South Korea's latest K2 tank (left) and North Korea's various intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of carrying nuclear warheads and striking the U.S. mainland. [Ministry of National Defense, Korean Central News Agency] 

Military power is not merely a set of statistics, but the sum total of a vast organism that determines a nation's survival. Current global military power ranking indicators are often lost in visible physical assets. The world military power rankings and indicators we face may be an illusion created by conventional weapon figures and purchase receipts. 

What determines victory or defeat on the battlefield is not statistical numbers. It is the invisible variables of substantive capability and morale that statistical numbers fail to capture. In a situation surrounded by four major powers, relying on a statistical ranking of 5th in global military power as a basis for self-defense demonstrates how shell statistics can be a fatal poison. Statistics can provide a sense of security and superiority, but if there are errors in the statistical production process, they can lead to serious misjudgments. 

1. Global Military Power Rankings Created by Conventional Numbers and 'Purchase Receipts'

The most widely known global military power ranking, GFP (Global Firepower), scores over 60 indicators such as troop numbers, available mobilization resources, warship tonnage, quantity of armored, air, and naval equipment, defense budget size, logistical capabilities, and geographical conditions. It assigns weights to each item to calculate a military power index, where a score closer to 0 indicates greater strength. Military power rankings fundamentally focus on the 'quantitative sum of visible conventional forces.' 

Military power assessment is closer to an inventory list of military assets than to actual 'military power.' Such quantitative assessments do not fully reflect the qualitative gap in cutting-edge technology. For example, North Korea has maintained a top global position for years in terms of the number of submarines, with around 70 to 80 vessels, but most of these are outdated models designed in the 1950s. 

Conversely, one of South Korea's latest Dosan Ahn Changho-class submarines possesses a qualitative superiority that overwhelms dozens of North Korean submarines in terms of diving capability, quietness, and SLBM strike power. While numerically it may appear as a 1 to 80 disadvantage, actual combat superiority is a problem on an entirely different level. 

Furthermore, the tactical advantage in a clash between 1,000 older generation tanks and 100 state-of-the-art tanks cannot be calculated through simple summation. Moreover, modern warfare has transformed into a 'technology-intensive total war' where asymmetric capabilities like drones, cyber warfare, and electronic warfare determine victory or defeat. Evaluating modern power with past criteria is akin to trying to gauge the performance of a 'smartphone' based on 'walkie-talkie' standards.

The example of Russia, which possessed 10,000 tanks at the beginning of the Ukraine war in 2022 but lost over 3,500, vividly illustrates how powerless older generation forces are against modern asymmetric weapons. 

2. The Most Critical Blind Spot in Modern Military Assessment is the Exclusion of Nuclear Power 

Nuclear weapons are not simply weapon systems; they are decisive end-state weapons with infinite weight that completely change the landscape of war. South Korea's evaluation as the world's 5th largest military power is merely a report card limited to conventional firepower. When nuclear capabilities are considered, it could fall out of the top 10. Even if a non-nuclear state ranks high in conventional forces, it is difficult for them to exert decisive deterrence in an all-out war with a nuclear-armed state. 

Conversely, North Korea, ranked 31st globally, attracts international attention through its persistent ballistic missile provocations because it is believed to possess the absolute constant of nuclear weapons. If one finds comfort in the mere figure of 5th place, excluding the external variable of the ROK-U.S. alliance's extended deterrence, it is an optical illusion of security that obscures the North Korean nuclear threat. Advocating for the transfer of wartime operational control and self-defense without independent deterrence against North Korea's nuclear weapons is a sign of security ignorance and incompetence. 

3. What if We Consider the Domains of Morale and Spirit, Which Are Difficult to Quantify?

The most challenging aspects for military experts when discussing military power are indomitable spirit and combat will, and morale. These are intangible assets that cannot be calculated by big data or artificial intelligence algorithms. During the Vietnam War, the South Vietnamese army, despite possessing the world's 4th largest air force, collapsed due to corruption, division, and a sense of defeat among its leadership. Similarly, the Afghan government forces, despite receiving astronomical support, disintegrated before the Taliban's offensive because they could not find a reason to fight. 

On the other hand, Ukraine, which was expected to be defeated immediately at the start of the war, was able to withstand Russia's relentless offensives due to the strong will to resist stemming from the desperation of its citizens and soldiers. Taiwan's effort to survive by adopting an asymmetric hedgehog strategy in the face of the colossal threat from China is another variable that cannot be factored into military power assessments. 

If an army is a sword made to cut the enemy, then spirit and morale are the cutting edge that aims at and cuts the enemy at critical moments. If the military's depleted spirit and morale due to political interference are reflected in the military power index, could it even rank within the top 50? 

4. Actual Calculation of Modern Warfare Power

[Actual Power = (Conventional Power + Asymmetric Power) X Nuclear Deterrence X Will to Wage War]

△Conventional Power: Tanks, airplanes, warships, number of soldiers. 60 visible physical elements. 

△Asymmetric Power: Drones, cyber, missiles, etc. 'Surprise finishing moves' that the enemy cannot counter. 

△Nuclear Deterrence: The terrifying power of "If you attack, you die too, and I die too."

△Will to Wage War: The mindset of "We will fight to the end to defend our country!"

△The 'Zero' Rule: In mathematics, any large number multiplied by 'zero' becomes 'zero.' 

Nuclear weapons are absolute constants that overturn the playing field, and the will to wage war and morale are decisive factors, yet they are excluded from military power indicators. No matter how good the weapons, if the spirit is 'zero,' the overall power becomes 'zero.' The defeats of South Vietnam and Afghanistan proved this. 

We must face the true nature of military power as an organism essential for national survival and immediately escape the numerical illusion of '5th in the world' and the security myopia that obscures qualitative gaps and asymmetric threats. The swift completion of the practical three-axis system to counter the North Korean nuclear threat is urgently needed. 

The military must focus on establishing a practical security posture through thorough preparedness, recovery of spirit, and boosting morale, without being swayed by political interference that hinders the performance of its inherent mission. Unless the security leadership can advise on the strategic decision of indigenous nuclear armament, they should refrain from advocating for the transfer of wartime operational control and self-defense. 

◆ Park Pil-gyu, Committee Member

Editorial Committee Member, The Hankook Ilbo

40th Class, Korea Military Academy