Why hasn't the US dared to launch a military attack on North Korea?

If the United States chooses to launch a military attack on North Korea, it would be a bad choice with extremely dire consequences.

That's the assessment of analyst Peter App in an article published by Reuters.

According to analyst Peter App, US presidents since Bill Clinton have all faced the North Korean weapons program and have been offered a range of military options to address the issue.

Young leader Kim Jong-un is increasingly causing Washington headaches. Photo: Reuters

To date, no previous U.S. president has risked a military attack on North Korea, primarily because all options are bad, especially given the risk of retaliation that could turn the Korean Peninsula (and perhaps a wider region) into a bloody battlefield. In the worst-case scenario, conflict on the Korean Peninsula could even draw the U.S. into a war with China, similar to the Korean War.

President Donald Trump declared that he would not allow Pyongyang to develop the capability to attack the United States with nuclear weapons. However, if he were to conduct a limited attack, Pyongyang's nuclear program would only temporarily slow down and could lead to a fierce retaliation from North Korea.

If Washington chooses a more drastic measure, it would be large-scale bombing of North Korea's missile and weapons systems.

While such action might not completely eliminate North Korea's nuclear-missile program, it would slow its development. In the most effective scenario, this large-scale air campaign would only prevent Pyongyang from perfecting some of its more ambitious weapons programs, such as submarine-launched diesel-electric ballistic missiles.

The most well-known bomb in the U.S. Air Force arsenal designed for this purpose is the GBU-57, a bunker-busting bomb weighing nearly 15 tons.

Developed by the George W. Bush administration and primarily intended to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities, the GBU-57 can be dropped from B2 stealth bombers operating from bases in the region or the continental United States. The B2 bomber could penetrate North Korean airspace undetected if it coordinated with several F-22 Raptor stealth fighters and even the newly deployed F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in the region.

The reason such attacks have not been launched until now is also the reason they have never been launched against Iran's nuclear program. Many experts believe that these attacks would not be able to destroy all targets and that retaliation would be devastating.

With Iran, Washington fears Tehran will retaliate by attacking oil and gas production and transportation facilities in the Gulf, with potentially catastrophic consequences for the global economy. With North Korea, there are concerns that Pyongyang could launch missile attacks on Japan and US bases such as Guam, as well as a devastating artillery attack on South Korea. Some analysts suggest North Korea is capable of firing up to 500,000 artillery shells at the South Korean capital of Seoul within an hour.

There are also concerns that if North Korea feels its missiles and nuclear warheads are threatened, it could use them first – with Japan most likely as the target.

There are some indications that the U.S. is trying to prevent escalation by simply "decapitating" the North Korean leadership. According to Yonhap news agency, this month's U.S.-South Korea joint exercises involved U.S. Navy SEALs – the force that conducted the 2011 raid that killed terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.

Such an option would be very difficult to implement. North Korea's air defense system makes troop movements by helicopter difficult, while leader Kim Jong-un is heavily protected.

Donald Trump is one of the most unpredictable American presidents. If any American leader were to choose a military solution against North Korea, Trump might be one of them.

Analyst Peter App concludes: Action could be disastrous. But doing nothing could lead to a future conflict that is far worse.

According to Kienthuc.net.vn