With
tensions on the Korean Peninsula heating up, a recent
analysis by Stratfor provides
us with a glimpse into what methods the United States could use to carry out a
military strike against the Kim Regime, with the goal of reducing its nuclear
program.
The Stratfor analysis assumes that the United States will conduct a limited attack on North
Korea using stealth aircraft and cruise missiles launched from both ships and
submarines located in nearby waters. While the North Koreans do
have an air defense network, it is relatively obsolete and would likely be
incapable of detecting or defending against full-spectrum stealth aircraft
including the F-22 fighter and the B-2 bomber as shown here:
...and
here:
The
F-22 has the capability of flying at more than the speed of sound for an
extended period of time and in its air-to-ground role, can carry two 1000 pound
GBU-32 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), two AIM-120C and two AIM-9
missiles. In its air-to-air role, it can carry six AIM-120C and two
AIM-9 missiles. All of the F-22s armaments are carried internally, an
important part of its stealth characteristics and its reduced aerodynamic drag.
The
B-2 bomber is capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear munitions and
has an unfueled range of 9600 kilometres or 6000 nautical miles. Its low
observability is derived from reduced visual, infrared, electromagnetic and
radar signatures which make it difficult for even sophisticated defense systems
to detect and track the B-2. It has a payload capability of 40,000 pounds
and can carry 16 nuclear weapons including the B61 and B83, up to 80 MK82
conventional bombs or 12 JDAMs. The B-2 can also carry two GBU-57
Massive Ordnance Penetrators built by Boeing. This 30,000 pound
"bunker buster" is a precision-guided weapon that contains over 5,300
pounds of explosive material and is designed to penetrate up to 200 feet
underground before exploding. As well, it has the capability of
penetrating 25 feet into 10,000 psi reinforced concrete. Here is a video with some background
information on the GBU-57, showing how it is ideally suited to dealing with
underground nuclear facilities:
If
the USAF was given sufficient time, it could assemble roughly ten B-2 bombers
for a strike deep into North Korea from just about anywhere in the world (with
refuelling), particularly given the significant range of the aircraft. Since the F-22
has a much shorter range, it would have to be located at airfields in either Japan or South Korea with the risk that deployment of significant numbers of
F-22s would alert Pyongyang to offensive operations. As such, the
analysis suggests that up to 24 F-22s could be deployed without arousing North
Korean suspicions.
Not
only could U.S. forces rely on stealth aircraft in operations against North
Korea, it could also use Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from Ohio-class
submarines located off the coast of North Korea. Two of these submarines
would be capable of deploying more than 300 BGM-109 Tomahawk land
attack missiles as shown here:
The
Tomahawk missile has a range of about 600 nautical miles or 1100 kilometres and
carries a 1000 pound warhead.
Given
the ability of the United States to assemble a fearsome military force against
North Korea, one would expect that a strike could be surgical and that
hostilities would be short-lived. There are, however, complications:
1.)
North Korea has a fleet of approximately 200 transporter erector launchers
(TEL) of varying designs which are quite difficult to track, particularly the
TELs equipped with tracks rather than wheels which give them access to very
remote, off-road areas of the country.
2.)
Intelligence regarding North Korea and its nuclear program is far from perfect.
There is no precise picture of where the weapons are located or how well
they are protected. Intelligence would have to be extremely accurate to
ensure that all weapons and delivery vehicles are destroyed, an effort that
becomes increasingly unlikely as North Korea's nuclear and missile capability
evolves.
3.)
North Korea has recently tested its first solid-fueled missiles. These
missiles are designed to be survivable in a first-strike situation, allowing
North Korea to respond to any attack on its soil.
While
on the surface an attack against North Korea's Kim regime may appear to be a
cakewalk given the vast superiority of the United States military machine, as
we have learned in the decade and a half since the Bush II Administration
declared that it was "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq, there is unwise
to count on a quick military win when it comes to dealing with nations that are
determined to keep America out.
Great article, however, as you indicate at the end of your piece, problems and risk exist. The proximity of Seoul to the world's most heavily armed border would let the North Koreans cause a lot of casualties and damage in any attack.
ReplyDeleteIt is very important America and people throughout the world realize and internalize the potential for a million or more dead North Koreans and many of their neighbors to the south, including American servicemen. This does make this situation dire indeed. The article below delves deeper into the situation.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2017/03/north-korea-just-one-mistake-away-from.html
Trump will regret his reckless actions. Don't understand estimable Kim. He may have secret weapons too.
ReplyDeleteShort sighted analysis. There is no way hostilities would be short lived. Just like 'shock and awe', too many people think about the initial strike without thinking about the response afterwards. Perhaps the people of Seoul are expendable in the author's thinking. The north would not sue for peace so easily. The lessons of the past are never heeded.
ReplyDelete