The Costs and Consequences of the Korean War

This past weekend was the 61st Anniversary of the Korean War, which began on June 25th, 1950, with the invasion of South Korea by the armies of North Korea.

A Grouse Failure

In the minds of most Americans, the U.S. intervention into Korea was necessary to defend the United States. But since the Korean War brought little success for the United States, our government shoves it under the rug. Ivan Eland of the Independent Institute elaborates: "Nationalism in many countries prompts their governments to trumpet foreign-policy successes while sweeping disappointments under the rug...Because American nationalism is especially strong, the U.S. government regularly attempts to take maximum credit for events such as the fall of the communist bloc and the killing of terrorist Osama bin Laden—while forgetting about profligate blunders that have made America and its citizens less secure, a failure in the most importance function of government." The Korean War is no exception. Laurence M. Vance elaborates further on the costs and sheer absurdity of the Korean War: "The civil war in Korea from 1950 to 1953 that the United States foolishly intervened in, and, for the first time for a major conflict, without a congressional declaration of war, is known as the Forgotten War. The number of American soldiers killed in this senseless war is over 36,000. Yet, Korea remains divided at the 38^th parallel to this day just like it was before the war began. Talk about dying in vain. None of these soldiers died in defense of the United States; all of them died for the United Nations, for the foolish policies of Harry Truman, and for the failed diplomacy of World War II. "

Unnecessary and Unconstitutional

One basic fact that needed to be stated is this: North Korea never was a threat to our national defense during that war. And since North Korea was no genuine threat to the United States, there was no need to send over 36,000 American troops to their deaths in a war that made weakened our national defense, hindered economic growth, and assaulted our Constitution. American intervention into Korea was unconstitutional because President Harry Truman did not go to Congress and get a proper declaration of war against North Korea. Instead, he claimed two things: First, that he got his authority to intervene in Korea from the United Nations, and second, he also claimed that he needed no declaration of war and could send American troops abroad for whatever purpose or reason he chooses. But President Harry Truman was wrong. Under the U.S. Constitution, the President has no authority to initiate war against another nation-state. Therefore, under no circumstance may the President send troops abroad on his own authority. The President may only use military force on his own when the country has been invaded or is being attacked by a foreign government. This is why the Framers of the Constitution made the President the Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces (once only comprised on an army and navy) because they thought of this power as a necessary "emergency power" in the event of an attack or invasion by a foreign government. Said George Washington about war power under the Constitution: "The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure." James Madison echoed a similar sentiment:“The Constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the Legislature the power of declaring a state of war [and] the power of raising armies. A delegation of such powers [to the president] would have struck, not only at the fabric of our Constitution, but at the foundation of all well organized and well checked governments. The separation of the power of declaring war from that of conducting it, is wisely contrived to exclude the danger of its being declared for the sake of its being conducted.” As Bruce Fein has noted in his book American Empire: Before the Fall, instead of wasting precious American treasure and blood in a no-win, unnecessary war in Korea, the United States government could have first repealed and abolish the federal welfare-regulatory state and relieve the free-market economy of the disastrous and destructive regulations and welfare statism, then the United States government could have used its resources to strengthen American defenses instead of wasting them in unnecessary and unjustified wars.

The Current Mess and the Way Out
 The failed and unjustified Korean War of the 1950s has greatly if not been the sole origin of the current mess in the Koreas. As it stands, the United States maintains a military presence of over 25,000 American troops in South Korea. The stated reason given for such a violation of the national sovereignty of South Korea is that those troops are needed there to prevent a dangerous North Korean regime from inflaming the region. While no one (including myself) is defending the totalitarian and communist regime of North Korea, charged acts of North Korean "aggression" do not come out of the blue. Jacob Hornberger of the Future of Freedom Foundation elaborates on an incident that occurred on November 25th, 2011, in which the North Korean Army launched artillery strikes onto a South Korean island: "Yesterday, the North Korean regime shelled a South Korean island, killing two South Korean soldiers and injuring several more. Did this act of aggression appear out of nowhere? Not exactly.
According to the New York Times, 'The attack on Yeonpyeong Island occurred after South Korean forces on exercises fired test shots into waters near the North Korean coast.' You mean to tell me that the South Korean military fired test shots near the North Korean coast before the North Koreans shelled that island from which the South Korean shots were made? Yep. According to this news report posted on Brahmand.com Defence and Aerospace News, the South Korean test shots into waters near the North Korean coast were part of a military exercise involving 70,000 South Korean troops designed to 'enhance combat capabilities against North Korea.' Question: If the Venezuelan armed forces fired test shots near the U.S. coast in the Gulf of Mexico, what would be the response of U.S. officials? Answer: There would be U.S. bombs falling on Caracas tomorrow, if not sooner. U.S. officials would never permit such a provocation from the Hugo Chavez regime to go unanswered. In fact, such test shots would undoubtedly be a dream-come-true for U.S. officials who have longed for regime change in Venezuela." Jacob Hornberger goes on: "Why shouldn't the U.S. government play a role in the South Korean military exercises? After all, U.S. soldiers in Korea are the sacrificial trip-wire that guarantees U.S. entry into another land war in Asia without the bother of congressional debates and the constitutionally required congressional declaration of war. I once read a lesson about scuba diving that applies in foreign policy. In the ocean, there are lots of dangerous creatures, such as sharks and moray eels. But by and large, if you leave them alone, they will leave you alone. Everyone knows that North Korea is headed by an irrational, weird, dangerous, unpredictable group of people. So why provoke them? Why not just leave them alone?" Doug Bandow of the Cato Institute (an institute that I do not endorse) explains that South Korea, if left to its' own devices (that means no help from the U.S. government) could defend itself: "Pyongyang retains a quantitative military edge, but its equipment is antiquated; North Korean troops are malnourished and get little training. The North is effectively bankrupt and without allies. With about 40 times the GDP and twice the population of the North, Seoul could outmatch the Kim regime in any way it chose. With large military reserves, a strong industrial base, abundant allies, and generous access to international credit markets, South Korea is well-positioned to triumph in any conflict...The DPRK has neither the interest nor the ability to challenge other nations in the region -- Indonesia, Australia, Philippines, et al. The North possesses an antiquated army and little else, not a globe-spanning military like that of the U.S." If we think about it, the North Korean regime does not have the capabilities to launch a successful invasion of the United States. "What about their nuclear weapons?" one might ask. The North Korean regime feels determined  and pressured to pursue nuclear weapons as a means of preventing a meddlesome U.S. government from toppling their regime.

How do we solve this dilemma? Simple. We need to return the foreign policy of noninterventionism as advocated by our Founding Fathers. This means that the United States government needs to bring all the troops home from the Korean Peninsula, terminate our defense obligations to South Korea, eliminate all foreign aid to South Korea, end our constant meddling into the affairs of North Korea, and simply defending America.