1. A U.S. View of The North Korean Military Threat
Bruce Bennett
June 2004
This material represents the author’s view and not those of RAND or DoD

2. How Could Korea Evolve? (Now Through 2025)
North Korean economy fails, approaches collapse
Kim Jong-Il launches an invasion of ROK to unify internally, or
Regime collapses, civil war results, or
Regime collapses, North Korea absorbed by the ROK
North Korea “muddles through”--stays independent
North Korean economy recovers
North Korea remains independent, or
North and South unify (soft landing)
North Korean nuclear threat leads to conflict
U.S./ROK action leads to escalatory spiral?
U.S./ROK alliance fails, North Korea tempted to invade

3. U.S. Objectives Relative to NK WMD Threats
Prevent the proliferation of WMD to other “rogue” states and especially to terrorist groups who would likely use WMD against the United States or U.S. interests
Prevent North Korea from threatening or using a WMD against the United States
Eliminate the North Korean WMD threat, and prevent it from causing damage in NE Asia
Avoid an escalatory spiral of proliferation in Northeast Asia (South Korea, Japan, China)
Build regional cooperation, with special focus on ROK, China, and Japan

4. The Strategic Threat Spectrum: North Korea to 2025
NK Invasion
Collapse, Civil War
Nuclear Conflict
High
Collapse, Absorbed
Soft Landing
Medium
Strike
Low
NK Independent
Very Low
Risk is more than a NK invasion

5. Level of Risk: North Korea to 2025
High Risk
NK Invasion
Collapse, Civil War
Nuclear Conflict
High
Collapse, Absorbed
Soft Landing
Medium
Strike
Low
Low Risk
NK Independent
Moderate Risk
Very Low

6. My Assessment of the Risks Associated With Some Future Scenarios
*Concerns about contamination of Korean goods, handling of refugees, offensive operations in NK, and handling of people/insurgents

7. What Might a NK Collapse/Civil War Look Like?
Kim Jong-Il dies (is killed?), lack of consensus on a successor
Factions form, organized around NK military forces
NK control system fractures
Open conflict develops between factions
WMD is used as part of escalating violence, casualties
Attacks spill over into the ROK; massive refugee flows to the ROK in which SOF/agents are concealed
Most factions are hostile to the ROK
Some factions/soldiers offer WMD to the highest bidder
ROK decision to intervene, stop violence, unify
Opposed by most NK factions
Fighting spreads and diversifies
Some direct fighting, some NK soldiers disappear into insurgency or criminal groups
Some retaliation against the ROK, including WMD use
ROK seeks U.S. help

8. If North Korea Remains Cohesive, Key North Korean Military Objectives
Regime survival
Directly protect the regime from internal and external threats
Deter U.S./ROK military action and escalation
Unification
Achieve unification via conquest
Break the ROK/U.S. alliance
Convince ROKs that the alliance provides little value, high costs
Prepare to cause a U.S. “Beirut/Mogadishu reaction” in war

9. Presumed North Korean Invasion Strategy
Focus: CFC ground, air power
Capture ROK?
Get U.S. to disengage
Yes
Yes
Win
Cannot militarily defeat the U.S. No No
Prolonged conflict
Draw/Survive: Disable the ROK, U.S. disengages
Regime survival
Yes No
Revenge: Cripple the ROK, hurt the U.S.,
change regional balance of power

10. Looking at the Conventional Balance
North Korean emphases
SOF
Artillery, TBMs vs. armor, aircraft
MANPADs vs. SAMs
Chem/bio vs. conventional
Nuclear forces
Concerns with ROK forces
Too much equipment is antiquated
Military forces have many holes (e.g., BMD, AWACS, vaccines)
As service times decrease, conscripts less experienced and cohesive
Equipment functioning
and personnel training/ quality not included

11. WMD Use Is Integral to the North Korean Strategy*
Key target: Seoul
We believe WMD is fully integrated into North Korean planning
North Korean artillery, FROGs, Scuds deliver chemical weapons
North Korean SOF deliver biological weapons
North Korean NoDongs, atomic “mines” deliver nuclear weapons
*These numbers are approximate, and assume NK has 8+ nuclear weapons

12. Potential Effects of WMD on Seoul*
Winning is not just about
NK forces destroyed
NK territory captured
Korea “unified”
10 kilograms of anthrax
30, ,000 untreated fatalities
Smallpox, plague could cause quarantine
12.5 kiloton nuclear explosion
50, ,000 fatalities
Fallout in ROK?
1,000 kilograms of sarin
5, ,000 fatalities
WMD effects could impair ROK recovery, absorption of North Korea
*Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction: Assessing the Risks, U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment, August 1993

13. The North Korean Threat Affects the Alliance: Some U.S. Expectations
Is North Korea a Threat?
Strengthen ROK Defense
Strong U.S. Alliance
Yes
Sustain force size
25-30 year equip. cycle
Broad defense efforts
Strong response to NK nuclear threat
Sustain U.S. forces
$11 bn eqp. upgrades by 2006
Strong ROK support for U.S. No
Modest ROK Defense
Reduce U.S. Alliance
Reduce force size, conscription period
40-50 year equip. cycle
Niche defense focus
Passive response to NK nuclear threat
Reduce U.S. forces
No major equipment upgrades
Establish ROK independence

14. But What Is the ROK Government Position on the North Korean Threat?
Is North Korea a Threat?
Strengthen ROK Defense
Strong U.S. Alliance
Yes
Sustain force size
25-30 year equip. cycle
Broad defense efforts
Strong response to NK nuclear threat
Sustain U.S. forces
$11 bn eqp. upgrades by 2006
Strong ROK support for U.S. No
Modest ROK Defense
Reduce force size, conscription period
40-50 year equip. cycle
Niche defense focus
Passive response to NK nuclear threat
It Appears to Be:
Yes/ No
Modest ROK Defense
Strong U.S. Deterrence
Reduce U.S. Alliance
Improve NK relations
Reduce force size, conscription period
40-50 year equip. cycle
Niche defense focus
Passive response to NK nuclear threat
Sustain U.S. forces
$11 bn eqp. upgrades by 2006
Establish ROK independence
Reduce U.S. forces
No major equipment upgrades
Establish ROK independence

15. Sharing Responsibility in an Alliance

16. Other Korean Military Work by RAND
North Korean invasion threats (1990-present)
Conventional arms control (1991, )
Measuring the “balance of power” ( )
North Korean Weapons of Mass Destruction (1996-present)
WMD arms control ( )
Restoration of Operations ACTD (2001-present)
ROK military force requirements (1995-present)
ROK Air Force requirements (1999, 2002)
ROK Army requirements (2002)
Requirements for “peaceful” unification ( )
ROK/U.S. alliance (Early 1990s, 2000-Present)