Skip to footer

Should the US help South Korea establish a missile defense system?

The United States is currently considering imposing additional economic sanctions on North Korea following the increasingly belligerent nation's rocket launch earlier this month. South Korean defense officials are expected to ask for more material assistance next week.

|
Lee Jin-man/AP
A man watches a television news program reporting about North Korea's recent rocket launch at the Seoul Train Station in Seoul, South Korea, Thursday. Under the gaze of armed soldiers, large white trucks streamed across the world's most armed border Thursday as South Korean workers on Thursday began shutting down a jointly run industrial park in North Korea. The South's suspension will end, at least temporarily, the Koreas' last major cooperation project as punishment over Pyongyang's recent rocket launch. The letters read: 'North, Long range missile launch.'
  • By Michael Holtz Staff

The United States and South Korea will begin discussions as early as next week about the potential deployment of an advanced US missile defense system to defend against an increasingly belligerent North Korea.

An unnamed South Korean defense official told Reuters that the discussions would focus on placing a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) unit in South Korea following North Korea’s rocket launch last weekend.

Analysts say the system would offer South Korea, and the nearly 30,000 American soldiers stationed there, better protection against the North’s growing nuclear challenge than Seoul’s current inadequate missile defenses. It’s designed to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles inside or just outside the atmosphere during their final phase of flight.

But while US military officials have said the THAAD unit was needed in the South, Seoul had been reluctant to openly discuss its deployment. It’s worried about disrupting relations with China, South Korea’s biggest trading partner, which has expressed anger at the imminence of a US missile system so close to its borders.

South Korea and the US have said that if a THAAD were deployed to South Korea, it would be focused solely on the North. But Chinese experts contend that the system has a radar that could penetrate deep into China and threaten its own missile deterrence system.

Aside from deploying the missile defense system, US policymakers are also considering the adoption of a new set of economic sanctions in response to North Korea’s nuclear provocations. Yet as Howard LaFranchi reported for the Monitor earlier this week, experts differ on just how effective unilateral US sanctions can be.

For some, the most effective approach is international sanctions adopted by the United Nations Security Council. That’s because such action would include the participation of China, which is North Korea’s sole benefactor and the country considered to hold the Kim regime’s survival in its hands.

But others see the potential for US sanctions to have considerable impact – particularly measures targeting illicit financial transactions and the North Korean individuals and entities involved in them, as well as the “secondary” financial institutions that facilitate the flow of funds and materials to the North’s nuclear and missile programs.

Both Seoul and Washington said last week’s rocket launch violated UN Security Council resolutions. The council could adopt a new sanctions resolution proposed by the US, Japan, and South Korea by the end of the week.

This report includes material from Reuters.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Should the US help South Korea establish a missile defense system?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2016/0212/Should-the-US-help-South-Korea-establish-a-missile-defense-system
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe