Military Review

Evgeny Pozhidaev: North Korea is returning to its historical position of loyal vassal of China

16

The Chinese web resource www.china.org.cn, citing official statements by representatives of the DPRK, reported on the upcoming reduction of the Korean Peoples Army by 300 thousand people (including 50 thousand officers); This information was later confirmed by the Japanese channel Asahi. Abbreviations should be started at the end of this month.


If the message is true, then we are talking about a huge shift in the balance of power on the Korean Peninsula. It should be taken into account that the data on the number of KPA in 1,19 million are the fruit of the rich South Korean imagination, and the actual number of North Korean armed forces is no more than 750 thousand people. Thus, we are talking about 40% reduction in the number of KPA, which in this variant will be significantly (450 thousand against 560 thousand) inferior to the South Korean army even after its intended reduction. A significant reduction in the officer corps, apparently, indicates a decrease in the organized reserve.

In fact, we are talking about changing the military doctrine formulated as early as 1962 by Kim Il Sung. The so-called "four general lines in the military construction" of the DPRK (enshrined directly in the constitution) have since looked like this: "the general arming of the population"; "turning the whole country into an impregnable fortress"; "training of all military personnel as personnel"; "improvement of defense based on our own strength". In fact, the DPRK borrowed the Maoist concept of popular war "with a very significant participation of the militia, already formed in peacetime from citizens combining work in the" national economy "with intensive military training. In other words, the goal of Maoist military theorists has always been to achieve maximum mass character. this bet on the marginal "massing" of the army logically flowed from the strategic goals of the KPA: the doctrine of the DPRK was traditionally offensive in nature, given that the United States was behind the southerners, the goal was its defeat of the enemy and the prevention of the transition of the war into a protracted phase.

However, the real offensive outbursts of the DPRK evaporated almost immediately after the collapse of the USSR and “Desert Storms”, when almost as numerous as the KPA and much better armed Iraqi army with a huge combat experience literally devoured for five days of ground offensive with insignificant losses of the MNF . Over the past two decades, the situation has only worsened - the Southerners, with their more than twenty-billion-dollar military budget, are becoming more and more powerful, the weapons of the KPA are becoming more and more obsolete physically and morally. In general, it is obvious that the KPA is currently not capable of an effective invasion of the South, and passive defense is the limit of its potential.

An attempt to restore an acceptable balance of power within the framework of the Songun concept ("army first of all"), which is, in fact, an extreme case of a "Maoist" approach to the issue, in the 1990s essentially failed - inflating KPA numbers to a peak of 900 thousand with the population of about 25 million did not increase the DPRK military potential too much, but played a very significant role in the actual collapse that befell the North Korean economy in that decade. As a result, as early as 2003, reductions began (in a remarkable way affecting tank and artillery units, which may indicate poor technical condition), the service life was reduced. As a result, as was noted above, the current number of North Korean armed forces is 750 thousand people.

Now we are seeing a second wave of cuts. At the same time earlier, 31 of March 2013 of the Year was declared to the plenum of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party of Korea "a strategic course for the parallel development of economic construction and the construction of nuclear forces." His goal, according to an official statement, "by strengthening self-defense nuclear forces to increase the country's defense capability and direct more efforts to economic construction to build a powerful socialist state" and "significantly increase the effectiveness of military deterrence and defense forces without an additional increase in military spending and, thus, concentrate resources on economic construction and improving the welfare of the population. " Earlier, North Korean Vice-Marshal Choi Ren He, who met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, transmitted a request for recognition of the DPRK as a nuclear power.

In other words, the North Korean elite de facto refused to compete with the Southerners in the field of conventional forces, relying on nuclear deterrence (the nuclear forces are scheduled to increase and further - shortly before the plenum, work of several nuclear facilities was suspended, suspended in 2007). The addition to it will be a relatively compact, and, obviously, a purely “defensive” army (it is noteworthy that in May the DPRK offered the South a formal peace treaty instead of an armistice).

The resources freed up as a result of demilitarization are planned to be directed to the development of the economy, primarily light industry and agriculture. Attracting investment (obviously, from abroad) is proclaimed another tool for the development of the economy, which, just as obviously, requires a correction of the country's image.

Although this concept is described in official propaganda as a continuation of the songun course, and is “consecrated” by the names of Kim Il Sung and Kim Cher Il, it is actually a radical paradigm shift — indeed, it was originally planned. So, back in 2003, the North Korean media made a remarkable statement: "we are not trying to blackmail anyone with nuclear weapons. weapons. Our country wants to reduce conventional types of armaments and direct the released human and financial resources to the development of the economy and the improvement of the living standards of citizens. "

At the same time, the turn in the policy of the DPRK is not limited to the military sphere. Simultaneously with the proclamation of a new course in the field of defense, Pak Pont Zhu, who already held this post from 2003 to 2007 years, was appointed prime minister and displaced, after a series of conflicts with the Conservatives, for "trying to bring too much capitalist into the economy" (granting more independence to enterprises, limiting the scope of the card system, developing joint projects with the South). His task will obviously be to conduct the next round of reforms. So, as early as July 2012, the DPRK government announced the "June 28 policy", which has already begun to be implemented.

Industrial enterprises received more opportunities for self-disposal of earned funds (setting wages and incentives). The same rights were granted to collective farms, in addition to being able to independently manage the crop surplus. It has become possible to create farms from 1-2 families. Shops were able to manage 70% revenue. Of course, there can be no talk of a complete dismantling of the planned economy in the foreseeable future, but the DPRK’s desire to move along the Chinese path is obvious.

The reasons that stimulate this are both opportunistic and long-term. On the one hand, in the DPRK, after Kim Jong-un came to power, the intraelite balance of forces shifted noticeably. Now the country is actually ruled by a triumvirate of the formal leader, the head of the organizational department of the Central Committee, Chan Son Taek and his wife, Kim Gen Hee (sister of Kim Jong Il). At the same time, Pak Pont Joo is a longtime ally of Chan Song Taek. On the contrary, the North Korean military leadership of the gray cardinal of North Korean politics has long been hostile, despite the recent rank of general. It is assumed that the command of the army was involved in the exclusion of Chan Song Thaek from the party in 2004. The coming to power of the triumvirate was accompanied by repression against the military elite - then disappeared without a trace (apparently, was killed), in particular, the Chief of the General Staff and the third member of the "Regency Council" Marshal Lee Young-ho. In other words, the actual leadership of the DPRK has extremely dubious relations with its own army and an impressive array of reasons to seek its easing.

Long-term incentives, in turn, are more than significant. Although the 1990s with their massive famines are in the past, the economy of the North is still in a deplorable situation. Thus, per capita energy consumption, which is an important indicator of the level of economic development, in 2008 was 819 kilowatt-hours compared to 919 in 1971 and 1247 in peak 1990 (the lowest point is 2000 of the year, 712 kW / h) and did not have a steady upward trend. Food shortages persist. Because of the mountainous terrain, arable land makes up only 16% of the territory; only 0,12 per hectare of cultivated land per capita is consumed. To lead on such a limited area of ​​inefficient agriculture means to doom the population to permanent malnutrition, which is what happens in reality. Neither a sufficiently efficient agriculture, nor energy development is impossible without imports - fuel, fertilizers, etc. However, North Korea’s trade balance is persistently negative — in 2011, imports exceeded exports by 30% (4,8 and 3,7 billion, respectively). This situation is already threatening political stability - for example, 2011 was noted at once by several mass demonstrations of the local population.

In other words, Pyongyang does not have much choice. At the same time, nuclear tests and the atomic project as a whole are by no means a manifestation of insane aggressiveness and frantic militarism, as well as a means of international racketeering. Nuclear weapons for the DPRK are only a way to guarantee their own safety and free up resources for economic reanimation, and a nuclear program is also a way to solve the energy problem that is really critical for the economy of the North. It is also necessary to take into account the extreme hypocrisy of the position of the South and the USA. The states were the first to place nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula, and the three northerners' proposals for turning them into a nuclear-free zone, sounded in 1980's, were rejected by Washington and Seoul. In 1990, American promises to build two nuclear reactors in the DPRK, which are not suitable for producing "combat" fissile materials, remained promises. In general, the northerners took the path of becoming a "official" nuclear state only after having exhausted the possibilities for a compromise.

In the long run, a new course can really bring the DPRK an increase in living standards - there are not so many “reserves” of super-cheap and, at the same time, quite skilled labor in the world. In this case, the pay, obviously, will be increased dependence on China. As shown above, Pyongyang cannot build an economy that is closed and successful at the same time, and trends towards greater integration with the outside world are already visible - from 1999 to 2011, DPRK exports grew 6 times, imports 4 times. At the same time, China accounts for 60% of exports and 81% of imports. She will inevitably act as a key investor. In general, the absorption of a small North Korean economy by the Chinese colossus is more than likely. Increased economic dependence will inevitably entail a more dense political integration. In a sense, North Korea is returning to its historical Beijing's loyal vassal position.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.regnum.ru/
16 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dober
    Dober 25 July 2013 15: 40 New
    +2
    That’s good if so. Let them climb under the "wing of an older brother."
    You look and from them the world perverts-capitalists at last will be untied.
  2. Grenz
    Grenz 25 July 2013 15: 45 New
    +9
    What do you want? What is the friendship of the West Koreans !? American films have seen enough. It is the same with Cuba. Well, China is picking up a very good market for its products. And we cheated, how to be friends with the DPRK and prs ... the place where our goods would go with a bang. Especially the common border. And the Koreans in our territory are not a potential threat, like the Chinese, but real hard workers and help in the development of Siberia.
    1. duke
      duke 25 July 2013 18: 21 New
      +1
      it’s all so, but for great politics you need to have both strategic and tactical thinking, but I don’t observe serious think tanks, maybe they are, but no one listens to them, hence prs ...
  3. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 25 July 2013 16: 07 New
    +1
    Natural process. All the same, it’s interesting (purely theoretical) - will the DPRK be completely assimilated by China or will it ever reunite with the southern part?
  4. smiths xnumx
    smiths xnumx 25 July 2013 16: 29 New
    +1
    Well, where do the DPRK go! The idea of ​​"juche", "songun" and a nuclear bomb, this is of course all very good, but I want to eat something. all the more so since the collapse of the USSR, the DPRK has one natural ally, China, which does not really need the unification of Korea, which will create another rival in the region and will strengthen the role of the United States. Moreover, China does not need a war on its northern borders, which the DPRK simply does not have a chance to win, even taking into account the million-strong KPA. And so, maybe some new food or weapons will be thrown, especially since some of the North Koreans constantly go to China to earn money. Yours faithfully! hi
  5. Essenger
    Essenger 25 July 2013 16: 33 New
    +3
    Great article + from me.
  6. knn54
    knn54 25 July 2013 16: 58 New
    0
    Next in line is South.
  7. Black
    Black 25 July 2013 18: 13 New
    0
    Quote: grenz
    What is the friendship of the West Koreans !?

    All right! Let them want to wave their flags. But the forest in the Far East, they fell, any-expensive. Following in the wake of pro-Western politics, we have lost and will continue to lose.
  8. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 25 July 2013 19: 20 New
    0
    I think the DPRK in the DPRK was after the United States (a whisper of China, like "Weak on Amerov .. ??" If yes, we are friends .. That's just for Russia it does not bode well .. If the whole region finally clings to South Korea zagadit .. to the delight of Amers and China .. It was already like that .. The Navy grouping needs to be increased there, etc. .. And the special services there also need to work hard .. Well, something like that .. then it will be too late ..
  9. xtur
    xtur 25 July 2013 23: 36 New
    +2
    own nuclear weapons fit very poorly with vassal status
    1. Day 11
      Day 11 26 July 2013 00: 01 New
      0
      So right and “own”!
  10. The comment was deleted.
  11. DPN
    DPN 26 July 2013 08: 26 New
    +1
    It is better to be a vassal of China having his protection than a friend of Russia and wait for it to throw again !.
    1. velikoros-xnumx
      velikoros-xnumx 26 July 2013 15: 22 New
      0
      Quote: DPN
      it is better to be a vassal of China having his protection than a friend of Russia and wait for it to throw again !.

      Well, mu ... to you negative
  12. eplewke
    eplewke 26 July 2013 12: 16 New
    +1
    eh Korea - Korea ... The multi-million dollar peninsula is a victim of ambitions and principles of two superpowers ... I consider the demilitarization of the DPRK to be completely justified. why have a million soldiers with atomic weapons. 100 well-trained and well-armed soldiers will be enough for border clashes. And in the event of a large-scale war, one cannot do without a vigorous war ... In any case, it will be applied, and everyone understands this very well. Yes, and a powerful neighbor will help. And no one needs this war. if it happens, then you can put an end to Korea ...
  13. Sergey S.
    Sergey S. 26 July 2013 14: 37 New
    0
    Talking about foreign countries is easy.
    Especially from overseas. Or because of the mountains and thousands of kilometers of forests.

    A special feature of North Korea is a divided people that continues to exist in the conditions of the Cold Civil War. And in such a war, nuclear weapons are pointless. Use it and in the history of the people you will turn out to be a scoundrel for eternity.

    So the reduction of conventional weapons and the staff of the army should be understood as a gesture of goodwill, which should be understood as a statement of self-confidence. Perhaps, given the actually agreed support of the Allies.

    I assume that the Chinese are helping the Koreans to modernize their armed forces.
    And the reduction in number is optimization for the real size of investments.
  14. AIR-ZNAK
    AIR-ZNAK 26 July 2013 18: 20 New
    +1
    You can’t get anything to use blackmail for nothing. As an ally, the Northerners are nothing for us. As a cross-border headache, yes, and even what. During the times of the USSR, the Northerners never perceived us as neighbors-allies. Only for a cash neighbor's cow. But Kim Il Sung was something like Marshal I.B. Tito. In 90, in early October, Kim, offended by the reduction in subsidies from Gorbachev, froze relations with the USSR / Russia. to raise prestige at the international level. This regime without external support is not viable. And it is supported by the money of the United States (under the guise of humanitarian aid) and Chinese people trying to play their card on the peninsula. The unification of the North and the South is not needed by either of these. Those then, how to explain to everyone will be the presence of nuclear weapons in the South, and this does not need to strengthen the economic competitor. And that's it. Nothing more.
  15. Sergey S.
    Sergey S. 26 July 2013 18: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: AIR-ZNAK
    Forever ...

    Cynicism in politics is the norm, unfortunately.
    But in relation to the people, even if less successful, cynicism is unacceptable.
    As they say, Koreans are people too. And if they have been living in a certain way for many years, you should not blame them. It would be more correct to understand.

    For example, if communism is being built in North Korea, that is their business.
    Similarly, the right of the Anglo-Saxons to live in capitalism.
  16. 094711601
    094711601 27 July 2013 00: 47 New
    0
    Quote: Sergey S.
    Quote: AIR-ZNAK
    Forever ...

    Cynicism in politics is the norm, unfortunately.
    But in relation to the people, even if less successful, cynicism is unacceptable.
    As they say, Koreans are people too. And if they have been living in a certain way for many years, you should not blame them. It would be more correct to understand.

    For example, if communism is being built in North Korea, that is their business.
    Similarly, the right of the Anglo-Saxons to live in capitalism.
  17. AIR-ZNAK
    AIR-ZNAK 27 July 2013 02: 52 New
    +1
    Cynicism-This is when the top rulers pretend to defend the interests of the conquered socialism, and she is fattening. Have you seen barriers and machine gunners at the crossroads of Pyongyang in front of the government quarter? Isn’t cynicism hiding from your own people? Take a look, and the rest, without pink glasses, is Cynicism, when the fate of neighboring countries is decided in high offices. And when they simply say it from the outside, this is a statement of fact, and no more. And we are not in power to change anything, no matter how much we would like to. Alas.....
    1. studentmati
      studentmati 27 July 2013 02: 58 New
      0
      To date, we have not gone far from this comparison. Just interpretation can be a little different ...
    2. Sergey S.
      Sergey S. 29 July 2013 21: 13 New
      +1
      Machine gunners in Pyongyang are a demonstration of the idea of ​​an armed people.
      By the way, in which capital of the capitalist world are government buildings not guarded in the most stringent way?
      I can give an example of a democratic society only from my own childhood. When Fidel Castro came to Leningrad, he and Khrushchev drove along the city avenues while standing in the open ZIL at low speed. Crowds of people stood on the sidewalks, some with flags of friendship, some with flowers. Some even managed to run up to the car and give flowers to Fidel or N.S.
      I was a preschooler, the day before my retired grandmother and I voluntarily glued two flags - the USSR and Cuba.
      It was a happy time ... !!!
    3. smart fellow
      smart fellow April 16 2017 18: 11 New
      0
      And in front of the White House in Washington there is no protection?