Military options for N. Korea range from bad to worse

China warns U.S., N. Korea to be careful in standoff

Although the Trump administration has moved an aircraft carrier strike group toward Korea and warned of a possible military strike if Pyongyang conducts a nuclear test, likely U.S. military options range from bad to worse. Meanwhile, President Trump’s tweets are adding fuel to a cycle of tensions on the Korean Peninsula, North Korea's vice foreign minister said.

WASHINGTON — Although the Trump administration has moved an aircraft carrier strike group toward North Korea and warned it would respond forcefully if Pyongyang conducts a nuclear test this weekend, likely U.S. military options range from bad to worse.

Satellite imagery has shown preparations at the North Korea’s Punggye-ri nuclear weapons site, including more military personnel and mounds of dirt from recent excavations, U.S. officials and outside experts said.

North Korea’s state media has warned that Kim Jong Un’s government may use its national holiday Saturday, birthday of the country’s founder, Kim Il Sung, for a weapons test, although it could be another ballistic missile or something less provocative.

The Pentagon has moved the Carl Vinson carrier strike group to waters near the Korean Peninsula as a show of force, and President Donald Trump has said attack submarines were also on the prowl.

“We have submarines — very powerful, far more powerful than the aircraft carrier. That I can tell you,” Trump told Fox News.

U.S. ballistic missile submarines are designed for stealth and launching of conventional and nuclear warheads, the Navy said.

The North Korean military on Friday accused the Trump administration of “maniacal military provocations” and threatened to attack U.S. bases in South Korea and other targets if an attack is launched against them.

“We will go to war if they choose,” Vice Minister Han Song Ryol said in Pyongyang.

Threats and bluster are part of a long-running game of brinkmanship between Washington and Pyongyang, but this time it has been made more dangerous by two volatile new players — Kim and Trump.

Kim, the latest member of North Korea’s ruling dynasty, is following the bellicose path set by his father and grandfather. He has redoubled efforts to build a nuclear arsenal, but U.S. analysts don’t think he will launch a suicidal attack that would bring about the end of his regime.

“The most unpredictable part of this story is Trump, not North Korea,” said Sue Mi Terry, a former CIA analyst who focuses on the isolated country. “North Korea is doing what it always does.”

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis twice this week sought to downplay the possibility of a U.S. attack and the significance of the carrier strike group, noting U.S. warships regularly operate in the western Pacific.

On Thursday, however, he offered tougher talk.

“The bottom line is North Korea has got to change its behavior,” Mattis said at the Pentagon.

The State Department spokesman, Mark Toner, warned of “an urgency to the situation” as well.

“Provocations from North Korea have grown, frankly, too common, too dangerous to ignore anymore,” he said.

Trump called Chinese President Xi Jinping this week to enlist his support to resolve the crisis, days after the two had conferred at Mar-a-Lago in Florida.

An influential Chinese newspaper, the Global Times, subsequently called for “severe restrictive measures that have never been seen before, such as restricting oil imports to the North” if Pyongyang engages in further provocative activity.

U.S. analysts say a full oil embargo could paralyze North Korea for months, but Beijing is unlikely to enforce it because of fear it would send millions flooding across its border and destabilize its Communist ally and neighbor.

Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi warned Friday of “storm clouds” gathering, saying “tit-for-tat threats between the United States and North Korea with daggers drawn has created a dangerous situation worthy of our vigilance.”

It’s unclear just how Trump might respond to a nuclear test.

One option that might fit his recent pattern — symbolic but dramatic — would be to reintroduce U.S. nuclear weapons to South Korea. President George H.W. Bush removed them in 1991 after the Soviet Union had collapsed.

A major U.S. attack against the North could involve salvos of conventional cruise missiles from warships, attack submarines and waves of warplanes against air defense sites, missile batteries, submarine pens and other targets. It could pull in South Korean and Japanese forces plus dozens of U.S. fighter jets and heavy bombers stationed on Guam.

Under the War Powers Act, passed by Congress during the Vietnam war, presidents can order U.S. armed forces into combat without congressional approval, but only for limited periods of time and only in response to an attack on the U.S. or its military.

A limited military strike on Punggye-ri and other known nuclear sites could risk releasing radiation. Much of the infrastructure is supposedly buried deep underground anyway.

Cyberattacks against military command and control facilities are possible, but much of the country is off the grid. The Obama administration reportedly launched cyberattacks against North Korea’s missile program, but the impact is difficult to discern.

U.S. warships could try to knock out a North Korean missile over the ocean — or use a newly installed antimissile battery in South Korea to target one closer to its launch. But a miss could prove more of an embarrassment than a deterrent.

Diplomatic options are equally problematic. North Korea has ignored or defied numerous United Nations resolutions intended to restrain it.

WONG MAYE-E/AP North Korea state media has warned leader Kim Jong Un’s government may use its national holiday for a weapons test.