[Yang Nak-gyu's Defense Club] Will Every Issue Become a Dispute Over 'North Korea-Originated Response'?

[Asia Economy Yang Nak-gyu Reporter] Concerns are emerging that the United Nations Command (UNC) may intervene in how our military responds to provocations by North Korea. This is because the UNC interprets our military’s response to the North Korean army’s shooting incident at the South Korean guard post (GP) in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) as an 'excessive response.'

On the 3rd, when North Korean forces fired four rounds from a 14.5mm anti-aircraft gun toward the South Korean GP at the central front line, our military fired about 30 rounds from K-3 light machine guns and K-6 medium machine guns targeting the North Korean post presumed to be the origin point. However, the UNC stated that it cannot definitively determine whether the North Korean firing was accidental and that both North and South violated the armistice agreement.

Additionally, the North Korean military reported firing four rounds of 14.5mm small arms toward the South Korean UNC post number 250. Unlike our military’s announcement calling it an 'anti-aircraft gun,' North Korea described the 14.5mm weapon as 'small arms.' North Korean anti-aircraft guns are classified as heavy weapons.

Colonel Lee Peters, a UNC public affairs officer, said, "The UNC concluded that both North Korean and South Korean forces violated the armistice agreement by firing unauthorized shots across the Military Demarcation Line." He added, "The UNC will continue to comply with and enforce the armistice provisions to carry out its mission of maintaining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, which has been successfully conducted since 1953."

If the UNC’s conclusion is accepted, it means that even if North Korea provokes, our military should not conduct retaliatory fire according to its own guidelines. The UNC operates under a framework that requires responses to be proportional, carefully considering the potential for escalation and crisis management. For example, in 2017, when a soldier defected through the Joint Security Area (JSA), North Korean forces fired about 40 rounds from pistols and AK-47 rifles, but our military did not respond. This was because the UNC holds operational control over the JSA.

However, since North Korea’s shelling provocation of Yeonpyeong Island in 2010, our military expanded the scope and level of retaliatory strikes. Former Minister of National Defense Kim Kwan-jin, at a major commanders’ meeting on December 7 of that year, issued guidelines to frontline commanders to 'take preemptive action and report afterward,' emphasizing that the scope of self-defense includes the origin point of attacks (provocations) within North Korean territory. This was the first mention of the scope and level of retaliatory strikes against North Korea.

In March 2012, during a visit to the Yeonpyeong Island Marine Corps unit, he issued instructions to "respond with up to ten times the volume of enemy fire." This was a statement urging not to be bound by the UNC’s rules of engagement, which require responding with 'the same weapon and the same quantity' during clashes near the Northern Limit Line (NLL) and Military Demarcation Line (MDL). It is known that during the 2012 Ulchi Freedom Guardian (UFG) exercises, South Korea and the U.S. intensively trained on the expanded retaliatory strike procedures.

Because of this, it is pointed out that if North Korea provokes in the future, disagreements between our military and the UNC over response methods are inevitable. Notably, the UNC did not investigate the North Korean forces in this recent inquiry. They could not accurately clarify how many rounds were fired or what weapons were used. Nevertheless, interpreting our military’s response as excessive is an overreach based on the investigation results.

Shin Won-sik, a former deputy chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and elected member of the Future Korea Party, criticized, "Our military made a premature judgment that North Korea’s provocation was accidental, creating a situation where it cannot respond to provocations."