朝鮮劍指關島有遠慮 「雙暫停」可成美國出路

<轉載自2017年8月11日 明報 社評>

美朝劍拔弩張，美國總統特朗普警告平壤政府勿再挑釁，否則將面對「前所未見的炮火與怒火」，朝鮮則聲稱考慮向美國前哨據點關島周邊海域，發射4枚中遠程彈道導彈。朝鮮已擁有核武，特朗普大放「嘴炮」，不代表美國願意開戰，不過朝鮮劍指關島，還鉅細無遺披露發射細節，表明導彈將飛越日本，卻未必是信口開河，即使朝鮮同樣無意開戰，可是擦槍走火風險始終存在。事到如今，特朗普與其跟朝鮮打口水戰，不如認真考慮採納中國主張的「雙暫停」方案。

「瘋子不瘋」兩國難開戰 截擊朝導彈美陷兩難

特朗普私下曾說朝鮮領袖金正恩是「拿着核武的瘋子」，朝鮮軍方司令則稱特朗普「喪失理性」，「武力是唯一對付他的方法」，可是金正恩與特朗普的行事風格卻頗有相似之處，兩人都不按牌理出牌，懶理外界反應，令到美朝的戰爭邊緣博弈變得更為難測。特朗普揚言以「炮火與怒火」應對朝鮮挑釁，口脗十足朝鮮政府聲言要令首爾「陷入一片火海」，言辭鹵莽。然而話得說回來，金正恩和特朗普「似瘋不瘋」，深明全面開戰代價沉重難以承受，嘴巴說得兇，不表示想開戰。

上月朝鮮成功試射「火星14」型中遠程導彈，射程估計可達阿拉斯加。美國國防情報分析估計，朝鮮已能製造出微型核彈頭，可搭載到洲際導彈之上。就算朝鮮核導彈精準度成疑，可是美朝一旦全面開戰，駐日韓美軍與關島等地勢成核攻擊目標，華府亦不可能無視日韓對戰火的憂慮。美軍無法保證「核戰第一擊」能率先將朝鮮核武悉數摧毁，也無法確保任何有限度的軍事行動不會演變成全面核戰。國務卿蒂勒森為特朗普強硬言論降溫，聲稱總統只是「以金正恩能明白的語言」向朝鮮發出信息，「美國人應繼續安枕」，反映美國無心亦無能力對朝開戰。

相比下，朝鮮表示考慮使用4枚「火星12」型中遠程導彈，射向關島對開30至40公里水域，卻未必是靠嚇。關島是美軍西太平洋戰略據點，部署了戰略轟炸機，朝鮮視為重大核威脅。不過朝鮮只是說要對關島「包圍」射擊，「壓制」當地美軍設施，沒說過要轟擊關島及島上美軍，反映朝鮮並非真想與美開戰。對金正恩來說，向關島附近水域發射導彈，既有逼美國談判之意，亦有重大軍事測試意義。

朝鮮交代發射大計，連具體發射軌迹、如何飛越日本上空、飛行距離和時間，全都說得一清二楚，實際形同一份導彈試射的外交通知照會，並給美日設下了「應否截擊」這道難題。上次朝鮮試射「火星14」型中遠程導彈，為免直接挑戰美國，選擇以最大高度角發射，讓飛彈落在日本專屬經濟水域。這種試射方法可測試火箭引擎表現，然而要準確測試彈頭和運載工具能否承受巨大摩擦力和熱力、會否在重返大氣層途中解體，始終要以正常角度發射測試，向關島附近試射中遠程導彈，正好達到此目標。對於美日來說，任由朝鮮導彈射來，是奇恥大辱，兩國部署導彈盾耗費不菲，若不截擊，勢惹國內外嘲諷；可是要同時截擊4枚導彈亦非易事，倘有閃失，無法悉數截擊，美國導彈防禦系統的可靠度和威懾力勢必重挫。

中國倡雙暫停夠務實 美國需放下身段談判

美國面對朝鮮，既不能貿然動武，制裁又不管用，唯一方法就是談判。鑑於朝鮮已經擁有核武，快將發展出洲際導彈，今年初中方提出「雙暫停」方案，即朝鮮暫停所有核武和洲際導彈開發，美韓暫停大規模聯合軍演，希望紓緩危機，為恢復和談創造條件，獲得俄國支持。美國前防長佩里亦認為，美國現時難望透過談判逼朝鮮放棄核武，倒不如現實一點先要求朝鮮煞停導彈測試。美國國際戰略研究所專家菲茨帕特里克（Mark Fitzpatrick）也同意「雙暫停」是眾多壞選項中較好的一個，就算不完全叫停美韓軍演，也可顯著縮減規模，刪去模擬「斬首行動」和戰略轟炸機飛行一類演練，並可考慮以糧食援助為甜頭。

美國一些政界人士和專家對「雙暫停」仍頗有保留，說到底就是覺得美國是世界第一大國，沒理由被迫跟「流氓國家」朝鮮談條件，妥協形同間接承認朝鮮已是核武國，此例一開，其他國家必然有樣學樣，日韓等軍事盟友則會懷疑華府「大難臨頭各自飛」。然而朝鮮擁有核武是不爭事實，鴕鳥政策不會是出路，同意「雙暫停」也不代表放棄無核化目標，目前最大障礙是美國能否放下崖岸自高心態，放下身段跟朝鮮談判。特朗普政府提出，只要朝鮮放棄開發核武和導彈，美國不要求改變朝鮮國家體制、不要求搞垮金正恩政權、不急於南北韓统一、美軍不會越過北緯38度，可是這個「四不承諾」甜頭太小叫價太高，朝鮮不會接受。朝鮮每射一次導彈提高核震懾力，談判籌碼就愈多，華府愈遲展開談判，只會對美國愈益不利。

"Double-freeze" — a possible way out for the US

THE United States and North Korea are at daggers drawn, with US President Donald Trump warning the North Korea government not to issue more threats, otherwise it will be met with "fire and fury like the world has never seen". Meanwhile the North Korea has claimed that it is considering the launch of four medium and long-range ballistic missiles to waters off Guam, the US's military outpost.

Last month North Korea successfully test-launched Hwasong-14, a medium and long-range missile which is estimated to be able to reach Alaska. According to intelligence obtained by US national security agencies, North Korea is now capable of manufacturing miniaturised nuclear warheads, which can be fitted to an intercontinental missile. Even if North Korea's nuclear missiles have questionable accuracy, US troops stationed in Japan and South Korea as well as places like Guam are likely to be targets of a nuclear attack if an all-out war breaks out between the United States and North Korea, and the White House could not possibly pay no attention to Japan's and South Korea's concern about warfare. The US military cannot guarantee that its "first strike in a nuclear war" can entirely destroy North Korea's nuclear weapons. Nor can it ensure that a military action of a limited scale will not develop into an all-out nuclear war.

But North Korea's claim that it is considering firing four Hwasong-12 medium to long-range missiles to waters 30 to 40 kilometres off Guam might not be an idle threat. Guam is a strategic stronghold of US troops stationed in West Pacific, and with their strategic bombers is considered a major nuclear threat by North Korea. However, North Korea said that it would only carry out a "peripheral" attack on Guam and "suppress" US military facilities. It did not say it was going to attack Guam and the US troops on the island. This shows that North Korea does not really want to start a war with the US. To Kim Jong-un, firing missiles to waters off Guam not only will pressurise the US to return to the negotiating table but also serve consequential military testing purposes.

North Korea has set out its launch plan with great clarity, providing such details as the actual trajectories of the missiles, how they will travel high up above Japan and the distance and time. It is no different from a diplomatic notification of a test launch of missiles. It also presents the US and Japan with a dilemma: Should they intercept the missiles? When North Korea test-launched its Hwasong-14 medium to long-range missile last time, it fired the missile at the sharpest angle to avoid directly challenging the US. The missile fell into Japan's exclusive economic zone.

The United States cannot carry out a strike on North Korea rashly, and the sanctions have not been working. The only option is negotiation. As North Korea is already equipped with nuclear weapons and is set to develop its intercontinental ballistic missiles, China proposed early this year a "double-freeze" proposal, under which North Korea would freeze the development of all nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles, while the US and South Korea would stop holding massive joint war games in order to de-escalate the crisis and make the resumption of talks possible. The proposal was supported by Russia. William Perry, former US Secretary of Defense, also believes that it is very difficult for the US to force North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons through negotiation at this moment. A more practical approach would be to demand North Korea stop test-launching missiles. Mark Fitzpatrick, an expert from the International Institute for Strategic Studies, also agrees that "double freeze" is the better option out of the many bad ones. Even if the US and South Korea do not stop staging joint war games, they can scale them back significantly and skip training sessions such as simulated decapitation strikes and strategic bomber flights. The US can also try cajoling North Korea into cooperation with food aid.

朝鮮劍指關島有遠慮 「雙暫停」可成美國出路

美朝劍拔弩張，美國總統特朗普警告平壤政府勿再挑釁，否則將面對「前所未見的炮火與怒火」，朝鮮則聲稱考慮向美國前哨據點關島周邊海域，發射4枚中遠程彈道導彈。

上月朝鮮成功試射「火星14」型中遠程導彈，射程估計可達阿拉斯加。美國國防情報分析估計，朝鮮已能製造出微型核彈頭，可搭載到洲際導彈之上。就算朝鮮核導彈精準度成疑，可是美朝一旦全面開戰，駐日韓美軍與關島等地勢成核攻擊目標，華府亦不可能無視日韓對戰火的憂慮。美軍無法保證「核戰第一擊」能率先將朝鮮核武悉數摧毁，也無法確保任何有限度的軍事行動不會演變成全面核戰。

相比下，朝鮮表示考慮使用4枚「火星12」型中遠程導彈，射向關島對開30至40公里水域，卻未必是靠嚇。關島是美軍西太平洋戰略據點，部署了戰略轟炸機，朝鮮視為重大核威脅。不過朝鮮只是說要對關島「包圍」射擊，「壓制」當地美軍設施，沒說過要轟擊關島及島上美軍，反映朝鮮並非真想與美開戰。對金正恩來說，向關島附近水域發射導彈，既有逼美國談判之意，亦有重大軍事測試意義。

朝鮮交代發射大計，連具體發射軌迹、如何飛越日本上空、飛行距離和時間，全都說得一清二楚，實際形同一份導彈試射的外交通知照會，並給美日設下了「應否截擊」這道難題。上次朝鮮試射「火星14」型中遠程導彈，為免直接挑戰美國，選擇以最大高度角發射，讓飛彈落在日本專屬經濟水域。

美國面對朝鮮，既不能貿然動武，制裁又不管用，唯一方法就是談判。鑑於朝鮮已經擁有核武，快將發展出洲際導彈，今年初中方提出「雙暫停」方案，即朝鮮暫停所有核武和洲際導彈開發，美韓暫停大規模聯合軍演，希望紓緩危機，為恢復和談創造條件，獲得俄國支持。美國前防長佩里亦認為，美國現時難望透過談判逼朝鮮放棄核武，倒不如現實一點先要求朝鮮煞停導彈測試。美國國際戰略研究所專家菲茨帕特里克（Mark Fitzpatrick）也同意「雙暫停」是眾多壞選項中較好的一個，就算不完全叫停美韓軍演，也可顯著縮減規模，刪去模擬「斬首行動」和戰略轟炸機飛行一類演練，並可考慮以糧食援助為甜頭。