[News analysis] Questions about Kim Jong-un’s intentions behind projectile launches

Posted on : 2019-05-10 15:20 KST Modified on : 2019-05-10 15:20 KST
Pyongyang seems to be sending message of displeasure over joint SK-US drills
Estimated path of North Korea‘s 2 short-range missile and projectile launches
Estimated path of North Korea‘s 2 short-range missile and projectile launches

North Korea test-launched projectiles believed to be short-range missiles from the Kusong area of North Pyongan Province on May 9 – five days after multiple-rocket launchers and a tactical guided weapon launch – in an apparent bid to ratchet up tensions on the Korean Peninsula. The question of what practical effect North Korea’s launches will have on the peninsula’s political situation hinges on the response of US President Donald Trump, but discussions between visiting US State Department Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun and officials in the Moon Jae-in administration also appear likely to focus on the North’s recent military activities.

The main question surrounds the intentions of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. According to the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff headquarters, the two projectiles launched by North Korea on the afternoon of May 9 traveled for distances of over 420 km and 270 km. They are believed to have been short-range missiles. During firepower strike drills attended on May 4 by Kim, the North fired short-range projectiles including rounds from 240mm multiple rocket launchers and 300mm large-caliber multiple rocket launchers and a new tactical guided weapon. In addition to being a response and backlash directed at South Korea-US joint flight exercises at the time, analysts read it as a relatively low-key move to demand changes in the attitudes from Seoul and Washington since the collapse of the North Korea-US summit in Hanoi, without crossing any “red lines.”

The latest launch is being interpreted along the same lines. By opting to test-launch short-range missiles that pose no direct threat to the US or neighboring countries, the North seems to have been attempting to send messages domestically and internationally while avoiding an immediate response from the US or UN. At the same time, the increased range of the weapons has fed tensions.

The message Pyongyang sought to send internationally can be summed up as one of unhappiness with the joint South Korea-US military exercises and a call to halt them. In a May 8 response to questions from a Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reporter, a North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesperson said, “Any country carries on military drills for national defense and this kind of very normal drill is obviously different from the war exercises waged by some countries against other sovereign states.”

South Korean Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs Lee Do-hoon and US Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun (right) leave a hotel in Seoul after a breakfast meeting on May 9. (Yonhap News)
South Korean Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs Lee Do-hoon and US Special Representative for North Korea Stephen Biegun (right) leave a hotel in Seoul after a breakfast meeting on May 9. (Yonhap News)

An Apr. 25 statement by the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Country (CPRC), North Korea’s agency for South Korea-related affairs, described the recent South Korea-US combined air exercises as a “provocative combined aerial drill“ targeting the North, while Kim himself expressed displeasure with the exercises during an Apr. 12 policy speech.

“Chairman Kim already warned against this in his policy speech,” said a former senior government official closely acquainted with the North Korean situation.

“South Korea and the US provoked [North Korea] with their exercises, and now North Korea has responded at the level of regular exercises in response,” the former official concluded.

Commenting on this analysis, Hong Min, director of the North Korea research office at the Korea Institute for National Unification (KINU), said, “The North may have been taking into consideration the military’s displeasure and other internal discontent over not maintaining the traditional retaliation posture of the past.”

The test launches also appeared to underscore Pyongyang’s calls for the US to shift away from its pursuit of a “big deal” – a continuation of its objections to the US’ “maximum pressure” strategy and warnings for a “change in course” after the breakdown of its denuclearization talks with the North. They may also have hinted at the possible “new road” mentioned by Kim in his New Year address. Some observers are also viewing them as motivated by the North’s aims of shifting the frame of denuclearization talks toward traditional issues of regime security guarantees following a summit with Russia.

Trump’s response to launches a pivotal factor

The response from Trump is expected to be a pivotal factor in determining whether the test launches result in additional heightening of peninsula tensions. In his response on May 4 to North Korea’s launch of a short-range projectile, Trump signaled that he planned to manage the situation.

“[Kim Jong-un] knows that I am with him & does not want to break his promise to me,” he tweeted at the time.

If Trump does choose to match the North’s tough rhetoric, the possibility of North Korea attempting additional tension-raising actions cannot be ruled out. But the fact that neither of the latest projectiles were intermediate-range or long-range missiles – which Kim announced he would not be test-launching – suggests a strong possibility that Trump will attempt to calm the situation once again.

By Kim Ji-eun, staff reporter

Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]

button that move to original korean article (클릭시 원문으로 이동하는 버튼)

Most viewed articles