NORTH KOREA: Unlikely to Pursue Threatened Armed Conflict with the United States
Summary: Supreme Leader of North Korea Kim Jong Un’s recent comments on pursuing armed conflict with the U.S. will most likely remain as empty threats to maintain the possibility of reunifying with South Korea.
Development: On 11 February, Pyongyang stated its military forces would respond as necessary to a U.S. Navy fast-attack nuclear submarine docked in South Korean waters. Pyongyang expressed concern over U.S. military actions and deemed it hostile, further stating it could lead to a military confrontation near the Korean Peninsula. Pyongyang stated this confrontation could lead to an armed force conflict between the two nations, according to Al Jazeera. Kim plans to expand North Korea’s nuclear arsenal to counter the U.S. and its allies and prepare for war, according to Newsweek. As of January 2024, North Korea owned approximately 50 nuclear warheads, according to Arms Control, compared to some 3,750 U.S. nuclear warheads, according to the Department of Energy. Pyongyang’s foreign policy goals include reunification with South Korea under Pyongyang’s control.
Analysis: Pyongyang’s threat of entering armed conflict with the U.S. will likely remain an empty threat to retain the possibility of reunification between North and South Korea. Despite Kim recently stating to engage in war with the U.S. as it deems necessary, it remains unlikely for Pyongyang to act on the perceived threats. The lack of execution remains likely due to its insufficient supply of nuclear weapons to survive conflict with the West. Pyongyang likely prioritizes its foreign policy objective to eventually reunify with South Korea, rather than using its resources on conflict
[Lauren Estrada]
SOMALIA: Campaign Against ISIS Likely to Significantly Reduce Group’s Capabilities
Summary: Garowe’s ongoing campaign against ISIS-Somalia will likely significantly reduce the group’s human and financial resources, leading to a decrease in its activities in the region.
Development: On 3 February, Somalian police announced the capture of Abdirahman Shirwac Aw-Saciid in the semiautonomous Puntland region of Northeastern Somalia. Aw-Saciid, also known as Laahoor, headed ISIS’s assassination squad in the region and had primary responsibility for extorting businesses to finance the group. The Puntland authorities are conducting the Hilac Campaign against ISIS forces in the region’s mountains. ISIS-Somalia may have between 500 and 1,500 members, although estimates vary, according to Voice of America and Asharq al-Aswat. According to Puntland Information Minister Mohammed Aided, security forces captured approximately 100 square miles of territory from 1 January to 6 February. Military commanders’ claims indicate that security forces killed more than 150 militants, although estimates vary.
Analysis: If Garowe’s claims regarding the efficacy of its campaign are accurate, then this campaign will likely significantly reduce ISIS’ resources and capabilities in the region. Garowe will likely continue its campaign for several months. Garowe likely already eliminated between 10 and 30 percent of ISIS-Somalia’s membership. In addition, Aw-Saciid’s arrest may significantly impact on ISIS-Somalia’s organizational ability. It will almost certainly impact its revenue-generating ability, as it primarily relies on extortion for funding. These factors indicate that ISIS-Somalia’s resources, both human and financial, will likely be considerably attrited by the end of the Hilac Campaign. Due to this, ISIS attacks and other activity in Somalia will likely decrease significantly. This may dissuade potential foreign fighters from joining ISIS-Somalia, with them instead joining other ISIS branches or other terrorist groups in the region. If the Hilac Campaign becomes a protracted conflict, this may attract foreign fighters in greater numbers, although this would likely not fully offset ISIS’ losses.
[Christina Muchow]
PANAMA: United States Pressure Likely the Cause of Economic Shift
Summary: Panama City announced its planned withdrawal from China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), citing increasing United States (U.S.) economic pressure. Panama City’s decision likely reflects shifting regional preferences toward U.S. alignment.
Development: On 2 February, reports indicated that Panama decided to leave the BRI as a response to the U.S. economic pressure of the canal and China’s expanding influence in Latin America. The BRI agreement, signed in 2017, facilitated Chinese investment in Panamanian infrastructure, including the canal, with an emphasis on Chinese development of the canal’s two largest water ports the Port of Balboa and the Port Colón, according to the Economic Times. Panama currently holds the status of both the first Latin American country to join and the first to leave the BRI, according to The Washington Free Beacon. Despite this decision, existing BRI agreements will remain in place and continue to carry through until the end of the agreement in 2027, according to Reuters.
Analysis: Panama’s almost certain withdrawal from the BRI likely reflects a shifting regional alliance to align with U.S. interests. The decision likely suggests a trend toward economic distancing from China, potentially limiting future Chinese investment in Panama. Panama City almost certainly seeks to maintain economic ties with the U.S., partly from previous economic treaties, to continue allowing free trade between the two countries. Panamanian preferences for U.S. investment into the canal most likely stem from U.S. financial agreements following international financial regulations, as opposed to the BRI, which previous investment countries accused of opaque loan lending requirements and debt-trapping diplomacy.
[Gavin Packard]
