North Korea says new ICBM puts U.S. mainland within range of nuclear weapons

By Christine Kim and Phil Stewart

 

A man looks at a street monitor showing a news report about North Korea's missile launch, in Tokyo, Japan, November 29, 2017. REUTERS/Toru Hanai

 

SEOUL/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea said it had successfully tested a powerful new intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that put all of the U.S. mainland within range, declaring it had achieved its long-held goal of becoming a nuclear power.

 

Wednesday's missile test, North Korea's first since mid-September, came a week after U.S. President Donald Trump put North Korea back on a U.S. list of countries it says support terrorism, allowing it to impose more sanctions.

 

North Korea has conducted dozens of ballistic missile tests under its leader, Kim Jong Un, in defiance of international sanctions. In September, it conducted its sixth and largest nuclear test.

 

North Korea said the new powerful missile reached an altitude of around 4,475 km (2,780 miles) - more than 10 times the height of the international space station - and flew 950 km (600 miles) during its 53 minute flight.

 

"After watching the successful launch of the new type ICBM Hwasong-15, Kim Jong Un declared with pride that now we have finally realized the great historic cause of completing the state nuclear force, the cause of building a rocket power," according to a statement read by a television presenter.

 

In the statement, North Korea described itself as a "responsible nuclear power", saying its strategic weapons were developed to defend itself from "the U.S. imperialists' nuclear blackmail policy and nuclear threat".

 

Many nuclear experts say the North has yet to prove it has mastered all technical hurdles including the ability deliver a nuclear warhead reliably atop an ICBM, but likely soon will.

 

"We don't have to like it, but we're going to have to learn to live with North Korea's ability to target the United States with nuclear weapons," said Jeffrey Lewis, head of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of Strategic Studies.

 

"THREATEN EVERYWHERE"

 

U.S., Japanese and South Korean officials all agreed the missile, which landed within Japan's exclusive economic zone, was likely an ICBM. It did not pose a threat to the United States, its territories or allies, the Pentagon said.

 

“It went higher frankly than any previous shot they’ve taken, a research and development effort on their part to continue building ballistic missiles that can threaten everywhere in the world, basically," U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told reporters at the White House.

 

Trump spoke by phone with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and South Korean President Moon Jae-In, with all three leaders reaffirming their commitment to combat the North Korean threat.

 

"It is a situation that we will handle," Trump told reporters.

 

Moon told Trump that North Korea's missile technology seemed to have improved, a spokesman for the South Korean leader's office said.

 

Trump, who was briefed on the missile while it was in flight, said it did not change his administration's approach to North Korea, which has included new curbs to hurt trade between China and North Korea.

 

ALL OPTIONS

 

Washington has said repeatedly that all options, including military ones, are on the table in dealing with North Korea.

 

"Diplomatic options remain viable and open, for now," U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said. 

 

Other than carrying out existing U.N. sanctions, "the international community must take additional measures to enhance maritime security, including the right to interdict maritime traffic" travelling to North Korea, Tillerson said in a statement.

 

The U.N. Security Council was scheduled to meet on Wednesday to discuss the launch, which Secretary-General Antonio Guterres strongly condemned.

 

"This is a clear violation of Security Council resolutions and shows complete disregard for the united view of the international community," his spokesman said in a statement.

 

U.S. EAST COAST IN RANGE?

 

The new Hwasong-15, named after the planet Mars, was a more advanced version of the Hwasong-14 ICBM tested twice in July, North Korea said. It was designed to carry a "super-large heavy warhead" and had much greater advantages in its tactical and technological specifications than its predecessor.

 

Based on its trajectory and distance, the missile would have a range of more than 13,000 km (8,100 miles) - more than enough to reach Washington D.C., the U.S.-based Union of Concerned Scientists said.

 

However, it was unclear how heavy a payload the missile was carrying, and it was uncertain if it could carry a large nuclear warhead that far, the nonprofit science advocacy group added.

 

Minutes after the North fired the missile, South Korea's military conducted a missile-firing test in response, the South Korean military said.

 

South Korea's Moon said the launch had been anticipated and the government had been preparing for it. There was no choice but for countries to keep applying pressure and sanctions against North Korea, he added.

 

"The situation could get out of control if North Korea perfects its ICBM technology," Moon said, according to the Blue House after a national security council meeting.

 

"North Korea shouldn't miscalculate the situation and threaten South Korea with a nuclear weapon, which could elicit a possible pre-emptive strike by the United States."

 

The test comes less than three months before South Korea hosts the Winter Olympics at a resort just 80 km (50 miles) from the heavily fortified border with the North.

 

U.S. stocks briefly pared gains on the news but the S&P 500 index closed up almost 1 percent and Asian markets largely shrugged off the news.

 

North Korea has said its weapons programs are a necessary defences against U.S. plans to invade. The United States, which has 28,500 troops in South Korea as a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean war, denies any such intention.

 

Last week, North Korea denounced Trump's decision to relist it as a state sponsor of terrorism, calling it a "serious provocation and violent infringement."

 

A U.S. government source said the U.S. assessment was the launch was the latest in a serious series of tests to develop and perfect North Korea missile systems rather than any response to Trump.

 

Trump has traded insults and threats with Kim and warned in September that the United States would have no choice but to "totally destroy" North Korea if forced to defend itself or its allies.

 

(Reporting by Christine Kim and Soyoung Kim in Seoul, Linda Sieg, William Mallard, Timothy Kelly in Tokyo, Mark Hosenball, John Walcott, Steve Holland and Tim Ahmann in Washington and Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Writing by Yara Bayoumy, David Brunnstrom and Lincoln Feast; Editing by Grant McCool, Michael Perry & Simon Cameron-Moore)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-11-29

To much is to much.

When will this be ?

18 hours ago, webfact said:

North Korea said the new powerful missile reached an altitude of around 4,475 km (2,780 miles) - more than 10 times the height of the international space station - and flew 950 km (600 miles) during its 53 minute flight.

Impressive ! Well done . Now start to build a lot of them Kim.

"Minutes after the North fired the missile, South Korea's military conducted a missile-firing test in response, the South Korean military said."

I don't understand how this is supposed to intimidate the North. Seems a waste of time and money.

37 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

"Minutes after the North fired the missile, South Korea's military conducted a missile-firing test in response, the South Korean military said."

I don't understand how this is supposed to intimidate the North. Seems a waste of time and money.

Preparation and planning. Sadly, this is now a necessity due to the nut job Kim. And yes, a waste of time and money. Should send the bill to Kim.

Just now, craigt3365 said:

Preparation and planning. Sadly, this is now a necessity due to the nut job Kim. And yes, a waste of time and money. Should send the bill to Kim.

 

Should send the bill to China:

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anderscorr/2017/07/05/chinese-involvement-in-north-koreas-nuclear-missile-program-from-warheads-to-trucks/#2e4f09f96f2f

They should just.take.out NK leadership to avoid  countless loss of lives of people.

 

4 minutes ago, Beats56 said:

They should just.take.out NK leadership to avoid  countless loss of lives of people.

 

Then what?

4 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Should send the bill to China:

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/anderscorr/2017/07/05/chinese-involvement-in-north-koreas-nuclear-missile-program-from-warheads-to-trucks/#2e4f09f96f2f

Seems the Chinese have learned a lesson from the US. Inflame the little guys, then sell them weapons.

Coming soon to AliExpress: Category > Military > ICBM

2 hours ago, baboon said:

Then what?

Come on...what's a matter with you. Make Korea one country not a hermit country where no buddy is free and not starving .

1 hour ago, Beats56 said:

Come on...what's a matter with you. Make Korea one country not a hermit country where no buddy is free and not starving .

Yes, but who foots the bill? What do you do with 23 million bewildered and angry people who all of a sudden want what you have AND have been conditioned to hate you all their lives? Who administers them? It isn't just as simple as kill their leaders and everyone lives happily ever after...

29 minutes ago, baboon said:

Yes, but who foots the bill? What do you do with 23 million bewildered and angry people who all of a sudden want what you have AND have been conditioned to hate you all their lives? Who administers them? It isn't just as simple as kill their leaders and everyone lives happily ever after...

Germany pulled it off and they are an economic powerhouse now.

21 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Germany pulled it off and they are an economic powerhouse now.

The wealth, infrastructure and cultural disparities are far greater on the Korean peninsula. There was more travel between the two Germanys and a certain amount of post and phone calls. Others might wish to disagree but I see no real comparison in what it would take to reunifiy the two Koreas successfully. 

http://www.38north.org/2016/05/cyang052516/

https://thediplomat.com/2014/07/why-korea-cant-follow-germanys-reunification-model/

3 hours ago, baboon said:

The wealth, infrastructure and cultural disparities are far greater on the Korean peninsula. There was more travel between the two Germanys and a certain amount of post and phone calls. Others might wish to disagree but I see no real comparison in what it would take to reunifiy the two Koreas successfully. 

http://www.38north.org/2016/05/cyang052516/

https://thediplomat.com/2014/07/why-korea-cant-follow-germanys-reunification-model/

 

Well, an instant reunification is not very likely, even if one doesn't accept all the premises suggested in these two articles. That said, the main obstacle seems to be NK's leadership being bent on the country's isolation and maintaining  tight controls on population. Affecting a regime change, preferably without too much mayhem, could be the first step in bringing about more favorable conditions. To be clear, a less belligerent, but more PRC leaning regime, may work out the best, in the long run.

3 hours ago, baboon said:

The wealth, infrastructure and cultural disparities are far greater on the Korean peninsula. There was more travel between the two Germanys and a certain amount of post and phone calls. Others might wish to disagree but I see no real comparison in what it would take to reunifiy the two Koreas successfully. 

http://www.38north.org/2016/05/cyang052516/

https://thediplomat.com/2014/07/why-korea-cant-follow-germanys-reunification-model/

Get rid of Kim and you've solved more than 50% of the problem.

6 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Get rid of Kim and you've solved more than 50% of the problem.

'I want to disagree but have nothing constructive to add.'

27 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Well, an instant reunification is not very likely, even if one doesn't accept all the premises suggested in these two articles. That said, the main obstacle seems to be NK's leadership being bent on the country's isolation and maintaining  tight controls on population. Affecting a regime change, preferably without too much mayhem, could be the first step in bringing about more favorable conditions. To be clear, a less belligerent, but more PRC leaning regime, may work out the best, in the long run.

Fine. Post articles with alternative viewpoints and we can take it from there.

9 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Get rid of Kim and you've solved more than 50% of the problem.

 

North Korea is a nuclear capable country. That's without taking into account other military capabilities. Throwing it into a chaotic situation, without any well thought out plan addressing multiple contingencies, may not be the best course of action.

1 minute ago, baboon said:

Fine. Post articles with alternative viewpoints and we can take it from there.

 

Is linking opinion columns and articles mandatory for having an independent point of view? Did we just have a my-dad-is-stronger-than-your-dad moment? Allow me to suggest that such were linked on previous topics (and there were quite a few of them), so doubt there's much value in rehashing things over and over again.

 

I think I just presented a (somewhat) alternative point of view, if you wish to ignore it, that's quite alright.

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

Is linking opinion columns and articles mandatory for having an independent point of view? Did we just have a my-dad-is-stronger-than-your-dad moment? Allow me to suggest that such were linked on previous topics (and there were quite a few of them), so doubt there's much value in rehashing things over and over again.

 

I think I just presented a (somewhat) alternative point of view, if you wish to ignore it, that's quite alright.

Yeah. I'm still waiting...

Just now, baboon said:

Yeah. I'm still waiting...

 

Going to be a long wait under that bridge.

17 minutes ago, baboon said:

'I want to disagree but have nothing constructive to add.'

Most countries problems stem from their leaders. Zimbabwe is another excellent example.

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

Going to be a long wait under that bridge.

You don't have one, in other words. Now you have to infer I am a troll and post emoticons. Very well, let the readership decide for themselves. 

18 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

North Korea is a nuclear capable country. That's without taking into account other military capabilities. Throwing it into a chaotic situation, without any well thought out plan addressing multiple contingencies, may not be the best course of action.

Hard for things to get much worse. Perhaps, things would get much better. IMHO, worth a try.

3 minutes ago, baboon said:

You don't have one, in other words. Now you have to infer I am a troll and post emoticons. Very well, let the readership decide for themselves. 

 

I presented an opinion, and there were previously linked articles (not that they are essential). As for inferring the obvious...duh.

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Hard for things to get much worse. Perhaps, things would get much better. IMHO, worth a try.

If there's one thing you can count on it's the possibility of anything getting worse. Nuclear arms in the hands of a dictator, but one with a certain logic to his actions may be preferable to having a new guy (or guys) in partial control trying to figure an agenda in a chaotic situation. The chances for something going BANG by accident, rather than by design, rise considerably.

5 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Germany pulled it off and they are an economic powerhouse now.

Before unification the population of West Germany was 4 times the population of East Germany.

The population of South Korea is 2 times the population of North Korea.

Before unification the GDP per capita of West Germany was slightly over twice that of East Germany

Currently the GDP per capita of South Korea is 47 times that of north korea.

 

So no, the respective situations of Germany and Korea are, from an economic perspective, hugely different. And in a way that massively disfavors the Koreas.

On Fox news now there is a discussion about Rex Tillerson leaving his job in the near future because he is out of step with POTUS over North Korea. Mike Pompeo; head of the CIA; and Nikki Haley; US UN Ambassador; are potential replacements.

4 hours ago, baboon said:

You don't have one, in other words. Now you have to infer I am a troll and post emoticons. Very well, let the readership decide for themselves. 

 

I've appreciated your participation in this topic but I have never understood why someone needs to "see a link" that corroborates or justifies or seconds another poster's viewpoint. Their posts stand on their own and one is left to accept their premise or reject it, be informed by it or not. Up to you.

4 hours ago, champers said:

On Fox news now there is a discussion about Rex Tillerson leaving his job in the near future because he is out of step with POTUS over North Korea. Mike Pompeo; head of the CIA; and Nikki Haley; US UN Ambassador; are potential replacements.

He only likes yes men.