Waiting to avoid a losing by winning scenario

By Dave Anderson:

More information is coming out about the sinking of the ROKS Cheonan in South Korean territorial waters near the disputed Northern Boundary Line. 

CNN reports that US officials believe the sinking was due to a North Korean torpedo:

A North Korean torpedo attack was the most likely cause for the sinking
of a South Korean warship last month, according to a U.S. military
official.

The United States believes the ship was sunk by the
blast of an underwater explosion, but that the explosive device itself
did not come in contact with the hull of the South Korean ship, the
official said. This is the same conclusion expressed by South Korean
military officials.

As I mentioned at the start of the crisis, a deliberate sinking of a warship is a legitimate causus belli:

Sinking warships is an act of war.  I don't think South Korea or the
United States or Japan wants to go to war with North Korea at this time,
but it is a slight possibility. 

The area where the ROK ship sank is a disputed zone.  South Korean
naval patrol boats fired upon a North Korean gun boat last November in the
same general area.  South Korean ships sank North Korean vessels in a similiar
clash in 1999.

If this was a torpedo attack instead of either an internal explosion
or a mining, North Korea could be escalating the sea border dispute as a
means of registering their displeasure of being ignored and
contained.   

Grover at the Pileus blog argues that North Korea may be fishing for a short, losing war in order to consolidate internal political support behind one faction or another in Pyonging.  This theory is somewhat persuasive, and it illustrates why South Korea is slow walking the crisis down instead of escalating.  There is no positive pay-off to any armed confrontation with North Korea.

A limited engagement and punitive expedition strengthens the hands of North Korean hardliners while the actual fighting would be in confined spaces and littorals which negate the US/South Korean technology advantage. 

A general war is a lose-lose proposition for the Republic of Korea.  Any general war will produce significant casualties among both the ROKA and the civilian population that lives north of Seoul near the DMZ.  In a North Korean invasion scenario, the DMZ defenses will most likely get overrun with heavy casualties within a week, and Seoul would be in unguided artillery range from the first moment of the war.  If South Korea attacked northwards, its army would be running into well prepared fixed defenses in difficult terrain as well. 

And even assuming a rapid and relatively low casualty South Korean win and a North Korean political-governmental collapse, South Korea would look wistfully at 1989 West Germany as their integration of East Germany would be seen as a best case scenario as the North is even poorer, more isolated and starving to death as it became a South Korean responsibility.  Oh yeah, now the ROK northern border would be with China instead of North Korea. 

Slow walking the crisis away from escalation makes a lot of sense as escalation is a means of only entering negative pay-offs for South Korea.