Latest News Clips 2017.03.27

1.      Did London attack expose city's 'weak spot'?

CNN   March 24, 2017

Not all UK police officers are armed.

(CNN) The terrorist attack on Westminster -- the heart of government in Britain since the 16th century -- did not come as a surprise to authorities.

In the aftermath of atrocities in France last year, London's most senior police officer warned that an attack was "highly likely" -- a case of "when, not if."

Given the threat, it may come as a surprise to people unfamiliar with the British model of policing that fewer than one in 10 London police officers carries a gun in their daily duties. Keith Palmer, the 48-year-old officer stabbed to death at the gates of Parliament, was unarmed.

Weak spot

Palmer was standing guard at Carriage Gates, the wrought-iron entrance from Parliament Square that gives onto New Palace Yard, where cars carrying Members of Parliament sweep through into the underground parking lot below.

After plowing a rental car through crowds on Wesminster Bridge, 52-year-old Khalid Masood crashed the vehicle into Parliament's perimeter fence, dashed round the corner, stabbed Palmer and pushed through into the compound before being shot by an armed officer.

There were questions about why the gate, which can only be used by parliamentary pass holders, was ajar and not bolted shut. "It's a terrible, terrible day for parliament, the one weak spot on our estate is those carriage gates," said Mary Creagh, a member of parliament, said, according to The Telegraph.

When asked why an armed policeman was not on the gate, Iain Duncan Smith, a former cabinet minister, said it was a "little bit of a surprise that there was not." He said the gate was a "vulnerability" because vehicles come and go through it.

However, another lawmaker, Richard Benyon, said on Twitter he was irritated by reports of a security breach, calling it a "highly professional response."

More police?

London has stepped up security in the wake of the attacks. Mayor Sadiq Khan told CNN that Londoners would see more armed and unarmed police officers patrolling the streets.

"One of the reasons I can say London is the safest global city in the world and one of the safest cities in the world is because there are literally tens of thousands of Keith Palmers keeping our cities safe, working with members of the public who provide intelligence and information, working with our security services," he said.

Last year, shortly after the Nice truck attack, the Metropolitan Police, which covers most of London and is usually referred to simply as "the Met," increased its number of firearms officers by 600 to 2,800 -- however this is still less than 10% of the total.

However, it's unlikely that the Met will make a wholesale shift in its policing model.

The previous Commissioner, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, who retired in January, said last year the fact that the vast majority of police officers were unarmed "gives us a far healthier relationship with the people we police."

"Our neighborhood officers -- the ones who know their streets, who know their environment and who know many of the names of the people in their communities -- are our major weapon. They are our eyes and ears on the street," he said.

Low-tech terror

The Westminster attack was just one in a series of such relatively low-tech terrorist attacks involving vehicles in the West over the past three years that have typically been inspired by ISIS, says Peter Bergen, CNN's National Security analyst.

"These attacks are hard to defend against in free societies where crowds will gather, as was the case for Bastille Day in Nice, or the Christmas market in Berlin, or students attending Ohio State -- and now the throngs of tourists and visitors that typically crowd the sidewalks around the Houses of Parliament," he said.

He says law enforcement needs to have a deep understanding of who may be radicalizing before they carry out a lethal terrorist attack. And for that, they need the help of peers and family members.

Community initiatives also help, say analysts at Quillam, a counter-extremism think thank in London.

"If extremist recruiters seek to manipulate grievances, teachers and youth workers must develop programs to address them through promoting democratic responses," Jonathan Russell, head of policy at Quilliam and Joshua Stewart, a strategic communications officer there, wrote in an opinion piece for CNN.

2.      South Korea Removes President Park Geun-hye

The New York Times     MARCH 9, 2017

SEOUL, South Korea — A South Korean court removed the president on Friday, a first in the nation’s history, rattling the delicate balance of relationships across Asia at a particularly tense time.

Her removal capped months of turmoil, as hundreds of thousands of South Koreans took to the streets, week after week, to protest a sprawling corruption scandal that shook the top echelons of business and government.

Park Geun-hye, the nation’s first female president and the daughter of the Cold War military dictator Park Chung-hee, had been an icon of the conservative establishment that joined Washington in pressing for a hard line against North Korea’s nuclear provocations.

Now, her downfall is expected to shift South Korean politics to the opposition, whose leaders want more engagement with North Korea and are wary of a major confrontation in the region. They say they will re-examine the country’s joint strategy on North Korea with the United States and defuse tensions with China, which has sounded alarms about the growing American military footprint in Asia.

Ms. Park’s powers were suspended in December after a legislative impeachment vote, though she continued to live in the presidential Blue House, largely alone and hidden from public view, while awaiting the decision by the Constitutional Court. The house had been her childhood home: She first moved in at the age of 9 and left it nearly two decades later after her mother and father were assassinated in separate episodes.

Eight justices of the Constitutional Court unanimously decided to unseat Ms. Park for committing “acts that violated the Constitution and laws” throughout her time in office, Acting Chief Justice Lee Jung-mi said in a ruling that was nationally broadcast.

Ms. Park’s acts “betrayed the trust of the people and were of the kind that cannot be tolerated for the sake of protecting the Constitution,” Justice Lee said.

As the verdict was announced, silence fell over thousands of Park supporters who rallied near the courthouse waving South Korean flags. Soon, they tried to march on the court and called for “destroying” it. When the police blocked them, some of the mostly elderly protesters attacked the officers with flagpoles, hurling water bottles and pieces of the sidewalk pavement. Two pro-Park demonstrators, ages 60 and 72, died during the unrest.

Ms. Park did not comment on the ruling, and remained in the presidential palace after her removal from power. But In Myung-jin, the leader of Ms. Park’s conservative Liberty Korea Party, said he “humbly respected” the ruling.

With the immunity conferred by her office now gone, Ms. Park, 65, faces prosecutors seeking to charge her with bribery, extortion and abuse of power in connection with allegations of conspiring with a confidante, her childhood friend Choi Soon-sil, to collect tens of millions of dollars in bribes from companies like Samsung.

By law, the country must elect a new president within 60 days. The acting president, Hwang Kyo-ahn, an ally of Ms. Park’s, will remain in office in the interim. The Trump administration is rushing a missile defense system to South Korea so that it can be in place before the election.

After the ruling, Mr. Hwang called key Cabinet ministers to put the nation on a heightened state of military readiness, saying the lack of a president represented a national “emergency.” He also warned North Korea against making “additional provocations.”

3.      Why China is so mad about THAAD, a missile defense system aimed at deterring North Korea

The Washington Post  March 7

 

A U.S. military video shows the arrival of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense units to South Korea on Mar. 6. The units are designed to shoot down ballistic missiles like the ones recently launched by North Korea into the Sea of Japan. (Youtube/Osan AirBase)

Given how angry Beijing gets about THAAD, you may be forgiven for thinking that the U.S. missile system, deployed to South Korea, is primarily aimed at China. However, Washington and Seoul have justified the system by saying it is necessary to defend South Korea from North Korean aggression.

With the missile system finally being deployed and tensions between the Koreas and China exploding again, here's a guide to the controversy.

What exactly is THAAD?

The acronym stands for Terminal High Altitude Area Defense. The ground-based missile defense system, which first came into development after the Persian Gulf War, is designed to shoot down short-, medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles during the terminal phase (i.e., when they are coming down).

According to Lockheed Martin, the U.S. company that manufacturers the system, there are four stages to its operation. First, a radar system identifies the incoming threat; then the target is identified and engaged. An “interceptor” is fired from a truck-mounted launcher, which destroys the missile using kinetic energy. Because the incoming missile is destroyed at a high altitude, the effects of weapons of mass destruction can be mitigated with the device.

The system is designed to be highly mobile, and it consists of four main components: a truck-mounted launcher; eight interceptors on the launcher; a transportable radar system; and a fire control system that links the various components with external command centers.

So why is it in the news right now?

THAAD systems have been deployed in a number of places around the world, including Guam and Hawaii. However, last year the Defense Department announced it would deploy a system to South Korea, where it would be operated by U.S. forces stationed in the country. In a statement, the Pentagon described the move as a “defensive measure” against North Korea after the country continued to pursue nuclear weapons and tested a number of ballistic missile systems.

This week, the situation on the Korean Peninsula escalated dramatically. On Tuesday, North Korean state media reported that the country has practiced attempts to hit U.S. military bases in Japan with a number of recently launched missiles. The number of missiles fired suggested that North Korea was training to see how quickly it could set up its extended-range missiles in a wartime setting.

That same day, the United States announced that it has begun deploying THAAD to South Korea this week. While the land where the system is due to be deployed is not ready yet, the equipment will be kept at a U.S. air base in Osan until the site is prepared. Full deployment is expected as early as June.

The news of the THAAD deployment sparked a threat of “consequences” from China. “I want to emphasize that we firmly oppose the deployment of THAAD,” said Geng Shuang, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry, at a daily news briefing in Beijing on Tuesday. “We will resolutely take necessary measures to defend our security interests.”

Why is China so angry?

On the surface of it, it may be hard to understand Beijing's fury with THAAD. For one thing, it's a purely defensive system — THAAD systems don't carry warheads, relying on the force of the “interceptor” to destroy the incoming missile rather than a detonation. And while, in theory, the system could be used to intercept Chinese ballistic missiles, it would only work on missiles in their terminal phase: ruling out those targeting the United States, which would still be ascending.

Moreover, while China is well-known as a key ally and “big brother” of North Korea, it has shown itself to be exasperated by Pyongyang's recent missile launches. Beijing recently blocked coal imports from North Korea, striking a major blow to the isolated nation's economy.

Instead, many experts argue that China's anger over THAAD has less to do with the missiles than with the sophisticated radar capabilities included in the system. These radars could be used to track China's own missile systems, potentially giving the United States a major advantage in any future conflict with China. Some Chinese analysts argue that THAAD itself is of only limited use against North Korea anyway, as it would not be able to take out short-range missiles and artillery that do not reach high altitudes, hinting that the radar may be the real reason for the deployment.

More broadly, Beijing is concerned that the United States is hoping to use both South Korea and Japan to contain China in the future. “If South Korea insists on becoming a US puppet, China will have to act against it,” the nationalist state newspaper Global Times wrote in an editorial early this year.