Hwasong-18 ICBM test launch
A Hwasong-18 intercontinental ballistic missile is launched from an undisclosed location in North Korea in this image released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency on July 13. Photo: Reuters/KCNA
politics

U.S., South Korea, Japan hold missile defense drill after North's ICBM launch

50 Comments

The U.S., South Korea and Japan held a joint naval missile defense exercise on Sunday to counter North Korea's evolving nuclear and missile threats, the South's navy said, days after the North launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

North Korea fired its latest Hwasong-18 missile, which Pyongyang describes as the core of its nuclear strike force, off the east coast on Wednesday in what it said was a "strong practical warning" to the adversaries.

Sunday's trilateral drill was conducted in international waters between South Korea and Japan, bringing together destroyers equipped with Aegis radar systems from the three countries, the navy said.

Washington and its Asian allies have been working to improve their information-sharing system on North Korea's missiles. South Korea and Japan are independently linked to U.S. radar systems but not to each other's.

The exercise aimed at mastering the allies' response to a North Korean ballistic missile launch with a scenario featuring a virtual target, the military said.

"We will effectively respond to North Korea's nuclear and missile threats with our military's strong response system and the trilateral cooperation," a South Korean Navy officer said.

The North's ICBM launch was denounced by the U.S., South Korea and Japan, though Pyongyang has rejected the condemnation, saying it was an exercise of its right to self-defense.

The latest launch followed heated complaints from North Korea in recent days, accusing American spy planes of flying over its exclusive economic zone waters, condemning a recent visit to South Korea by an U.S. nuclear-powered cruise missile submarine and vowing to take steps in reaction.

© Thomson Reuters 2023.

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.


50 Comments
Login to comment

Nuclear missiles cannot be countered by holding naval

drills-a complete show and waste of money…

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

American spy planes of flying over its exclusive economic zone waters, condemning a recent visit to South Korea by an U.S. nuclear-powered cruise missile submarine.

Chicken or egg?

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Military training and exercises are critical for all those charged with protecting the country. You might as well say there is no point in having a military because the enemy has nuclear missiles.

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Read the the faux pas title again Wallace…

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

That will have the Kims foaming at the mouth. A defiant statement in nice old-fashioned English is being prepared and will be released tomorrow, just need to get the tone of the threats right.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Cool...wish I was around to see this stuff go off, but you better bring some HEARING protection !

4 ( +4 / -0 )

kurisupisu

Read the the faux pas title again Wallace…

You want the military to do nothing and will be the first to complain when they do. NK does not have any nuclear missiles.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

The U.S., South Korea and Japan held a joint naval missile defense exercise on Sunday to counter North Korea's evolving nuclear and missile threats, the South's navy said, days after the North launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

Well, kids, if you study hard you too can become a decision maker and totally regress. Do adults still believe in ‘goodies’ and ‘baddies’.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

The right for self defense !?? you must be joking NK,

The only reason little kim is developing hi HANABI is so that he can stay in power and lose his crown or grip on the his own people.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Japan only have 5 minutes after a missile launch for Tokyo to be hit on any given scenarios

-15 ( +0 / -15 )

How childish.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

And Yrral? You point being?

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Fantastic photo at the top. Did they manage to hit that flying saucer?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

NK has nothing to lose. The USA really has nothing much to lose. Japan has a great deal to lose. Japan needs to get along a bit better and think smarter regarding the nut. Sometimes silence is golden.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Good old US warmongering..

Nothing good coming from this..

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Then Japan must also start developing nuclear weapons in preparation for North Korea's ICBM. Of course, Japan also has the right to self-defense.

Article 9 of the Constitution must also be changed at random.

After all, rogue nations such as China, Russia, and North Korea are nearby. There are no peaceful nations around, and the three nations are nuclear-armed.

It's scary, it's scary

2 ( +2 / -0 )

HoudiniJuly 16 11:13 pm JST

Ukraine and every other sovereign nation on earth has a right to self defense.

But not nukes.

North Korea was willing to sign the peace treaty with south Korea but the USA intervened and stopped it.

A common fanfiction of the apologist side. Start stupid wars, win stupid prizes.

The USA actions have forced North Korea to pursue nuclear capabilities.

NK already had a nuclear backer in China. They weren't forced into anything.

Why is that too difficult to understand ?

Right back at ya.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So with SK suffering from flooding and the US from a heat wave, what were the emissions from that pointless missile test? Oh yeah, I forgot, military/government stuff doesn't affect the climate. Only what we do.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Nuclear missiles cannot be countered by holding naval

drills-a complete show and waste of money…

You must not be aware of RIM-161 SM-3. It is probably the premier ballistic missile defense system and all three navies carry it aboard their guided missile destroyers. SM-3 Block 2 has has an unclassified published range in excess of 1200 km and has demonstrated the ability to hit an ICBM target in testing off Hawaii using off board sensors so yes it is very possible to knock down ICBMs from ships at sea. The use of off board sensors, meaning land and satellite based radars in addition to the radars on the ships and integrating these systems across the three nation's armed forces was the purpose of the exercise.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The USA actions have forced North Korea to pursue nuclear capabilities.

NK already had a nuclear backer in China. They weren't forced into anything.

A major part of the reason DPRK developed its own nuclear arsenal was that until very recently the Norks didn't trust China or Russia to come to their aid in the event of a war with the US and South Korea. Kim Il Sung hated Mao and hated both Khrushchev and Brezhnev. Kim senior wanted Mao to make removal of US forces from Korea a prerequisite for normalizing relations with the US. When Mao refused to do this Kim turned his back on China. Likewise Kim detested Khrushchev for denouncing Stalin and didn't trust Brezhnev after he reneged on their treaty obligation to defend Vietnam when China went to war with Vietnam in 1979. He figured that Russia would not come to their aide either. Fearing being left out in the cold the Norks began pursuing an independent nuclear deterrent. China has never been comfortable with DPRKs nuclear weapons seeing them as a destabilizing factor on their border.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

North Korea was willing to sign the peace treaty with south Korea but the USA intervened and stopped it.

That is a bald faced lie. At the conclusion of the Korean War Park tried to sabotage the armistice the UN negotiated with Indian help by deliberately violating the terms and attacking DPRK forces.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Then the historians who wrote it are lying ?

Are they? I would guess it more likely that you misinterpreted what they said, and got confused.

Google is lying ?

Google is an algorithm. Lying requires intent. Google cannot form intent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HoudiniToday 11:54 am JST

We'll be waiting. I won't hold my breath.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's because when China became involved in the Korean war, at that time the Soviets and China were inseparable and the US believed their agenda would jeopardize the USA hegemonic agenda in the Asia-Pacific.

Is it? Do the historians agree with you?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Sorry but 4 minutes wasn't enough time for you to realistically read the necessary documents from the US government office of the historian.

Any other things I never claimed I have done, that are making you angry that I haven't done?

Therefore just ranting and raving and not worthy of an intellectual debate or expansion of knowledge on what could have been an interesting discussion.

How is asking you a question to clarify yourself 'ranting and raving'? Do you think an outsider seeing that reaction to being asked a question to clarify your position may look at that as a bit of a persecution/victim complex on your part?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

They wrote it not me !

Are you sure you interpreted it correctly?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The U.S as allies of the South Korea's strongly advised not to sign the peace deal in exchange for continued protection.

You better read your history again. There was a two year negotiation over the armistice that was led by greatly facilitated by India. There was a dispute over where the eventual border and DMZ would be but the main thing that held up talks was the disposition of POWs. Many of the DPRK fighters held by UNC forces were South Koreans pressed into DPRK service while DPRK forces occupied South Korea. They objected to being repatriated to DPRK. Home for them was South Korea where they were taken from. Who can blame them! Likewise there were many Chinese soldiers who former KMT soldiers who didn't want to go back to PRC. They wanted to go to Taiwan. India hit on the idea of sending these POWs to a neutral third nation for a decision on where they would go. This broke the logjam and allowed the UNC, China and DPRK to reach an armistice agreement.

ROK President Park however was irate and would not go along with the deal. To try to stop it he ordered the ROK army to attack Chinese and DPRK forces after a cease fire was agreed to. This put the whole deal in jeopardy. The US convinced the ROK to back down by promising them a defense pact.

https://thediplomat.com/2018/08/the-long-road-to-the-korean-war-armistice/

1 ( +1 / -0 )

HoudiniToday 12:19 pm JST

Ukraine and every other sovereign nation on earth has a right to self defense.

But not nukes.

So other sovereign nations on earth aren't allowed to have nukes for self defense ?

That makes no sense

Yes, the UN doesn't hand out nukes to every country in the world because that would be dangerous. I guess for the Russian this sounds like a solid plan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Enough Co2 emission from all those drills. Trying to scare each other lol

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HoudiniToday 02:58 pm JST

Name one war overseas that the USA has won.

Every war except the Vietnam and the Afghan wars. And that includes the Korean War as a W.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HoudiniToday 03:03 pm JST

Somebody is in a tizzy!!!

The USA thinks it the world's greatest best badass military and country and economy but in reality its a total mess.

We haven't lost a conventional war like Russia has in Ukraine.

If you don't think the USA is hegemonic then that's your prerogative.

Zero territory added since 1898.

There was a two year negotiation over the armistice that was led by greatly facilitated by India. There was a dispute over where the eventual border and DMZ would be but the main thing that held up talks was the disposition of POWs.

No more dumb questions please

End of story

Deal with it !

1 ( +1 / -0 )

"Mutually Assured Destruction" prevented either of the two super powers from starting a nuclear war during the Cold War era. If the Kims decide to attack their neighbors or the USA with one of their long range missiles, armed with a nuclear warhead, it will be very bad for the recipients, but it will signal the utter and complete destruction of North Korea. So, NK does not have the means to destroy any other country, but they have the means to cause their own destruction. What will it be Mr. and Ms. Kim? Death or life?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nuclear missiles cannot be countered by holding naval drills-a complete show and waste of money…

SM-6 missiles have been tested to show they can hit ICBMs on reentry. SM-6 are carried on some US destroyers. https://www.defense-aerospace.com/upgraded-sm-6-missile-successfully-intercepts-ballistic-missile-target-in-test/ https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/07/us-navy-destroyer-launches-four-sm-6-missiles-against-two-srbms-in-latest-mda-test/ The DDG 114 was part of the testing in 2021. Interception has only improved since then. DDG 118 was part of this test: https://www.defense-aerospace.com/upgraded-sm-6-missile-successfully-intercepts-ballistic-missile-target-in-test/ which shows it isn't just a single ship with the capability.

For Japan, https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/navy-unveils-truck-mounted-sm-6-missile-launcher-in-european-test

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Trailer mounted land launched SM-6 and Tomahawk are already fielded in the US Army.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SM-6 missiles have been tested to show they can hit ICBMs on reentry. SM-6 are carried on some US destroyers. https://www.defense-aerospace.com/upgraded-sm-6-missile-successfully-intercepts-ballistic-missile-target-in-test/ https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/07/us-navy-destroyer-launches-four-sm-6-missiles-against-two-srbms-in-latest-mda-test/ The DDG 114 was part of the testing in 2021. Interception has only improved since then. DDG 118 was part of this test: https://www.defense-aerospace.com/upgraded-sm-6-missile-successfully-intercepts-ballistic-missile-target-in-test/ which shows it isn't just a single ship with the capability.

Those were not ICBM targets SM-6 engaged. They were MRBM targets. The exercise demonstrated the ability of SM-6, which is the fleets primary long range air defense weapon to intercept something like a DF-21D in the atmosphere on its final dive at a target. SM-6 has not been tested against ICBM targets. However as I pointed out above SM-3 Block 2 very much has the capability, using off board sensors, to make long range exoatmospheric intercepts of ICBM targets.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Btw, SM-6 has an anti ship and land attack surface to surface capability. The US Army is employing them as part of their "Mid Range Capability" alongside Tomahawk for land attack.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites