'U.S. Presidential D-10' Strikes Israel, Iran in retaliation amid all-time close race

■ Host: Anchor Lee Hyun-woong, Anchor Cho Ye-jin
■ Starring: Park Won-gon, Professor of North Korean Studies at Ewha Womans University

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN Newswide] when quoting.

[Anchor]
With the U.S. presidential election just 10 days away, there is a very close race in which no one can predict the outcome.

In the meantime, the situation in the Middle East and the international security situation such as the war in Ukraine are also becoming variables. Let's take a look at the related content with Park Won-gon, a professor of North Korean studies at Ewha Womans University. Welcome.

I think we need to look at the breaking news that just came in. Israel launched a retaliatory airstrike against Iran. Previously, it was said that there was a possibility of an attack on nuclear or oil facilities, but what was reported was that it was only targeting military targets. How do you see this background?

[Park Won-gon]
Iran hit Israel last January. It didn't cause much damage by firing about 200 missiles, but Iran hit it anyway, so Israel has warned of a retaliatory attack on it. It's ongoing and more detailed news will come in. I think many people will remember, but there was a workshop last April. At that time, Iran hit Iran with 170 drones and 150 missiles, and they hit Israel. At that time, Israel did not attack the nuclear facilities themselves.

As you said this time, we are still cautious that we attacked military facilities. It can be judged only when more information comes in, but it is a limited attack. It was originally talked about in Israel and it was also talked about on various shows.Ma can directly hit Iran's nuclear facilities. In April, they showed their ability to strike nuclear facilities without striking them. However, this time, there was talk that it could strike real nuclear facilities, but Israel also made a limited attack to a certain level, considering that it did not strike the nuclear facilities. So far, it is currently possible to judge.

[Anchor]
So does it seem that the U.S. also had influence on the background of that limited attack?

[Park Won-gon]
That's right. The Biden administration continued to publicly say that there was no escalation, and again, it notified the United States in advance. I've probably talked to the U.S. If that happens, or if Iran attacks immediately, the U.S. has to respond to it, and so does the U.S. military already have a lot of U.S. forces there. When Iran hit Israel on the 1st, U.S. forces defended it in large part. Then, of course, the Biden administration's basic position in the United States is that it does not want to escalate, so it probably persuades Israel to a large extent. But Israel wouldn't have stopped it from responding to this. If so, I think there is a high possibility that they demanded a limited response.

[Anchor]
This situation in the Middle East will inevitably affect the current U.S. presidential election. Harris and Trump are now in a super-controversy. How do you think this attack will affect the aspect?

[Park Won-gon]
It becomes complicated. Because the Gaza War itself is one of the most important agendas in the U.S. presidential election this time. In particular, isn't the U.S. presidential election a super battle this time? The so-called 7 contestants that many people know. In Michigan, there are about 150,000 to 200,000 Arab voters. This is because the percentage is within the margin of error of around 1%, so the votes of that number of voters are very important. And the Arab voters there were very uncomfortable with the Biden administration's support of Israel because of course they're Palestinian supporters, so in February, when then-President Biden was a candidate in the Democratic primary, he deliberately abstained. in the Democratic primary They made 16% of abstentions and delivered their voices.

This time, Iran is complicated, but Arab countries are divided into two. There are Shiites centered on Iran and Sunnis centered on Saudi Arabia. But in a way, Iran's Shiites are a minority. Therefore, we need to analyze the tendencies of Arab American voters relatively, but they are likely to be Sunni. Then, in fact, Sunni and Shiite are not getting along very well. Israel's attack on Iran does not significantly affect the votes of Arab voters in the United States, and the Gaza War is spreading toward Iran, so it can also have the effect of covering up various disasters in Gaza. I think it has the potential to be very complicated.

[Anchor]
You said that there are sharp interests intertwined, but based on the timing of this attack, what kind of intentions do you predict?

[Park Won-gon]
I'm cautious about this, too. If you look at the basic position of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and the trend so far, it seems that he wants to make an all-out war that Israel can do before and after the US presidential election anyway. There's been a lot of pushing. As we saw, Hezbollah in Lebanon continued to attack and continue to escalate. The Biden administration continued to prevent escalation and requested a ceasefire, especially on the Gaza War, but Netanyahu is refusing to do so. If so, it would be correct to say that the U.S. presidential election was considered. In particular, Harris is likely to maintain the existing policy, but Trump is considered to have a very complex option.

Netanyahu and Trump have a good relationship with each other. But Trump fully supports Israel. But that doesn't mean Trump wants war in the Middle East. One of the things he says on Trump's campaign trail is that if he is elected, he will also solve the Middle East problem. I won't go to war anymore. So Trump has the potential to prevent war because he's a person who thinks it's bad for the U.S. economy because he brings inflation. Then, from Netanyahu's point of view, we believe that he intends to maximize this offensive and then take the lead in an environment that will change after the U.S. presidential election and take the negotiations to an advantageous phase.

[Anchor]
It is said that they notified the U.S. about the bombing. The White House said it sees it as a kind of exercise of self-defense. So you're telling me you weren't involved?

[Park Won-gon]
We've notified you, so the U.S. has not joined the attack itself. But isn't there any uncertainty about being an attack? As a result, it is possible to respond to it immediately, and there is a possibility of military expansion, and the U.S. has the effect of preventing and deterring it. The United States itself has already issued some kind of warning to Iran several times. However, I notified it this time, but I don't know if it will be reported or true in the future.The timing of the notification is important, and I think we need to wait and see how much Israel reflected the U.S. position, as we said.

[Anchor]
What do you think about the possibility of this attack escalating into a local or all-out war in the future, and if it does, how will it affect the international situation?

[Park Won-gon]
I'm very worried if I make a big fight. In the Middle East, we've already seen such a serious problem many times in history. In particular, the Middle East has key strategic materials called crude oil, so does the transport channel. In that case, the impact on the global economy is very serious because we've experienced the oil crisis many times since the 1970s. This is also a cautious estimate, but in particular, more analysis of this attack should be made. The expression is the same in the case of the April attack.Ma did not want to expand, as did Iran and Israel, so he went in the form of a certain level of limited warfare. I'm careful this time, too.I can see that kind of image. So if it stops here, it can't be guaranteed.

But I'm cautious about the overall possibility of escalation, but I don't think it's great between Iran and Israel. The rest is fighting against the targets of Hezbollah and Hamas, and once the state and the state fight, Iran and Israel are far away. Since it is about 1,200 kilometers apart, it means that it is very difficult to enter the ground forces to wage an all-out war. Another is that Israel is a nuclear power. So if you look at what Israel has seen so far, you can't completely rule out the possibility of using nuclear weapons if it's actually an all-out war between the state and the state. In this situation, Iran, and moreover, the United States is behind Israel anyway.

Under these circumstances, will Iran risk all those things and go to war? There is a misunderstanding of Iran. Among Arab countries, Iran is one of the most open countries. Although there is a religious leader named Khamenei, Iran has elections, elects presidents, and forms parliaments. As much as the public opinion in Iran is important, so it doesn't seem to be very easy to expand.

[Anchor]
Let's go deep into the story of the U.S. presidential election. According to recent polls, it seems that the super-contest continues, but candidate Trump seems to be gradually raising the mood.

[Park Won-gon]
I think it's a really tough election. I've seen Washington correspondent Hong Sang-hee continue on YTN. It changes every day. As such, what I can tell you from a local point of view is a super-contact. So, unlike the 2016 and 20 elections, it's really hard to predict, researchers, everyone agrees. Also, one of the characteristics is that there are so many 7 contestants, so I think many people know it well, but how will the contestants be divided? In the case of the 2016 election, for example, Trump took six of the seven competing states. Biden took it all in 2020. This time, there is a high possibility that the competing stocks will be divided, so it is very difficult to predict.

But to be very careful, you can see it on the screen.Looking at the overall trend of Ma, Harris's uptrend seems to have been dampened. Didn't we do well enough to see it as Harris' victory during the debate last month? Around that time, Harris' rise slowed down and crossed the so-called limit as she moved into October. It is true that the English term "golden cross" means that Trump has begun to outperform Harris in approval ratings for political parties and rival states since the 22nd of this month, and if you look at the current trend, you can see that kind of situation.

[Anchor]
As the presidential election approaches, there is a prospect that it will be a match between Shy Trump and Hidden Harris. What do you think?

[Park Won-gon]
I think many people probably know that it's Shy Trump. It came out in 2016. Because it was a bit of a shame to support a character called Trump at the time. Because Trump talks so much and acts so bizarre, it was burdensome for American voters to say, "Support Trump." So he didn't express his support, but when he voted, he supported Trump. In that sense, it's not at all embarrassing to support Trump in the current situation in 2020 and 2024. The same goes for the Republican Party itself being Trumpized because Trump took over. If so, the basic judgment is that overall Shy Trump's numbers will be less than before, but if you look at the percentages of Shy Trump in 2016 and 2020, Trump won more votes than the 2.2% to 6.9% poll.

6.9% is outside the margin of error. The representative one is 2016. Everyone in 2016, including me. At that time, I did this broadcast on YTN and made predictions, but what was wrong was that Hillary won almost all of the seven competing states, and it was my judgment at the time that she won all of them. There were a lot of polls that were outside the margin of error. However, as a result, Trump took all six places except Nevada at the time, and that is the influence of Shy Trump. Even now, I can't say there's no Shy Trump, but I think there's a possibility that these will be surveys that reflect the numbers of Shy Trump probably are less than in 2016 and 2020, and the polls know that.

[Anchor]
Then, I think there are people who have never heard of Hidden Harris before. What kind of group is it? And I wonder how influential it will be.

[Park Won-gon]
New coined words are continuously being made. Hidden Harris says Harris is black and female and that's why she can't openly talk about electing a black woman for president in some American voters. Those are the layers. So it's still necessary to check whether the substance is really accurate. This is because Harris is supposed to have a much larger support base for black people, but recent polls show that support for black people is lower than Biden received. So as I continue to see this phenomenon, one of the reasons why this is happening is that there is another hidden Harris, so I think I might change my mind when I go to the polls.

[Anchor]
Since the U.S. presidential election system is a winner-take-all system, isn't competing stocks very important? What is the public opinion of the rival states now?

[Park Won-gon]
This keeps changing, too. There are a lot of pollsters in the contention state, but there are some that aggregate the pollsters and average them. Many people cite two places in Korea. One is called the Real Clear Plate RCP, which has a lot of Republican money so it's a little bit Republican-biased in the U.S., of course, because pollsters shouldn't do that. The other one is called FiveThirtyEight in English. I saw it until recently before I just came in, and former President Trump is now leading all seven competing states you just mentioned. But it's all within the margin of error. So I still doubt that this is meaningful. In Michigan, for example, it's 0.2 percent, and it's 0.5 percent in Pennsylvania, 0.5 percent in North Carolina, and it's almost statistically meaningless. I think it's still necessary to look at this part carefully because it's tossing and turning.

[Anchor]
What's on the screen is Bloomberg News data, and as you said except for Michigan, there are differences within the margin of error. In competing stocks, the gap between the two candidates continues within the margin of error of about 2-3 percentage points. I really don't know this until the end. Can I look at it like this?

[Park Won-gon]
That's right. To take the 2020 presidential election as an example, even then, in Arizona, President Biden won by 0.3%. In Georgia, it was 0.2%, and in Wisconsin, it was 0.6%. All seven other states are about that. Michigan has the biggest difference, 2.8%. All of them are less than 3%. Then, of course, it's within the margin of error, so we can't say exactly what it is here. Some of you may remember in Georgia, but there is a 0.2% difference and 12,000 votes. So Trump told the Georgia Secretary of State that Georgia should be re-voted, so he's under indictment, isn't he? That's how close it is, I still think it's very difficult for us to say exactly what this is.

[Anchor]
As we pointed out earlier, the rise in Harris seems to have slowed down for a while now. There is an analysis that the support for black people for Harris is not overwhelming, and among them, a lot of black men's votes have deviated, what do you think of this analysis?

[Park Won-gon]
So that's what the poll showed. For example, 92% of the support President Biden received from black voters in 2022. It's a very high number. In recent years, 78 percent of black people said they would vote for Vice President Harris. Black men fall to 70 percent. So in this super-contest that I mentioned, of course, black voters are about 16% of the population of all American voters, but this super-contest, the 0.2% that I mentioned earlier, by a few votes, is a huge 12% difference. So it's true that the Democratic Party is very nervous here.

[Anchor]
What's the reason?

[Park Won-gon]
There are a few reasons. In the case of black men, Harris has not been able to show her exact agenda for black men. And again, it's an economic issue. There are also two issues on the agenda that are the most important agenda of this election. One is the economy and the other is the issue of security. Security includes immigration issues. But in that sense, it's an election that the Democratic Party holds on a slanted playground. Both are more unfair from the Democratic Party's point of view than before, but the U.S. voters feel that the economy is more difficult than it was during Trump, and inflation remains.

And I can't help but feel that security and immigration issues are more serious. Black men are also feeling the same thing. Perhaps we should analyze it after this election, but racial things are much more different than before. Because races in the United States are also complicated. Isn't it a characteristic of the United States that there are not pure black people, but there can be black and white people, and there are a wide variety of races? I'm telling you this because the turnout Trump receives from black people is increasing. According to a recent poll, the approval rating is rising to double digits. If so, this means that the agenda, such as the economy that I've talked about beyond race, is more importantly moving the minds of voters.

[Anchor]
It is said that the largest number of people in history are participating in the early voting for the U.S. presidential election, and it is analyzed that more Democratic supporters participated. What if we were to argue about the advantages and disadvantages?

[Park Won-gon]
This is also a new phenomenon. We need an analysis after the election. As I said, it is true that the Democratic Party participated more, especially in contending states. But Republicans are just as involved. Early voting began in earnest in 2020. You'll be voting for up to a week or two. So I think the Democratic Party was advantageous before that because there are many working-class people in the Democratic Party and many working-class people support it, the U.S. is different from Korea, so Election Day is not a holiday.

That's why it was burdensome for him to go and vote separately. So if there is an early voting, it will take a long time, so it is advantageous for the Democratic Party to go there and vote. Still, it's not that wrong. But if you look at the phenomenon that's happening now, I just checked before this came in, and Nevada and Arizona are also competing states. Republicans have more early voting there. That's why Trump recently said he would rather vote in advance, and some even encouraged him to vote in advance. Therefore, the formula that early voting is necessarily favorable to the Democratic Party needs to be adjusted this time. Of course, we need to analyze it later.

[Anchor]
We have pointed out the unpredictable aspect of the U.S. presidential election. Let's move on to North Korea. Both North Korea and Russia indirectly admitted to sending North Korean troops to Russia. In addition, North Korea expressed its position that it conforms to international norms, especially if such a thing happens. This is a clear violation of the Security Council.

[Park Won-gon]
North Korea always says the same from its own point of view, Russia, which, as you just said, is a clear violation of Security Council resolutions. For example, 1718 was passed after North Korea conducted its first nuclear test in 2006. If you look at it, nothing in conventional weapons should enter and exit North Korea. Other than that, it's after the second nuclear test in 1874 and 2009. If you look there, related materials, technical training, and advisory services are all not possible. This is clearly a UN Security Council resolution with international legal effect. Furthermore, Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, so they agreed. It is a clear violation of this, so North Korea, even so Russia, is clearly denying itself. That's how it's judged.

[Anchor]
The situation is getting more and more clear, and the wiretapping data has come out now, and it includes a story that seems to be called K battalion. In fact, combat troops are put in. So we're going to have a new phase again?

[Park Won-gon]
For now, the possibility is high. This is because it is being talked about at the level of various information and intelligence that I mentioned, and as you just said, Russia and North Korea have actually acknowledged it. The important thing is that there are currently 3,000 people trained in Russia, and this is one brigade level. According to the NIS' announcement, there is a high possibility that the number will exceed 10,000. Then it's right to see this as a combat force. It's hard to see that number as a force capable of other activities. I think it will be confirmed in the next few days or weeks, but I heard that these troops have already moved, so I believe there is a possibility that they will appear at the battle site.

And in June, when North Korea and Russia cooperated, they signed a de facto alliance treaty, and considering the level, scope, and goal of cooperation, the possibility of sending military personnel cannot be ruled out. That's how much North Korea has the idea of binding Russia. Because these countries are authoritarian systems, it is much more important to give and receive each other than the treaties themselves. So, for example, North Korea sent its troops to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in blood, creating a kind of precedent for North Korea to demand Russian intervention in the event of an emergency on the Korean Peninsula. I'm concerned about that.

[Anchor]
If the North Korean military actually participates in the war now, what role it will play will be, and it will help Russia numerically, along with the analysis that it will be a bullet holder and a scapegoat. What role do you think you'll play?

[Park Won-gon]
Both are possible. Because the Russian-Ukrainian war is in a way a kind of World War I, World War II type of serious war. Since it is a form of building a position and striking with artillery force, this is bound to result in a lot of victims, so we need continuous support troops. Then where to go. If you go to a close game, you will inevitably make sacrifices. Russia needs that much combat troops, so it would be right to say that both of them, which we demanded from North Korea, are working with each other.

[Anchor]
I see. We looked at the tensions in the Middle East, the U.S. presidential election, and the North Korean issue. So far, I have been with Park Won-gon, a professor of North Korean studies at Ewha Womans University. Thank you very much. Thank you.