foz
Posts: 3490
Joined: 1/10/2005
|
It's true that there have been spats across the DMZ on and off for decades, but this is the biggest since the ceasefire was called in the early 1950s. It does all point towards the North and South willy-waving at each other, but with new military types in the North wanting to show strength in front of Kim Jong-un, it was sadly all too easy to escalate. Then again, the South do so love to have constant military and naval exercises right along the border, so nobody is especially blameless here. Politically, it's a bit sticky and a lot less clear since the "previous" war (previous in inverted commas, as no truce has ever been signed and ratified) - China and Russia keep North Korea nicely supplied with arms and training, but would be very reluctant to actively involve themselves in another conflict as they are now far too reliant on trade with the Korean Republic's Western allies to want to risk losing all that money. The South currently has some 30,000 US troops in and around the country as has been the case for a long time, but chances are if it does kick off they would be there as support and protection for the civilian population rather than frontline flighting. I'd imagine the UK's involvement to be no different than it is already, as part of the UN peacekeeping force. Japan has shown support for the South this week, but with no standing army of its own due to its post-war constitution, this is just symbolic.
|