will get a thirsty and corrupt government to feed and save from its own people. But, alas, countries have done much sillier things. After all, I do not think that the present-day Korean affair with China is going to last forever. The US also used to be very, very popular here few decades ago. And with China a lot of now overlooked problems are bound to surface sooner or later. Nonetheless, for Beijing it will be silly to destroy the present-day momentum. China can get much more from its good relations with Korea than from taking direct respnsibility for the troubled and, in a long run, doomed North Korean regime.
Dr. Lankov,
I wish I could share faith in the intelligence of those crazy members of the Korean ethnic group, but once blood is shed, I’m not sure which way the fascist sentiment will swing. Nazi Germany was also a very educated people, but they were “dumb” enough to take on almost everybody. Despite the fact that China is a nuclear power with over 1 billion people, many Korean kids look condescendingly of China–they could just as well put this prejudice in claiming the military “inferiority” of the People’s Army.
But more to the point, China, if it goes into NK will want to keep the conflict confined to that border and the SK will seek the same. I doubt even China would use WMD. In a conventional war setting, they might choose to fight.
Afterall, if SK thought that it’s own sovereignty was at stake, they might start to do some funky things. It probably isn’t too difficult to destabilize CCP in what is already a shaky time for CHina. An unpopular war could just be the thing that could foment a unified China, with a capital in Taipei.
Not that I really believe in any of that, but if enough crazy SK kids believe it, they might not have qualms about shooting bullets.
Oh, and thank you for a wonderful article on the ATimes. It was extremely fascinating. I wish I could read the articles in Russian!
live michigan club keno results
Please check some relevant information in the field of baccarat wine decanters