How We Know North Korea Didn't Actually Detonate a Hydrogen Bomb

[Indx TechStyle]

How We Know North Korea Didn't Actually Detonate a Hydrogen Bomb
A look at the evidence nuclear weapons experts used to analyze North Korea’s nuclear test.
Despite its bluster, it appears all but certain that North Korea didn’t successfully detonate its first hydrogen bomb on Wednesday as claimed. Within minutes of Pyongyang’s big announcement via state media, nuclear weapons experts were lining up to pour doubt on the bluster.
But why are they so confident?
While a definitive answer could lie in the analysis of radiation levels, which is yet to run its course, all signs are that whatever exploded at the Punggye-ri nuclear test site at 10 am local time on January 6 was a smaller, less sophisticated device.
The key clue is seismic activity recorded after the blast. H-bombs, which are based on nuclear fusion rather than fission, can be thousands of times more
powerful than the atomic weapon that flattened Hiroshima. The quake caused by Wednesday’s blast, measuring 4.85 on the Richter scale, points to a much less powerful weapon. From the estimates produced so far, Pyongyang’s fourth nuclear detonation appears to have had less than half the destructive power of the bomb dropped on Japan.
“The initial seismic activity indicates a yield of about 6-9 kilotons, which is more indicative of a nuclear fission
device,” Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at Washington D.C.’s Arms Control Association, told The Diplomat . “If North Korea had tested a hydrogen bomb, it would likely have a significantly higher yield, and
thus a higher seismic impact.”
Another indicator is the sheer technical complexity of making a H-bomb. If North did in fact succeed, it would
represent an advance few would have predicted, given what is known about its technical abilities.
If successful, North Korea “would have accomplished much more than other nuclear powers with fewer resources and less time,” said Melissa Hanham, a senior research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies.
A number of experts have pointed to the possibility of a device boosted by a small amount of fusion material. Such a “boosted” weapon would be primarily based on fission technology, as in the
case of North Korea’s previous nuclear tests, but would produce a more powerful blast.
For now, the exact nature of North Korea’s latest weapon remains unclear.
On Friday, the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety failed to reach a conclusion after an analysis of air off South Korea’s east coast. It said that the amount of radioactive elements detected was too small to confirm the detonation of a nuclear device.
@amoy @Srinivas_K @SREEKAR @AnantS @sydsnyper @rock127 @Blackwater @Scarface @sorcerer @shiphone @Zarvan @sabari @guru-dutt @Gessler @pmaitra @Yusuf @sayareakd @Sakal Gharelu Ustad @LETHALFORCE @roma @Rowdy @Mad Indian @I_PLAY_BAD @Bornubus @Ankit Purohit @salute @Indibomber @indiatester @IBSA @asingh10 @maomao @jackprince
@Screambowl

 

[warrior monk]

Information on North Korea’s nuclear test on 6 January 2016

The seismological observatory NORSAR at Kjeller recorded today, 6 January 2016, at 01:40:48 UTC, seismic signals from the announced underground nuclear test in North Korea. This is the fourth in a sequence of tests carried out by North Korea since 2006.

Date: 2016/01/06 01:30:00 UTC
Place: North Korea (41.28°N 129.07°E)
Magnitude: 4.9
Depth: 0 km

The figure below shows seismic signals from each of the four North Korean nuclear tests recorded in Hedmark, Norway, plotted to the same scale. The magnitudes (mb) are based on NORSAR’s recordings and the explosive yield estimates are given in kiloton equivalent of TNT.

The event is estimated by NORSAR to have a magnitude of 4.9. In comparison, the previous North Korean nuclear test which took place on February 12, 2013, had a magnitude of 5.0. The first North Korean nuclear test on October 9, 2006, had a magnitude of 4.2.The location is estimated to be 41.28N 129.07E which is in the region where the previous nuclear tests have taken place. This is a distance of approximately 7360 km from NORSAR’s seismic station in Hedmark. Given that the seismic waves take approximately 11 minutes to propagate from North Korea to Norway, the measurements indicate that the event took place at 01:30 UTC.

From the size of the event, indicated by the seismic signals, we can say that this was a nuclear event. It is not possible to tell what kind of nuclear device this was from the seismic signals alone. Future observations of possible radioactive leakage may be able to address this question.

NORSAR’s accurate location for the latest underground nuclear test by North Korea.

NORSAR has been able to calculate an accurate location for this event.

- Data obtained from the international network of seismic stations pinpoints the location of the explosion. The explosion was carried out in the same mountain structure as the previous two tests, but a few hundred meters further into the mountain, reports CEO Anne Lycke.

- This explosion resembled the previous North Korean nuclear tests both in size and characteristics, adds Lycke.

From the size of the event, indicated by the seismic data, this was clearly a nuclear explosion. From such observations, it is not possible to confirm anything about the type of nuclear device used. Subsequent possible releases of radioactivity into the atmosphere may help to answer this question.

The new information indicates:

• The explosion has taken place further into the mountain than the previous tests.
• There is likely to be a greater overburden than previously.
• There may therefore be a lower likelihood of leakage of radioactivity.
• Without radioactive leakage, it will be more difficult to determine the kind of weapon that has been tested.
• There is nevertheless the possibility that radioactive noble gasses can leak from the site of the explosion.

- It can take some time, maybe up to 60 days, before the gasses from such a leakage would reach radionuclide stations in the vicinity. The nearest stations are in South Korea, Japan, China and eastern Russia.

NORSAR estimates the explosive yield to be approximately 10 kiloton equivalent of TNT. This is a comparable size to the bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

About NORSAR
NORSAR is responsible for the operation of some of the world’s largest seismic monitoring deployments and has more than 45 years of experience in research and development for monitoring of nuclear tests, advanced seismological data processing, and analysis of data from seismic instruments.

NORSAR is the designated National Data Center (NDC) for Norway for verifying compliance with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and operates seismic stations located in Hedmark and Finnmark on mainland Norway, Adventdalen on Svalbard and on the island of Jan Mayen, in addition to a radionuclide station at Platåberget on Svalbard and an infrasound station near Bardufoss. The global network consists of 321 stations in 89 countries which ensures that no nuclear tests could be carried out undetected.

http://www.norsar.no/norsar/about-us/News/North-Korea-nuclear-test-on-6-January-2016

 

[warrior monk]

The Mb waves suggests that yield of about 12 to 13 kt assuming fired on dry rocks but it is distance and depth dependent so it might vary , which suggests a successful primary but might not have overcome the coulomb barrier so failed secondary probably now it depends upon post shot radioactivity observation like post shot radio xenon analysis , the data of 14 MeV neutron activation products , radiochemical methods , gamma-ray spectrometric measurements and number of fission per gram of the sample is needed to measure whether it is a staged device or not but without that it is just plain guessing

 

[Indx TechStyle]

The Mb waves suggests that yield of about 12 to 13 kt assuming fired on dry rocks but it is distance and depth dependent so it might vary , which suggests a successful primary but might not have overcome the coulomb barrier so failed secondary probably now it depends upon post shot radioactivity observation like post shot radio xenon analysis , the data of 14 MeV neutron activation products , radiochemical methods , gamma-ray spectrometric measurements and number of fission per gram of the sample is needed to measure whether it is a staged device or not but without that it is just plain guessing

Simply, NK may have improved their nuclear bomb but they are nowhere near thermonuclear bomb.

 

[warrior monk]

Simply, NK may have improved their nuclear bomb but they are nowhere near thermonuclear bomb.

The problem is Mb calculation which is distant dependent from surface and it is highly inconsistent to calculate yield from body waves especially when m = Log(A/T) + X (distance dependent factor) yield is calculated as B1 + B2Log(y) where B1 is site dependent and B2 has its own table. Mb to yield curve calculation has a error value of 37 % or more and without post shot analysis it will be again guessing . If the shot is at greater dept then upper mantle attenuation has to be taken into account. If Mb is correct then it looks like a failed test

North Korea got its nuclear capability from Pakistan in return it shared its missile program with Hajistan so we Indians have to follow North Korea's nuclear development as data will be transferred to Pakistan

 

[Indx TechStyle]

North Korea got its nuclear capability from Pakistan in return it shared its missile program with Hajistan so we Indians have to follow North Korea's nuclear development as data will be transferred to Pakistan

What do you mean by following North Koreans or pakis? Me and you both know very well about our nuclear capabilities of India, pakiland and NK.
Both NK and pk lack basic infrastructure for making even standard size atomic bombs(leave alone Hydrogen bombs) against India who have demonstrated nuclear capabilities on almost every front which can be nuclear.
Military, MIRVs,civilian, medical and very soon space (now, that case is different that India don't need to invest in making nukes for years. We produce much higher fissile material every year and can use that on wartime ).
And I don't have to speak at missile technology as everybody knows about it.

 

[amoy]

Canadian citizen indicted in China on charges of stealing state secrets

Source: Xinhua 2016-01-28 22:42:43

SHENYANG, Jan. 28 (Xinhua) -- A Canadian citizen has been accused of spying and stealing China's state secrets, Chinese authorities said on Thursday.

Kevin Garratt has been indicted by prosecutors in Dandong city in northeast China's Liaoning Province. The case will be tried at the Dandong Intermediate People's Court.

During the investigation, Chinese authorities also found evidence which implicates Garratt in accepting tasks from Canadian espionage agencies to gather intelligence in China.
------------------------ --------------- -----------------

Moving to China in 1984 Garratt had run a "coffee house" in Dandong a border city with N.Korea since 2008 and been in a Christian NGO assisting N.Korean refugees.

Possibly the "state secrets" may include trade btwn China and NK mainly through Dandong, and NK nuke programs. All intelligence gathered must have been passed on to Big Brother from the Canadian front end.

Bridges linking Dandong to Sinuiju the 2nd largest city of NK


~~Still waters run deep. ~~from my MiPad using tapatalk

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Canadian citizen indicted in China on charges of stealing state secrets

Source: Xinhua 2016-01-28 22:42:43

SHENYANG, Jan. 28 (Xinhua) -- A Canadian citizen has been accused of spying and stealing China's state secrets, Chinese authorities said on Thursday.

Kevin Garratt has been indicted by prosecutors in Dandong city in northeast China's Liaoning Province. The case will be tried at the Dandong Intermediate People's Court.

During the investigation, Chinese authorities also found evidence which implicates Garratt in accepting tasks from Canadian espionage agencies to gather intelligence in China.
------------------------ --------------- -----------------

Moving to China in 1984 Garratt had run a "coffee house" in Dandong a border city with N.Korea since 2008 and been in a Christian NGO assisting N.Korean refugees.

Possibly the "state secrets" may include trade btwn China and NK mainly through Dandong, and NK nuke programs. All intelligence gathered must have been passed on to Big Brother from the Canadian front end.

Bridges linking Dandong to Sinuiju the 2nd largest city of NK


~~Still waters run deep. ~~from my MiPad using tapatalk

Strange, now peaceful and harmonical land has started stealing info.

 

[amoy]

China seeks more workers from North Korea
Jan 27,2016

North Korean laborers work at a textile factory in the Chinese city of Dalian in Liaoning Province. [JOONGANG PHOTO]

Companies in three northeastern Chinese provinces are vying to recruit as many North Korean workers as they can to capitalize on cheap labor costs - moves that run counter to the international community’s efforts to impose further economic sanctions on North Korea following the country’s fourth nuclear test early this month.

Chunwoo Textile, a company based in Dandong, Liaoning Province, lost 100 of some 300 workers last year to factories operating in other provinces because wages were much higher there.

China’s northernmost provinces of Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang reputedly offer much cheaper wages for labor-intensive workers compared to other regions.

In Dandong, the average monthly wage stands at 2,843 Chinese yuan ($431.90), much less than the 5,313 yuan offered in Guangdong Province.

“The local economy centers on heavy industry, and with a lack of quality jobs, many workers have left the province in recent years,” said Kim Hyun-cheol, the owner of Chunwoo.

It is estimated that about 100,000 people leave China’s northernmost provinces annually in search of better working conditions, with better salaries, which has led to a shortage in manpower.

The labor shortage prompted Kim to look for an alternative last year in the form of North Korean workers.

“They have a relatively strong work ethic and demand cheap wages. The fact that they’re not entitled to health insurance is also an advantage for me as a manager,” Kim said, adding that he plans to hire more North Korean workers this year.

Chunwoo pays each of its North Korean employees about 2,000 yuan a month.

But the lack of manpower has also attributed to lackluster economic performances in the area.

According to official data released by the National Bureau of Statistics of China, annual economic growth in the three provinces ranged between 5.8 percent and 6.5 percent in 2014, behind the national average of 7.4 percent over the same period.

The local economies in northern China are heavily reliant on economic planning by the central government but started to decline in 2013 after reaching their limits. The decline across all three provinces came after years of economic growth, thanks to financial aid and an outlined blueprint for development from Beijing.

The exodus of workers in the region also comes at a time when the area economy is mainly focused on manufacturing, which generally requires more labor than other sectors.

To offset the shortage, the three provinces reached an agreement with North Korea last year in which Pyongyang agreed to send over 5,000 workers annually.

Estimates now gauge that up to 40,000 North Koreans are currently working there.

Pyongyang makes between $140 and 170 million per year by exporting labor to those provinces - that’s nearly twice as much as the average $86 million per year that the 54,700 North Korean workers at the Joint Kaesong Industrial Complex bring in.

“The total number of North Korean workers in China, including those not covered by official data, is estimated to be around 100,000, which brings the North Korean regime $1 billion in annual revenue on average,” said Cho Bong-hyun, a senior research fellow at the IBK Economy Research Institute.

Experts say Pyongyang will likely try to capitalize on cheap labor exports to China with its exports of mineral products to China now on the decline.

“China is expected to cut back on its imports of mineral resources from North Korea amid a slowing economy and environmental problems,” said Kim Suk-jin, a researcher at the Korea Institute for National Unification, adding that the dilemma would motivate Pyongyang to send more workers abroad.

Such close business cooperation could also make it difficult for Beijing - North Korea’s long-time ally - to join in international efforts to impose additional sanctions on Pyongyang following its most recent nuclear test on Jan. 6.

“Because Beijing’s top priority in its North Korea policy is to maintain the Kim Jong-un regime, rather than resolve the nuclear issue, China is likely to tolerate the North’s persistent irrational behavior,” said Liu Xing, a professor at China University of Political Science and Law.

---------------------------------------------
In NE China there're millions of Korean Chinese (citizens) and a lot of S.Korean investment + Evanglists.

Can N.Korea afford H-bomb and turn sour for China?

Disagree with the conclusion. An wayward NK is disconcerting to China too.

 

[Kshatriya87]

How We Know North Korea Didn't Actually Detonate a Hydrogen Bomb
A look at the evidence nuclear weapons experts used to analyze North Korea’s nuclear test.
Despite its bluster, it appears all but certain that North Korea didn’t successfully detonate its first hydrogen bomb on Wednesday as claimed. Within minutes of Pyongyang’s big announcement via state media, nuclear weapons experts were lining up to pour doubt on the bluster.
But why are they so confident?
While a definitive answer could lie in the analysis of radiation levels, which is yet to run its course, all signs are that whatever exploded at the Punggye-ri nuclear test site at 10 am local time on January 6 was a smaller, less sophisticated device.
The key clue is seismic activity recorded after the blast. H-bombs, which are based on nuclear fusion rather than fission, can be thousands of times more
powerful than the atomic weapon that flattened Hiroshima. The quake caused by Wednesday’s blast, measuring 4.85 on the Richter scale, points to a much less powerful weapon. From the estimates produced so far, Pyongyang’s fourth nuclear detonation appears to have had less than half the destructive power of the bomb dropped on Japan.
“The initial seismic activity indicates a yield of about 6-9 kilotons, which is more indicative of a nuclear fission
device,” Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at Washington D.C.’s Arms Control Association, told The Diplomat . “If North Korea had tested a hydrogen bomb, it would likely have a significantly higher yield, and
thus a higher seismic impact.”
Another indicator is the sheer technical complexity of making a H-bomb. If North did in fact succeed, it would
represent an advance few would have predicted, given what is known about its technical abilities.
If successful, North Korea “would have accomplished much more than other nuclear powers with fewer resources and less time,” said Melissa Hanham, a senior research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies.
A number of experts have pointed to the possibility of a device boosted by a small amount of fusion material. Such a “boosted” weapon would be primarily based on fission technology, as in the
case of North Korea’s previous nuclear tests, but would produce a more powerful blast.
For now, the exact nature of North Korea’s latest weapon remains unclear.
On Friday, the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety failed to reach a conclusion after an analysis of air off South Korea’s east coast. It said that the amount of radioactive elements detected was too small to confirm the detonation of a nuclear device.
@amoy @Srinivas_K @SREEKAR @AnantS @sydsnyper @rock127 @Blackwater @Scarface @sorcerer @shiphone @Zarvan @sabari @guru-dutt @Gessler @pmaitra @Yusuf @sayareakd @Sakal Gharelu Ustad @LETHALFORCE @roma @Rowdy @Mad Indian @I_PLAY_BAD @Bornubus @Ankit Purohit @salute @Indibomber @indiatester @IBSA @asingh10 @maomao @jackprince
@Screambowl

This is what I said in the first thread. No one believed me.

 

[amoy]

SK, US, China play ping pong with responsibility of responding to NK’s nuclear test

President Park Geun-hye speaks during the joint 2016 policy report to the president by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, National Defense, and Unification at the Blue House, Jan. 22. (provided by the Blue House)

US, SK favor forceful sanctions, China stresses dialogue. Meanwhile, US President Obama and Chinese President Xi have both been mum on the issue

The differences in Seoul’s, Washington’s, and Beijing’s ideas on how to respond to North Korea’s recent fourth nuclear test are coming into sharper relief.

South Korea and the US’s calls for “forceful, comprehensive, and effective sanctions” are drawing an unenthusiastic response from China, while China’s idea of combining sanctions with efforts to ensure regional political stability and achieve dialogue and negotiation are failing to gain traction amid a hard-line climate in Seoul and Washington. The resulting situation is one where neither of the two key components to a response on the nuclear issue - sanctions on one hand, dialogue and negotiations on the other - is able to function. And as the ping pong game of passing the responsibility continues between the sides, the vacuum of leadership in managing the situation and finding a solution is stretching into the long term. More than seven years have passed since the six-party talks to resolve the North Korean issue were suspended in Dec. 2008.

The divide in responses from Seoul and Beijing only deepened with remarks made by President Park Geun-hye at a Jan. 22 policy report to the president by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, National Defense, and Unification, during which she suggested that the six-party talks were a fruitless framework and proposed a “five-party” approach excluding Pyongyang. Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Hong Lei soon responded by saying that dialogue and negotiation were “still the basic approaches to problem resolution in the current situation on the [Korean] peninsula.” Hong also expressed “hopes that all of the countries will honor the principles and spirit of the Sep. 19 Joint Statement and resume the six-party talks quickly,” referring to a statement released in 2005. It was the rare example in South Korea-China relations of a foreign ministry spokesperson openly rebutting claims made by the other side’s President.

The attitude from Washington has been similarly fuzzy. When asked for initial comment by the Hankyoreh, the US State Department said it was “open to any dialogue aimed at North Korea’s return to credible and sincere denuclearization negotiations.”

But as the outcry over Park’s “five-party talks” remarks grew, the US ambassador to South Korea announced on Jan. 23 that the US “supports President Park’s call for a five-party meeting.” In addition to the unusual nature of the ambassador’s statement, it also came from someone farther down in the hierarchy than the State Department. A South Korean senior official also said on Jan. 24 that Park’s comments about the five-party talks had “been made without prior discussion with other countries,” including the US. In response, the Blue House and Ministry of Foreign Affairs have sought to contain the controversy over the remarks by claiming that Park was referring to “greater five-party coordination within the six-party talks framework.”

Meanwhile, Washington and Beijing continued to go back and forth publicly over “responsibility” for the North Korean nuclear issue. Just after the nuclear test earlier this month, US Secretary of State John Kerry said that China “had a particular approach that it wanted to make, and we agreed and respected to give them space to be able to implement that,” but that the approach “has not worked.” Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Hua Chunying fired back that the “origins of the [Korean] peninsula’s nuclear issue do not lie with China, and the key points of the solution do not lie with China either.” The Global Times, the English-language daily under the auspices of the Chinese Communist Party newspaper People’s Daily, went even further, citing the US’s “hostile policies” toward North Korea as one of the causes of the nuclear issue.

Perhaps a more serious sign is the lack of any public statements since the test from either US President Barack Obama or Chinese President Xi Jinping. The silence could be interpreted as signaling bafflement at the lack of any suitable solution to the escalating nuclear issue, but it also means that neither the top leader in the US nor in China has come out publicly to state a commitment to solving the problem.

Many have expressed vocal concerns about Park’s continued insistence on a Chinese role in the solution and public pressures on Beijing, including her discussion of the possible deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system on the Korean Peninsula at a Jan. 13 press conference and her calls for five-party talks at the Jan. 22 policy report to the president of foreign affairs and national security agencies.

“While I can understand the President’s sense of urgency, these are typical cases of undiplomatic statements that show concern only for domestic political impact,” said one former senior official on Jan. 24.

“Not only does this kind of public pressure from the President not help in getting the Chinese government to actively cooperate in the response to the North Korean nuclear issue, but it’s also poised to become a strain on South Korea-China relations,” the former official added.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

SK, US, China play ping pong with responsibility of responding to NK’s nuclear test

President Park Geun-hye speaks during the joint 2016 policy report to the president by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, National Defense, and Unification at the Blue House, Jan. 22. (provided by the Blue House)

US, SK favor forceful sanctions, China stresses dialogue. Meanwhile, US President Obama and Chinese President Xi have both been mum on the issue

The differences in Seoul’s, Washington’s, and Beijing’s ideas on how to respond to North Korea’s recent fourth nuclear test are coming into sharper relief.

South Korea and the US’s calls for “forceful, comprehensive, and effective sanctions” are drawing an unenthusiastic response from China, while China’s idea of combining sanctions with efforts to ensure regional political stability and achieve dialogue and negotiation are failing to gain traction amid a hard-line climate in Seoul and Washington. The resulting situation is one where neither of the two key components to a response on the nuclear issue - sanctions on one hand, dialogue and negotiations on the other - is able to function. And as the ping pong game of passing the responsibility continues between the sides, the vacuum of leadership in managing the situation and finding a solution is stretching into the long term. More than seven years have passed since the six-party talks to resolve the North Korean issue were suspended in Dec. 2008.

The divide in responses from Seoul and Beijing only deepened with remarks made by President Park Geun-hye at a Jan. 22 policy report to the president by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, National Defense, and Unification, during which she suggested that the six-party talks were a fruitless framework and proposed a “five-party” approach excluding Pyongyang. Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Hong Lei soon responded by saying that dialogue and negotiation were “still the basic approaches to problem resolution in the current situation on the [Korean] peninsula.” Hong also expressed “hopes that all of the countries will honor the principles and spirit of the Sep. 19 Joint Statement and resume the six-party talks quickly,” referring to a statement released in 2005. It was the rare example in South Korea-China relations of a foreign ministry spokesperson openly rebutting claims made by the other side’s President.

The attitude from Washington has been similarly fuzzy. When asked for initial comment by the Hankyoreh, the US State Department said it was “open to any dialogue aimed at North Korea’s return to credible and sincere denuclearization negotiations.”

But as the outcry over Park’s “five-party talks” remarks grew, the US ambassador to South Korea announced on Jan. 23 that the US “supports President Park’s call for a five-party meeting.” In addition to the unusual nature of the ambassador’s statement, it also came from someone farther down in the hierarchy than the State Department. A South Korean senior official also said on Jan. 24 that Park’s comments about the five-party talks had “been made without prior discussion with other countries,” including the US. In response, the Blue House and Ministry of Foreign Affairs have sought to contain the controversy over the remarks by claiming that Park was referring to “greater five-party coordination within the six-party talks framework.”

Meanwhile, Washington and Beijing continued to go back and forth publicly over “responsibility” for the North Korean nuclear issue. Just after the nuclear test earlier this month, US Secretary of State John Kerry said that China “had a particular approach that it wanted to make, and we agreed and respected to give them space to be able to implement that,” but that the approach “has not worked.” Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Hua Chunying fired back that the “origins of the [Korean] peninsula’s nuclear issue do not lie with China, and the key points of the solution do not lie with China either.” The Global Times, the English-language daily under the auspices of the Chinese Communist Party newspaper People’s Daily, went even further, citing the US’s “hostile policies” toward North Korea as one of the causes of the nuclear issue.

Perhaps a more serious sign is the lack of any public statements since the test from either US President Barack Obama or Chinese President Xi Jinping. The silence could be interpreted as signaling bafflement at the lack of any suitable solution to the escalating nuclear issue, but it also means that neither the top leader in the US nor in China has come out publicly to state a commitment to solving the problem.

Many have expressed vocal concerns about Park’s continued insistence on a Chinese role in the solution and public pressures on Beijing, including her discussion of the possible deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system on the Korean Peninsula at a Jan. 13 press conference and her calls for five-party talks at the Jan. 22 policy report to the president of foreign affairs and national security agencies.

“While I can understand the President’s sense of urgency, these are typical cases of undiplomatic statements that show concern only for domestic political impact,” said one former senior official on Jan. 24.

“Not only does this kind of public pressure from the President not help in getting the Chinese government to actively cooperate in the response to the North Korean nuclear issue, but it’s also poised to become a strain on South Korea-China relations,” the former official added.

That is why India's permanent membership is needed in UNSC.
Otherwise, yankees, chinkies and ruskies will make this world a hell.
India has always followed NPT even after not signing and has a better track record for solving disputes wherever it intervened.
Anyway, only God knows(yet I'm an atheist) what will happen till then.
:biggrin2:

 

[amoy]

N. Korea launches long-range rocket
2016/02/07 09:33

SEOUL, Feb. 7 (Yonhap) -- North Korea launched a long-range rocket from its northwest Dongchang-ri launch site on Sunday in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions.

The communist country has said the launch will put an earth observation satellite into orbit, but the outside world views it as cover for testing an intercontinental ballistic missile.

The North has warned that the rocket's first stage is expected to fall in the West Sea, the fairing in the East China Sea and the second stage in the Philippine Sea.

Initially, the North proclaimed the rocket would be fired sometime between Feb. 8 and 25, but it advanced the launch window to Feb. 7-14 on Saturday.

It is the sixth long-range missile test by the North in its program to develop nuclear-loaded intercontinental ballistic missiles.

The missile fired on Sunday is believed to have a range of more than 10,000 kilometers, which could reach the mainland U.S.
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2016/02/07/17/0301000000AEN20160207000900315F.html


~~Still waters run deep. ~~from my MiPad using tapatalk

 

[amoy]

Seoul Warns Russia, China of Missile Defence System Talks with US

Seoul has let Moscow and Beijing know in advance of the decision to start official negotiations with Washington on the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system on the South Korean territory, the government said in a statement on Sunday.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Earlier in the day, Yoo Jeh-seung, South Korean deputy minister for policy, said that South Korea and the United States had agreed to start talks on the deployment of the advanced US missile defense system.

"(We) have informed the Chinese and the Russian side [of the decision to start the negotiations] before the official Defense Ministry statement was issued," the statement reads, as quoted by the Yonhap news agency.

The United States has raised the possibility of the deployment of a THAAD battery in East Asia in the past, a decision the Pentagon has said would be made through the trilateral Japan-South Korea-US security alliance talks.

China and Russia have expressed concern over the controversial defense system, arguing it could upset the regional balance and be used against Chinese interests.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/asia/20160207/1034362860/korea-russia-china-thaad.html#ixzz3zUUxuAYg

~~Still waters run deep. ~~from my MiPad using tapatalk

 

[Compersion]

195 km
Distance from Pyongyang to Seoul

http://www.sfgate.com/travel/article/SEOUL-lives-life-on-the-edge-Just-35-miles-from-2557590.php

SEOUL lives life on the edge -Just 35 miles from the border with North Korea, the city crackles with a newfound sense of style.

-------------------------------

All the responses must be read not simply and have other impressions and takeaways. A rocket launch and also nuclear test and even missile defense system. One might say has nothing to do with North Korea.

--------------------------------

 

[amoy]

South Korean navy fires warning shots at intruding North Korea boat
February 8, 2016 04:00 GMT

NK boat

The South Korean navy has fired warning shots at a North Korean boat after it crossed a disputed maritime border, further raising the stakes in the Korean peninsula tensions. The naval encounter comes a day after Pyongyang fired off a long-range rocket defying global warnings.

Seoul's defence ministry said the North's vessel entered the tense waters about 7am local time on Monday (8 February). The de facto maritime boundary, known as the Northern Limit Line, has experienced serious confrontation between the nations in the past as well.

The line separating the two countries was drawn up at the close of the 1950-53 Korean War but both countries have struggled with the frontiers delimitation ever since and the countries are technically still at war.

South Korean forces have been kept on high alert after the North blasted off a rocket over the weekend violating UN resolutions. Though Pyongyang labels the launch as an attempt to put a satellite in orbit, it is widely seen as a test for its ballistic missile technology.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/south-korean-navy-fires-warning-shots-intruding-north-korea-boat-1542480



~~Still waters run deep. ~~from my MiPad using tapatalk

 

[amoy]

US sends n-submarine to South Korea

This image shows a satellite image of the Sohae lauch facility on the west coast of North Korea, in Cholsan County, North Pyongan Province


The United States, in response to the recent space rocket launch by Pyongyang, has sent a nuclear-powered submarine to South Korea, a spokesperson from South Korea's Armed Forces has told Yonhap news agency.

The USS North Carolina (SSN-777), a Virginia-class submarine with over eight years in service, with a cruising speed of 46kph, can carry Tomahawk cruise missiles and submarine-launched torpedoes.

With the deployment of this vessel in South Korean waters, the United States seeks to 'reassert its commitment to the defence of South Korea,' and 'send a warning message,' to North Korea, the spokesperson added.

The spokesperson claimed the United States is also considering dispatching two new combat aircraft with stealth capabilities, possibly a B-2 bomber and an F-22 Raptor fighter plane, to South Korea.

The dispatch of the submarine is being seen as a response to the recent North Korean space satellite launch carried out aboard a long-range rocket, an action that was fiercely condemned by both Seoul and Washington, who believe it to be a veiled missile test in violation of UN Security Council resolutions.

The international body is expected to issue new sanctions against the Kim Jong-un regime for the launch as also for its fourth nuclear test on Jan. 6, following which the US Army had sent a B-52 bomber plane to South Korea.

The United States deploys a permanent force of 28,500 troops in South Korea to defend its ally against North Korean aggression in an arrangement that dates back to the end of the 1950-53 Korean War.

 

[warrior monk]

US sends n-submarine to South Korea

This image shows a satellite image of the Sohae lauch facility on the west coast of North Korea, in Cholsan County, North Pyongan Province


The United States, in response to the recent space rocket launch by Pyongyang, has sent a nuclear-powered submarine to South Korea, a spokesperson from South Korea's Armed Forces has told Yonhap news agency.

The USS North Carolina (SSN-777), a Virginia-class submarine with over eight years in service, with a cruising speed of 46kph, can carry Tomahawk cruise missiles and submarine-launched torpedoes.

With the deployment of this vessel in South Korean waters, the United States seeks to 'reassert its commitment to the defence of South Korea,' and 'send a warning message,' to North Korea, the spokesperson added.

The spokesperson claimed the United States is also considering dispatching two new combat aircraft with stealth capabilities, possibly a B-2 bomber and an F-22 Raptor fighter plane, to South Korea.

The dispatch of the submarine is being seen as a response to the recent North Korean space satellite launch carried out aboard a long-range rocket, an action that was fiercely condemned by both Seoul and Washington, who believe it to be a veiled missile test in violation of UN Security Council resolutions.

The international body is expected to issue new sanctions against the Kim Jong-un regime for the launch as also for its fourth nuclear test on Jan. 6, following which the US Army had sent a B-52 bomber plane to South Korea.

The United States deploys a permanent force of 28,500 troops in South Korea to defend its ally against North Korean aggression in an arrangement that dates back to the end of the 1950-53 Korean War.

Nice Satellite image CNES Pléiades’ satellite imagery has some cool sharpening algorithms it seems

 

[amoy]

China Pushes Back Against THAAD
In official statements and media commentaries, China keeps making the case against THAAD.

China’s Spring Festival began on Monday, and with most of the country on holiday, official responses will be muted for the next week. However, Chinese state-owned media is filling in the gap with its own arguments against THAAD deployment, which were raised repeatedly last year. Beijing believes that deploying THAAD in neighboring South Korea means the system would be aimed at China as much as at North Korea, constraining China’s military options in the event of a conflict. Its repeated response to the THAAD question has been, as Hua said on Saturday, that “no country shall undermine other countries’ security interests while pursuing its own.”

That argument – effectively that South Korea should sacrifice its own national security for China’s — didn’t sit well with South Korean officials; last March, a spokesperson for South Korea’s Ministry of Defense said pointedlythat “a neighboring country… should not try to influence our security policy.”

This week, commentaries in Chinese media are taking a slightly different approach to criticizing THAAD deployment. An English-language commentary published online by Xinhua takes the position that deploying THAAD “does more harm than good.”

“The likely THAAD deployment… is detrimental to the efforts to solve the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula as it is likely to trigger an arms race in the troubled region,” authors Hu Yao and Zhong Cuihua argue.

The piece argues that “hostile U.S. policies” are “a major contributor to the regional predicament,” and thus that THAAD deployment would only spark “a vicious cycle on the Korean Peninsula.” Instead, Hu and Zhong argue for “sincere talks and well-intended negotiations.”

Global Times offered a similar argument in its piece on the THAAD talks, saying the announcement “further complicates” the security situation in Northeast Asia. The piece claims that “nearly all military experts” believe THAAD is aimed just as much at China as it is at North Korea, “and thereby constitutes a potential harm to China’s security” (the piece dismissed Seoul’s claims to the contrary as “wan”).

Global Times argues that the current rush toward THAAD, sparked by North Korea’s long-range rocket test, lacks strategic foresight: Seoul is “taking an impetuous action for the sake of its own security, without thinking about what further strategic effects it will cause and what is means over the long term.” Like Xinhua (and China’s Foreign Ministry), Global Times argues that THAAD deployment would backfire by making the Korean Peninsula more unstable.

The article also warns that, if things on the Korean Peninsula do get out of hand, China will first be concerned with taking care of itself – by making “adequate military arrangement” to counter THAAD (Global Timessuggests both increasing the number of Chinese missiles and improving their ability to evade defense systems).

Meanwhile, China Youth Daily, in an article published before North Korea’s rocket launch,takes that logic a step farther. Author Li Dunqiu, a Korean studies scholar at Zhejiang University, argues that, by deploying THAAD on its soil, South Korea would be “hijacked” by the U.S. “rebalance to Asia” strategy. In other words, THAAD really benefits the United States, with Seoul acting as an unwitting pawn.

 

[amoy]

Beijing: US Missile Defense System in South Korea May Be Meant for China

China's foreign minister on Friday reiterated Beijing's opposition to the US deployment of an advanced missile defense system to South Korea, saying the sophisticated technology could be used to target China.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, speaking in Munich, said Beijing has urged the United States to abandon plans to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) to South Korea.

"The facts are clear. The deployment of the THAAD system by the United States… goes far beyond the defense need of the Korean Peninsula and the coverage would mean it will reach deep into the Asian continent," he said.

"This directly affects the strategic security interests of China and other Asian countries."


Read more: http://sputniknews.com/asia/20160213/1034679504/us-missile-defense-targets-china.html#ixzz400pTGMeS

~Tapa talks: Orange is the new black.~