Return to *North Korean Studies*
Chosun Ilbo reported that the Rodong Shinmun, a state-run DPRK daily newspaper, said Monday that DPRK's fighter planes that buzzed a US spy plane last week were carrying out their right to self-defense. It also said ROK's criticism of the interception was outrageous, and likened it to complaining that your brother had kicked a thief out the door. The daily said that the incident would not have occurred if US had not "recklessly asserted its military power by sending the spy planes on patrol." It said that the "thoughtless actions" of ROK would only push inter-Korean relations back to a more contentious state. (Kim Min-cheol, "NORTH WARNS AGAINST SOUTH'S CRITICISM," Seoul, 03/11/03)
Joongang Ilbo reported that DPRK and US continued to say over the weekend that they want to talk, but remain poles apart on how. Appearing on US television over the weekend, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said, "I think eventually we will be talking to North Korea." But he called demands by DPRK for bilateral talks "a bad practice" that US would not agree to. He said other nations in the region are affected by DPRK's nuclear program and deserve a seat at the table.
DPRK repeated its demand for bilateral talks Monday, something it said was a demand of the international community and the US Congress. "If the United States truly wants to resolve the nuclear problem on the Korean Peninsula," DPRK's Central News Agency said, "it should withdraw its demand for multilateral dialogue and come to direct talks." ROK officials have reportedly been warming to the idea that the talks should be multilateral, although one official said the exact nature of the framework is still under discussion. The official said several ideas are being tested with DPRK through diplomatic channels. (Kim Young-sae, "US, NORTH WON'T BUDGE ON DIALOGUE," Seoul, 03/11/03)
Joongang Ilbo reported that DPRK said Monday that the Grand National Party had sent a secret envoy to DPRK before last year's presidential election. DPRK said the unnamed party representative had promised generous support if it took control of the Blue House. On its Japanese Web site DPRK's state-run Korean Central News Agency printed a lengthy statement by DPRK's Asia Pacific Peace Committee with that charge, although the bulk of the statement concerned the controversial transfer of $500 million from the Hyundai Group to DPRK.
The statement, dated Sunday but released Monday, said ROK conservatives had "absurdly" linked the deal with the June 2000 inter-Korean summit. "Hyundai's cooperation, representing the peculiarities of North-South relations, deserves the nation's appreciation and the issue of remittance to the North should never be subject to legal action," the statement said. A Grand National Party aide seemed unfamiliar with the North's comments about an envoy yesterday evening, but the GNP spokesman, Park Jong-hee, told the JoongAng Daily later that the party flatly denied the allegations. Mr. Park called them "groundless and malicious allegations."
DPRK statement challenged the GNP's right to criticize the cash transaction while making accusations about GNP offers of largesse. It said, "Frankly speaking, since long before the emergence of the Kim Dae-jung administration [in 1998], the GNP had suggested high-level contacts to the North through various channels. It even said that if the North accepted its request, it would offer us not only tens of billions of dollars but everything we wanted without any limit to items and the size of the aid." "With the presidential election at hand last year," the statement continued, "the GNP sent a secret envoy to DPRK. He said the GNP would offer DPRK more positive and bigger aid than what the [Kim Dae-jung] government had given if Lee Hoi-chang were elected." The committee said the envoy had informed DPRK of a shift in its DPRK policy from "absolute reciprocity to flexible reciprocity." (Ser Myo-ja, "NORTH SAYS PARTY ENVOY OFFERED AID," Seoul, 03/11/03)
Kyodo reported that DPRK fired a ground-to-ship missile Monday in the Sea of Japan but it was not a ballistic missile and is unlikely to pose an immediate threat to regional security, the Japanese Defense Agency said. The missile was fired at around noon from a launch site somewhere around Sinsang, South Hangyong, on DPRK's northeastern coast, the agency said. In Seoul, the ROK Defense Ministry said the missile believed to be the upgraded Silkworm fell into the sea some 110 kilometers from the launch site. It was of the same type that DPRK fired on Feb. 24 in the same area.
"It's not an emergency," Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told a House of Councillors Budget Committee session shortly after the agency announced the missile launch. Defense Agency chief Shigeru Ishiba played down the incident, telling the same committee session that the government does not consider it to be a threat to Japan's national security and peace because it was apparently not directly aimed at Japan. The agency said it has yet to identify the missile but confirmed it was not a ballistic missile. The premier said the government will deal with the series of missile test by closely working with the US and ROK. Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe, a government spokesman, told reporters the missile was fired as part of DPRK's regular military exercises.
But the Rodong Sinmun, the newspaper of DPRK's ruling Workers Party, said Monday the latest missile firing meant something more than a simple military drill, according to the (North) Korean Central News Agency. The news agency quoted the daily as saying that DPRK fired the missile as the US is flying a number of reconnaissance airplanes over the country's military boundaries and the waters near the Korean Peninsula in preparation for a preemptive nuclear attack on DPRK. Ishiba said DPRK had issued a warning to shipping last week to stay out of the area, a warning which is customarily given before a missile launch. ("N.KOREA FIRES NONBALLISTIC MISSILE IN SEA OF JAPAN," Tokyo, 03/10/03)
The New York Times reported that the DPRK today fired its second short-range missile in two weeks into the sea, maintaining tensions in the dispute over its nuclear weapons program. The ROK and Japan were relieved that the test-firing, apparently of the same type of surface-to-ship missile fired February 24, was not more serious. Countries in the region fear the DPRK is planning to launch a ballistic missile or begin reprocessing uranium for nuclear weapons in its effort to force the US into talks. "This is a continuation of their demonstration against the US," said Ahn Yin Hay of Korea University. "Because of the Iraqi situation, they feel they are running out of time and methods" to get Washington to negotiate.
The ROK's Defense Ministry said the missile was fired about noon today from the DPRK into the Sea of Japan. Officials said the missile traveled 66 miles from the coast, farther than the previous launch, which analysts here say they believe was a failed test. "We don't think this will have any significant impact on our national safety," Japan's defense chief, Shigeru Ishiba, told a parliament committee in Tokyo. "But we are monitoring it closely." Today's test was expected and the DPRK warned ships to stay out of the test range. North Korea has taken a number of steps since October in response to US demands that it dismantle its program to produce nuclear weapons-grade fuel. The DPRK has insisted on negotiations, which the Bush administration has refused. (Don Kirk, "NORTH KOREA FIRES ANTISHIP MISSILE IN TEST LAUNCH," Seoul, 03/10/03), the Agence France-Presse ("NORTH KOREA TEST-FIRES MISSILE, RAMPS UP PRESSURE IN NUCLEAR CRISIS," 03/10/03) and the Washington Post (Doug Struck, "NORTH KOREA TEST-FIRES MISSILE INTO SEA OF JAPAN," Seoul, 03/10/03)
The Agence France-Presse reported that the DPRK sought to justify its interception of the US spy plane by four fighter jets in international airspace as a defensive act. "We can not stand by and watch the aggressive attempts by the US army," said a commentary in the government mouthpiece Rodong Sinmun newspaper, the PRC's Xinhua news agency reported Monday from Pyongyang. "If the US aggressors had not reinforced the military build-up against us and committed such aggressive acts as that of the reconnaissance aircraft, the interception would not have happened."
The DPRK's actions came on the day it raised the stakes in the nuclear standoff with the US still further by lobbing an anti-ship missile into the Sea of Japan, according to Japan's Defence Agency. The firing followed the testing of a similar anti-ship missile on February 24, as the DPRK presses for direct dialogue with the US to resolve the five-month-old stalemate, ignoring calls for restraint by Beijing. The Rodong Sinmun charged that the US was paying lip service to negotiations and diplomacy on the one hand while "strengthening the aggressive forces around the Korean peninsula and staging military exercises against the DPRK," Xinhua reported. ("NORTH KOREA SAYS INTERCEPTION OF US PLANE SELF-DEFENCE: XINHUA," 03/10/03)
People's Korea March 2003, Pyongyang Report, Vol 5 No.1
Anybody in the DPRK can receive cellular phone service. ..//.. Recently, the modernization of communications services is spreading rapidly in the DPRK. A cellular phone call are expensive, subscribers now number about 3000. "From now on, we are going to upgrade equipment and to expand our equipment supply call are expensive, subscribers now number about 3000. "From now on, we are going to upgrade equipment and to expand our equipment supply capacity so as to meet the growing demand. Then, it will be possible to lower the rate. We are going to farther spread communications networks and a plan is afoot to extend the cellular phone service to all the provincial seats of government and main highways," Hwang Chol Pung, president of the Korea Communications Company said. The company has various service plans for cellular phones including those for a prepaid system, homepage and E-mail services connected to computer websites.
As fixed telephones has been automatized, the DPRK is going to focus investments and technical development on mobile phones. The cellular phone in the DPRK follows the "GSM (Global System for Mobile Communication) system" which is a mainstream in Europe. There is a plan to introduce the "CDMA (Code Division Multiple Access) system" which is used in South Korea. This is in view of future reunification of Korea.
In the DPRK, a nationwide communications network by optical fiber cable was completed on October 10, 2000, in time for the 55th anniversary of the founding of the Workers' Party of Korea. The backbone is of a 2.5GB capacity between the center and each province. Based on this, the construction of computer networks is being carried forward step by step.
Databases such as of the Central Information Company of Science and Technology, the invention offices of scientific academies and the People's Study Grand Palace began providing their information services using computer networks several years ago…//... At present, the sign-up fee is free in Pyongyang to promote the spread of computer networks…//.. Now, the computer network is domestic, that is, the Intranet, not the Internet. "However, at present, there is a plan for a international E-mail exchange service," Hwan said. The company plans to register the DPRK domain with NIC (Network Information Center) as ".kp". It is preparing to provide the service within this year.
The Associated Press reported that the rocket the DPRK fired off the Korean Peninsula's east coast last week was a new anti-ship cruise missile, but it appeared to have exploded in midair because of defects, the ROK's defense minister said Friday. Cho Young-kil told a parliamentary hearing that DPRK test-fired the missile with an estimated range of up to 160 kilometers (100 miles) on Feb. 24, but that it failed to hit its target. "North Korea usually tests its missiles between March and November. We understand that the North tested its missile early this year because of the current situation," Cho told the National Assembly's Committee of National Defense. Earlier Friday, Seoul's Defense Ministry urged the DPRK's military to "act in a more prudent and responsible manner." (Sang-Hun Choe, "SOUTH KOREA'S DEFENSE CHIEF: NORTH KOREAN MISSILE LAUNCH WAS A FAILURE," Seoul, 03/07/03)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK's interception of a US reconnaissance plane was an attempt to grab the attention of the world's only superpower, analysts believe. But it may also have been a means of stirring tension and patriotic fervor at home. The second theory underscores the possibility that dictator Kim Jong Il is playing as much to a home audience in the standoff over his nation's suspected efforts to develop nuclear weapons. In this scenario, Kim is more apt to take a hawkish approach to boost the prestige of the military - the pillar of his rule - as well as distract attention from the DPRK's economic debacle by raising fears of war with the US.
"By keeping the level of hostility high, he can focus the attention of his officer corps on this outside threat rather than the fact that he's destroying the country," said Ivan Oelrich, an analyst at the Federation of American Scientists, a research center in Washington D.C. US and ROK officials believe North Korea has embarked on a campaign of risky military stunts in order to pressure Washington to give it economic aid and formal security assurances. "It's part of North Korea's brinksmanship tactics to bring the US to direct dialogue, but we also interpret that as an attempt to heighten anti-American sentiments and build up the atmosphere of tension among the domestic population," ROK Defense Minister Cho Young-kil told a parliamentary hearing Friday. (Christopher Torchia, "THOUGH A DICTATOR, NORTH KOREA'S KIM JONG IL HAS TO PLEASE HIS POWER BASE IN NUCLEAR STANDOFF," Seoul, 03/07/03)
CNN News reported that in a move likely to add to rising tensions on the Korean Peninsula, the DPRK may be readying to test fire a medium-range ballistic missile, Japan's Kyodo news agency reports. Quoting an unnamed senior US official, Kyodo reported that the US was monitoring DPRK missile activity closely. "At this point, what we're concerned about is the Rodong," the official, in Washington was quoted as saying. The Rodong missile, with a range of about 1,300 km (800 miles) is capable of striking Japan. Defense analysts believe around 100 of the missiles have been deployed in DPRK. "There is various activity," the official said.
"There is nothing concrete to show that they are doing that, but we do have worries both logically and in terms of some movements we are seeing that might make sense." There have been a number of military related maneuvers in the past fortnight that have added to tensions on the Korean Peninsula. The DPRK says it has the right to possess missiles and that the US and Japan were using an alleged threat posed by its missiles as pretense to launch an attack. "The development and deployment of missiles is a sovereign right and is aimed at strengthening self-defense capabilities," the KCNA, a mouthpiece for the North Korean regime, said Monday. KCNA said Washington and Tokyo "are trying to make an excuse for staging a pre-emptive attack." ("NORTH KOREA 'PREPARING MISSILE TEST,'" Tokyo, 03/06/03)
The Korean Central News Agency of DPRK reported that the Rodong Sinmun today in a signed commentary accuses the US of describing the DPRK's proposal for concluding a non-aggression treaty as "brinkmanship tactics" to get a sort of "reward" from it.
It goes on: The DPRK's proposal for concluding a non-aggression treaty with the US is aimed to provide a legal binding force to keep the US from posing a nuclear threat to the DPRK and it has nothing in common with "brinkmanship tactics." The DPRK is bored with hypocritical US promises devoid of any legal binding force. In the 1990s the then US President sent a message of assurances to the DPRK. But later, the US threw it away like a pair of old shoes. Moreover, the Bush administration says that it has no intention to invade the DPRK but its words do not match with its deeds. It turned down the DPRK's proposal for holding dialogues, while paying lip-service to the "peaceful settlement of the nuclear issue," and it said that it is not in a position to legally assure the DPRK of non-aggression despite its assertion that it would not invade the DPRK by force of arms.
No matter how many security assurances that lack any legal binding force the Bush administration may give to the DPRK, it is not interested in them at all. That's why the DPRK calls for concluding a non-aggression treaty with a legal binding force to be approved by US Congress. What we need is a legal guarantee to be provided by a treaty as valid as international law. The US should not flee from its heavy responsibility for spawning the nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula but promptly opt for direct talks with the DPRK to conclude a non-aggression treaty with the DPRK, the most aboveboard and reasonable proposal to provide the best solution to the pending issues between the two countries. ("US URGED TO ACCEPT DPRK'S PROPOSAL FOR CONCLUDING NON-AGGRESSION TREATY," Pyongyang, 03/06/03)
by Bradley O. Babson, March 6, 2003
This report is by Bradley O. Babson, Senior Consultant on East Asia to the World Bank. Babson argues that economic conditions in DPRK and the nature of DPRK's relations with other countries have changed so fundamentally that ambiguity on economic issues is not a viable option for future U.S. policy. Also, economic relations in Northeast Asia are undergoing fundamental changes and the U.S. needs to position its future policy in the context of the wider regional perspectives. The focus of debate needs to shift to defining strategic goals for U.S. policy on economic engagement with DPRK and Northeast Asia, and to defining and building consensus on modalities for advancing these strategic goals...
The Agence France-Presse reported that the DPRK made a fresh call for a non-aggression pact with the US as the ROK rejected fears the US might launch a military strike on the DPRK's nuclear facilities. The pro-peace statements from both Koreas came amid mounting fears that the crisis over the DPRK's nuclear programs might spin out of control following the interception of a US spy plane by DPRK jet fighters on Sunday. The Pentagon on Tuesday said it was deploying 24 long-range bombers in the Pacific to deter the DPRK's threats, further raising the temperature.
"What we need is a legal guarantee to be provided by a treaty as valid as international law," said Rodong Sinmun, the official daily of the North's ruling Korean Workers Party. "The US should not flee from its heavy responsibility for spawning the nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula but promptly opt for direct talks with the DPRK (North Korea) to conclude a non-aggression treaty with the DPRK." The US has refused to initiate direct talks with the DPRK and recently said it will only address how the DPRK can stand down its twin nuclear weapons and power programs in a multilateral forum. ("PYONGYANG DEMANDS PEACE TREATY, SEOUL REJECTS MILITARY STRIKE AT NUKE SITE," 3/05/03)
CNN News reported that a top ROK presidential aide held secret talks with the DPRK in Beijing last month, offering large-scale aid and urging it to drop its nuclear ambitions, a Seoul daily newspaper has reported. The JoongAng Ilbo said that President Roh Moo-hyun's national security adviser, Ra Jong-yil, met a senior DPRK official in Beijing on February 20, five days before Roh took office amid a deepening nuclear impasse with the DPRK. Ra urged Kim Jong Il to visit the ROK as soon as possible to secure support for the ROK's policy of extending aid to the DPRK the daily said, quoting government sources.
The Roh adviser, who was previously Seoul's ambassador to Britain, said US support for ROK aid for the DPRK could be obtained if Kim renounced nuclear arms and visited Seoul before Roh's expected trip to Washington in May, the daily said. Asked about the report, an official at Ra's office in the presidential Blue House said: "The China visit is true, but parts in the JoongAng Ilbo article regarding North Korea's nuclear issue and a summit are different from the facts." The official said Ra had declined to comment further on the trip. The newspaper report said that Ra met Jon Kum chol, the vice chairman of the DPRK Asia-Pacific Peace Committee, but there was no word on how Jon responded to the ROK proposal. ("SECRET TALKS WITH NORTH: REPORT," Seoul, 3/05/03)
The Korean Central News Agency of DPRK carried a story that reported that the danger of armed conflict is growing owing to the "Foal Eagle" exercise which will continue for nearly one month, involving over 200,000-strong forces including the US troops stationed in the ROK, US reinforcements from overseas, and the ROK army as well as latest military equipment.
Minju Joson today says this in a signed commentary. The "Foal Eagle" exercise, which begins today, is a war rehearsal to invade the north to all intents and purposes. The US imperialists' launching of the exercise is an open challenge to the Korean nation and the world peace-loving people the commentary says, and goes on: No one can vouch that the US imperialists will not make a pre-emptive attack on the DPRK while launching the exercise involving huge forces enough to go to war. It is as clear as noonday that in case the "Foal Eagle" exercise leads to a war against the DPRK a nuclear war breaks out and all the Korean people in the north and the south can not escape nuclear holocaust.
At this critical juncture the entire Korean nation in the north and the south and abroad should turn out in the anti-US, anti-war and anti-nuclear struggle to save the destiny of the country and the nation from the crisis. The ROK warlike forces should stop at once their treacherous moves to have recourse to the outside forces to make a showdown with the fellow countrymen, mindful that joining in the US moves to provoke a war against the north is an unpardonable crime of inflicting nuclear disaster upon the nation. It is a miscalculation for the US imperialists to try to invade the north with the exercise as a momentum. The US imperialists and the ROK warhawks should stop the "Foal Eagle" exercise at once, mindful of the consequences to be entailed by their moves to provoke a war against the north. ("MINJU JOSON ON "FOAL EAGLE" EXERCISE," Pyongyang, 3/05/03)
The United States on March 4 announced the deployment of 24 long- range bombers to Guam to deter North Korean aggression, but officials added that the decision was made prior to the March 2 interception by four North Korean fighters of a U.S. surveillance aircraft. Washington is deploying 12 B-1 bombers and 12 B-52 bombers to Andersen Air Force Base in Guam. U.S. Pacific commanders requested the aircraft and additional troops in January in order to be prepared for any North Korean contingencies.
Washington is simultaneously stressing the deployment and downplaying its significance as it tries to harmonize sending a message to North Korea while alleviating the concerns of regional allies. And as it prepares for war in Iraq, the United States continues to contend that it will solve the North Korean issue diplomatically. Given the domestic and foreign pressures and the complexity of the military situation, Washington might be nearing a political arrangement aimed at ending the North Korean nuclear standoff.
The deployment of the bombers to Guam is not unexpected, nor is it directed solely at North Korea. Washington was discussing the movement of the two dozen planes back in January as part of a larger buildup around the Koreas. And aircraft based in Guam can be used for missions in Afghanistan and Iraq or rotated into the Middle East theatre while Guam is used for maintenance of other U.S. aircraft.
While Washington wants to make it clear to Pyongyang that the United States still is capable of handling two simultaneous conflicts, it also is facing concerns from South Korea that U.S. actions are doing little to resolve the growing security crisis on the peninsula. South Korea's new president, Roh Moo Hyun, intends not only to continue his predecessor's policy of engagement with North Korea but also to enhance it, and this requires Washington's cooperation. And with the United States entering discussions on troop reductions in South Korea,
Washington wants to ensure that relations with its Northeast Asian ally are on solid footing.
Yet Washington is hearing not only from South Korea, but from other allies and domestic interests as well that North Korea should be dealt with peaceably -- and the sooner the better. According to U.S. media reports, the CIA recently retracted a report that suggested North Korean leader Kim Jong Il faced domestic threats to his power. The initial report, based on information from North Korean defectors, might have shaped Washington's read that if the United States held out long enough, the North Korean regime would collapse, thus removing the nuclear threat from the region.
And Australia, a key ally for in the U.S.-led war against terrorism and one of the few nations to provide tangible support to the planned attack on Iraq has said the United States will eventually have to deal with North Korea bilaterally. For Canberra, backing the anti-terrorism war is a matter of national security, assisting with Iraq is a calculated risk to demonstrate Australia's strategic importance to the United States, but a war in Northeast Asia would destabilize all of East Asia, leaving Australia on the front lines of a potential war with China.
China also is pressing Washington to negotiate with North Korea, and has several times offered to facilitate such dialogue. Beijing has a better understanding of North Korean thinking, and realizes that Pyongyang truly believes the United States will attack North Korea, and therefore a bilateral non-aggression pact is one of the few things that can truly reassure Pyongyang.
Washington already is showing some signs of relaxing its previously inflexible stance on dealing with North Korea. During his February visit to Seoul, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said the United States would continue to supply aid in the form of food to North Korea. North Korean leaders, too, have shown some willingness to discuss security issues in a broader multilateral framework, telling a European delegation they would consider attending seven-party talks consisting of North Korea, the United States, South Korea, Japan, Russia, China and the European Union. But Pyongyang holds out the need for a binding assurance from the United States that North
Korea is not a U.S. military target.
Even as Washington deploys new bombers to Asia and U.S. President George W. Bush cautions that the failure of diplomacy could lead to a military solution, the United States is seeking a compromise on North Korea. Washington cannot be seen as acceding to North Korea's demands, as that would send a signal to other nations that the possession of nuclear weapons provides a ready bargaining tool with which to manipulate the United States. At the same time, Washington is serious about seeking a diplomatic solution, as a war would not likely be contained on the Korean peninsula. But with military action approaching in Iraq and pressures building at home and abroad, the
U.S. administration might be nearing a decision point, where some form of negotiations with North Korea are likely to come sooner rather than later.
by Yoichi Funabashi, Asahi.com, 4 March 2003
Amid the North Korean nuclear crisis, Kim Dae Jung stepped down and gave way to Roh Moo Hyun to head the South Korean administration. Former President Kim advocated an engagement policy aimed at building a new relationship with North Korea that has the magnanimity of the sun rather than the cold north wind. However, after it peaked with the June 2000 North-South summit, the sunshine policy went downhill. North Korean leader Kim Jong Il not only failed to pay a return call to Seoul but he also had been secretly pursuing a nuclear development project. After Pyongyang's nuclear program came out in the open, the Kim Dae Jung administration went into a severe shock and
never did recover. Generally speaking, domestic public opinion toward the former president is very critical. The public seems to regard him as ``a fallen idol.''
President Roh Moo Hyun has expressed his intention to carry on the North Korean engagement policy advocated by his predecessor.
However, it is unlikely that the new administration will simply follow the sunshine policy.
[...] Its purpose will be ``reconciliation'' based on the assumption that the North Korean regime will be maintained, rather than ``unification,'' which assumes its collapse. Security relations with North Korea will be regarded as a political issue rather than a military one. Adjustment of relations will be viewed as domestic rather than foreign affairs.
China Daily reported that the DPRK on March 2 accused US intelligence of staging a secret drill for a surprise attack on its nuclear facility and warned that an attack would trigger "horrifying nuclear disasters." Rodong Sinmun, the DPRK's ruling Workers Party newspaper, argued the US was pushing ahead with "actual military actions that came in accordance with the second Korean war scenario of aggression." The report said that tensions along the world's last remaining Cold War frontier escalated last week after US's announcement that the DPRK had restarted a five-megawatt reactor capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium.
Rodong Sinmun said its armed forces were ready to "mercilessly wipe out" a war of aggression. US Joint Chief of Staff Chairman Richard Myers reportedly said the US maintains and updates all military options - including preemptive nuclear attacks - against the DPRK. Yonhap news agency, however, said the same day that the ROK government dismissed talk of a US plan to attack the North as "not true." In a speech on March 1, new ROK President Roh Moo-Hyun warned of "horrible consequences" unless the nuclear stand-off was resolved peacefully, said the report. ("DPRK WARNS OF 'HORRIFYING' NUCLEAR DISASTERS," Seoul, 03/03/03, P12)
The New York Times reported that DPRK leader Kim Jong Il, has warned that nuclear war could break out if the US attacks his country's nuclear program. The remarks were his first public pronouncement since the DPRK restarted a nuclear reactor last Wednesday. The statements by Kim, which were read by an announcer for DPRK radio and monitored by the BBC, were consistent with statements in DPRK newspapers over the weekend, as the DPRK has increased its criticisms of US policies in response to growing worries in Washington that North Korea may soon begin production of nuclear weapons.
"Should a war break out on the Korean Peninsula due to the US imperialists, it will escalate into a nuclear war," Kim said, according to the announcer. "Then, not only the Korean people in the North and South but the people in Asia and many countries around the world will suffer from a frightful nuclear catastrophe." However, Kim also repeated previous DPRK denials that the country's nuclear program had a military purpose. "Our nuclear activities are thoroughly for peaceful purposes and do not pose threats to anybody," he said. (Keith Bradsher, "NORTH KOREA SAYS A US ATTACK COULD LEAD TO A NUCLEAR WAR," Seoul, 3/03/03)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK has accused the US and Japan of using an alleged threat posed by DPRK missiles as pretense to launch an attack. In a statement made on the DPRK's KCNA, the DPRK also said it had the right to develop and deploy ballistic missiles as a form of self-defense. "The development and deployment of missiles is a sovereign right and is aimed at strengthening self-defense capabilities," the KCNA said. The DPRK last week launched an anti-ship missile into the sea off its east coast. The test firing was the first since North Korea's self imposed moratorium on missile launches began in 1998. KCNA said the US and Japan "are trying to make an excuse for staging a pre-emptive attack." Monday's accusation followed the DPRK's starkest warning since its nuclear standoff with the US began in October. (Soo-Jeong Lee, "NORTH KOREA SAYS MISSILE DEVELOPMENT IS A SOVEREIGN RIGHT," Seoul, 3/03/03) and CNN News ("NORTH KOREA: MISSILES A 'RIGHT,'" Seoul, 3/03/03)
Chosun Ilbo reported that Hyundai Asan, the operator of the Mount Geumgang tours to DPRK, said Sunday that overland trips to the resort may be canceled for an unspecified amount of time because DPRK is carrying out railroad work near the road that the buses use. A representative of the company said that this month's schedule of excursions to the resort had not been confirmed. The land route to the resort opened last month, and Hyundai Asan began running buses over it on February 21. Subsequent tours ran on February 23, 25 and 27. The railroad construction that makes the roads evidently unusable came as a surprise, observers said. About 30,000 people have made reservations to take the land route to the resort, and the trips are booked through May, the company said. (Kim Hee-sup, "ROADBLOCKS FOR KUMGANG LAND ROUTE," Seoul, 03/03/03)
by Alexandre Y. Mansourov, March 3, 2003
Alexandre Y. Mansourov argues that Kim Jong Il is engaged in a two-level game whereby his domestic political and economic considerations are as important to him, if not more, as the signals, which he sends to and receives from the international community. The author believes that at the current stage of confrontation, Kim Jong Il is not interested in any sort of negotiations with the United States. Kim wants the Bomb, and North Korea will do its utmost to become a nuclear state, whether it will officially declare it outright or not.
On its part, Washington refuses to negotiate with Pyongyang because it pursues a Reaganesque strategy, reminiscent of the old Cold War days, of mounting international isolation and an escalating arms race that will hopefully lead to an implosion of the bankrupt North Korean state. The author argues that the real danger from such an uncontrolled escalation of tensions is an accidental outbreak of hostilities contrary to the real intentions of all the parties concerned. Mansourov outlines the initial steps to be required to jump start constructive negotiations between Pyongyang and Washington at the time of total mutual distrust, zero credibility, and personal enmity among leaders.
Summary Report of the Task Force on U.S. Korea Policy by Selig S. Harrison, March 3, 2003
A blue-ribbon Task Force on U.S. Korea Policy has presented detailed recommendations for resolving the nuclear crisis with North Korea, starting with immediate bilateral U.S.-North Korea negotiations. The Task Force convened on three occasions between November 2002 and January 2003. It was co-sponsored by the Center for International Policy and the Center for East Asian Studies of the University of Chicago. Funding was provided by the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation and the Center for East Asian Studies.
The New York Times carried an analytical story that reported that some of the most secret and scariest work under way in the Pentagon these days is the planning for a possible military strike against nuclear sites in the DPRK. Officials say that so far these are no more than contingency plans. They cover a range of military options from surgical cruise missile strikes to sledgehammer bombing, and there is even talk of using tactical nuclear weapons to neutralize hardened artillery positions aimed at Seoul. There's nothing wrong with planning, or with brandishing a stick to get Kim Jong Il's attention.
But several factions in the administration are serious about a military strike if diplomacy fails, and since the White House is unwilling to try diplomacy in any meaningful way, it probably will fail. The upshot is a growing possibility that President Bush could reluctantly order such a strike this summer, risking another Korean war. The sources of information for this column will be as mystifying as the underlying US policy itself, for few will discuss these issues on the record. But it seems those interested in the military option - consisting primarily of raptors clustered around Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld and in the National Security Council - have until recently been slapped down by President Bush himself.
Recently Bush seems to have become more hawkish. He is said to have been furious when Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage (one of the few senior Bush aides who know anything about Korea) told Congress that the US would have to talk to the DPRK. So the White House has hardened its position further, swatting away its old willingness to engage the DPRK bilaterally within a multilateral setting. Now the administration has dropped the bilateral reference and is willing to talk to the DPRK only in a multilateral framework that doesn't exist. The old approach had a snowball's chance in purgatory; now it's less than that. "We haven't exhausted diplomacy," one senior player noted. "We haven't begun diplomacy. ...We could have a slippery slope to a Korean war. I don't think that's too alarmist at all."
Other experts I respect are less worried. James Lilley, an old Korea hand and former ambassador to Seoul and Beijing, says my concerns are "much too alarmist." He says the State Department controls Korea policy and realizes that "the military option is almost nonexistent." Maybe. But meanwhile, North Korea is cranking out provocations and plutonium. This week it started up a small reactor in Yongbyon. More worrying, America's spooks detected on-and-off activity at a steam plant at Yongbyon, which may mean that the North is preparing to start up a neighboring reprocessing plant capable of turning out enough plutonium for five nuclear weapons by summer. Look for reprocessing to begin soon, perhaps the day bombs first fall on Iraq. Dick Cheney and his camp worry, not unreasonably, that the greatest risk of all would be to allow the DPRK to churn out nuclear warheads like hotcakes off a griddle.
In a few years North Korea will be able to produce about 60 nuclear weapons annually, and fissile material is so compact that it could easily be sold and smuggled to Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and Al Qaeda. The hawk faction believes that the US as a last resort could make a surgical strike, even without South Korean consent, and that Kim Jong Il would not commit suicide by retaliating. The hawks may well be right. Then again, they may be wrong. And if they're wrong, it would be quite a mistake. The DPRK has 13,000 artillery pieces and could fire some 400,000 shells in the first hour of an attack, many with sarin and anthrax, on the 21 million people in the "kill box" - as some in the US military describe the Seoul metropolitan area.
The Pentagon has calculated that another Korean war could kill a million people. So if the military option is too scary to contemplate, and if allowing North Korea to proliferate is absolutely unacceptable, what's left? Precisely the option that every country in the region is pressing on us: negotiating with the DPRK. Ironically, the gravity of the situation isn't yet fully understood in either the ROK or Japan, partly because they do not think this administration would be crazy enough to consider a military strike against the DPRK. They're wrong. (Nicholas D. Kristof, "SECRET, SCARY PLANS," 02/28/03)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK accused the US Friday of triggering a nuclear crisis by failing to provide promised energy, disrupting inter-Korean reconciliation and plotting war against the DPRK. At the same time, the DPRK reiterated that the only way to resolve the nuclear standoff on the Korean Peninsula was through direct talks with the US. The US says ties can only improve if the DPRK first abandons its nuclear ambitions. "The situation is getting tenser with each passing day," the North said in a dispatch on its state-run news agency, KCNA. "The US is entirely to blame for this."
A separate DPRK statement on KCNA said a nonaggression treaty should be ratified by the DPRK's Supreme People's Assembly and both houses of the US Congress. "The DPRK's proposal for concluding the treaty is aimed to provide a legal binding force to control and prevent the US from using nukes and posing a threat of military attack to it," read the statement, which was described as an indictment of Washington by the North's "lawyers' committee." "It is not leverage to get a sort of reward nor is it a temporary expedient so-called 'brinkmanship tactics,'" the statement said. US officials have ruled out a formal treaty, though they say some form of written security guarantee is possible. They also say the issue should be handled by the U.N. Security Council. (Christopher Torchia, "NORTH KOREA SAYS US SPARKS NUKE CRISIS," Seoul, 2/28/03) and the Washington Post (Doug Struck, "OBSERVERS SEE RISING RISK OF US-NORTH KOREA CONFLICT," Seoul, 2/28/03)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK daily denounces the US as a nation of wanton warmongers, and warns it is ready for battle. But observers say a brief, largely overlooked announcement from the DPRK this week reflects its desire to improve ties with its No. 1 foe. "The US government on Feb. 25 decided to donate 100,000 tons of food to (North Korea) this year through the World Food Program," read the one-line dispatch Thursday on the state-run KCNA. The terse KCNA dispatch offered no thanks for the food, which was announced by US Secretary of State Colin Powell in Seoul on Tuesday. But the DPRK acknowledgment could be an indirect expression of gratitude despite the furor over its efforts to develop nuclear weapons, aid workers said. "Several years ago, they probably wouldn't have announced that," said Kim Soon-kwon, an ROK agricultural expert who travels frequently to the DPRK. (Christopher Torchia, "AMID BELLICOSE RHETORIC, NORTH KOREA ACKNOWLEDGES US FOOD AID," Seoul, 2/28/03)
People's Daily reported that the US military committed encroachment on the airspace of the DPRK on February 24, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on February 25. Supported by a KC-135 tanker aircraft, a RC-135 reconnaissance plane of the US military, which flew from an overseas base, encroached upon the airspace above the territorial waters, which is an obvious aggression of DPRK's sovereignty and violation of the intentional law, and "we warn of adopting firm self-defense," said the official news agency. ("DPRK ACCUSES US OF ENCROACHING ON AIRSPACE," Beijing, 02/28/03, P3)
China Daily carried an analyzing article saying that due to the huge gap in military strength between the US and the DPRK, the attitude of the stronger side - namely, the US - plays a decisive role in the current nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula. The article said that the trading of criticism and conflicting stances between DPRK and US has pushed the situation near to crisis point and brought the world to the brink of an abyss of uncertainty.
A Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons is crucial to the security and stability of Northeast Asia as well as the world, however, US's rebuff of DPRK's repeated calls for direct talks contributes little to a peaceful solution of the issue, it commented. As the world's only remaining superpower, the US undoubtedly has more leverage in dealing with the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula. DPRK needs a guarantee for its national security and the crux of the issue is whether or not the US will give such a guarantee, it noted. The article at last commented that unless US changes its attitude towards DPRK and resumes direct talks, the situation on the Korean Peninsula will remain tense. (Hu Xuan, "BALL IN US COURT OVER DPRK ISSUE," 02/27/03, P4)
People's Daily reported that the DPRK's official Rodong Sinmun newspaper that DPRK Foreign Ministry spokesman said on February 25 that the upcoming US-ROK's war exercises is a part of the policy to throttle DPRK with force, and DPRK will defend itself with all means. The spokesman noted that the annual drills were designed to create a crisis atmosphere in the Korean Peninsula, therefore, DPRK's military side and people should made preparations to defense themselves with all means. US must be wholly responsible for all possible results derived from its own actions, he added in the report. (Zhao Jiaming, "DPRK ATTACKS US-ROK MILITARY DRILLS," Pyongyang, 02/27/03, P3)
By David Von Hippel and Peter Hayes, February 27, 2003
The depth and urgency of the current international crisis over the DPRK's nuclear program is entwined to a considerable degree in the past, present, and future of the DRPK's energy sector. A report by David Von Hippel and Peter Hayes of the Nautilus Institute entitled "The DPRK Energy Sector: Current Status and Options for the Future" provides discussions of current estimates of energy sector activity in the DPRK, of the potential role of energy-efficiency improvements in DPRK energy sector development, and of future energy "paths" for the DPRK. It also provides background to the deliberations of the International Workshop on "Upgrading and Integration of Energy Systems in the Korean Peninsula: Energy Scenarios for the DPRK," held in Como, Italy, September 19-21, 2002, which was hosted and organized by the Landau Network-Centro Volta in Italy and several partners. Read the full report in PDF format.
By David Von Hippel and Peter Hayes, February 27, 2003
Of the many possible approaches to addressing energy sector needs in Northeast Asia, the development of regional energy infrastructure-international power lines and pipelines-offers enticing potential benefits: shared economic savings, environmental improvements, and, most importantly, regional cooperation and confidence-building. This report by David Von Hippel and Peter Hayes of the Nautilus Institute entitled "Regional Energy Infrastructure Proposals and the DPRK Energy Sector: Opportunities and Constraints" provides an overview of some of the regional infrastructure proposals that have been suggested. Also included is summary information on the DPRK energy sector's status, problems, and options for international cooperation to assist in addressing those problems. This report was prepared for the Korea Economic Institute and the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy's workshop on "Northeast Asian Energy Cooperation," which was held in Washington, DC on January 7, 2003. Read the report in PDF format.
Yu Bin NYT Thursday, February 27, 2003
BEIJING. The Bush administration is impatient with China's perceived inability or unwillingness to pressure North Korea to abandon plans to develop nuclear weapons and long-range missiles. But there are many reasons why the U.S. attempt to "outsource" the Korean crisis to Beijing may not work. Pyongyang has made clear that it intends to talk only to Washington and that others should not interfere. Moreover, the ties between China and North Korea have significantly blurred in the past few decades and Beijing is not in a position to switch off Pyongyang's crisis behavior...
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK accused a US spy plane of intruding into its territory Wednesday and warned it "will take stern self-defense measures." The allegation came just hours after the DPRK urged its armed forces to be ready for war. The Korean Central News Agency said the RC-135 strategic reconnaissance plane was sent to its territory on Wednesday, according to Yonhap news agency. "This is an outrageous violation on our republic's sovereign rights and a clear violation of international laws," the North Korean media said, according to Yonhap. "We warn that we will take stern self-defense measures." On Tuesday, KCNA said the same plane entered its territory on Monday, accusing the US of trying to "find an opportunity to mount a pre-emptive attack on the DPRK." The US military has said it does not respond to such reports from the DPRK. ("REPORT: NORTH KOREA ACCUSES WASHINGTON OF ANOTHER AERIAL INTRUSION," Seoul, 2/26/03)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK has followed up a surprise missile launch with a belligerent warning for its citizens to be ready for war at any time. The fresh rhetoric came a day after the DPRK fired a missile into the sea between Japan and the Korean peninsula, just before the inauguration of the ROK's new president. The DPRK's statement, issued by the country's official news agency, said that forthcoming military exercises in the ROK involving US troops could herald an attack. "The US can launch a pre-emptive attack on us at any time," said the statement, which was also read out on DPRK radio. "This requires our military and people to mobilise all our resources to be fully ready for any contingencies." (Sang-Huh Choe, "NORTH KOREA WARNS OF POSSIBLE US ATTACK," Seoul, 2/26/03) and BBC News ("NORTH KOREAN WRATH AT WAR GAMES," 2/26/03)
The Associated Press carried an analytical story that reported stripping to their skivvies on an icy river bank, the shivering US soldiers peeled off their gas masks with abandon - somberly steeling themselves for a day none hoped would come. "That's possibly the scariest thing that people fear, chemical weapons," US Army Cpt. William Vickery said as his decontamination troops ran through an attack simulation within artillery range of chemically armed DPRK. The DPRK's stockpile of chemical weapons, believed to be as much as 5,000 tons, is overshadowed by mounting worries about nuclear weapons.
But Wednesday's chemical attack drill highlights the reality that soldiers on the divided Korean Peninsula already contend with a more immediate menace from weapons of mass destruction. "I hope they realize that threat is real," Vickery said. "We know it's there." Underlining the peril, the 37,000 US troops in the ROK began receiving next-generation chemical suits last month. Called JSLISTs, for Joint Service Light Weight Integrated Suit Technology, they are lighter than the old suits, and their hoods can be tucked over a person's head faster, in about 9 seconds. They also have a life span of about 24 hours in a chemical environment, much longer than six-hour duration of the old version. In theory, each soldier is supposed to be issued three suits.
Yet for the Eighth US Army alone, only 50,000 new suits have arrived so far - not enough even to drill with. Soldiers were practicing with old suits Wednesday. Information on the DPRK's chemical weapons programs is scarce, but the ROK Defense Ministry estimates Pyongyang increased its stockpiles fivefold over the 1990s to 5,000 tons. The arsenal is believed to include some of the deadliest chemical weapons known - mustard gas, tabun and sarin - all of which can be fired atop the DPRK's ballistic missiles or rained down on Seoul, in artillery shells. (Hans Greimel, "OVERSHADOWED BY NUKES, CHEMICAL WEAPONS ALSO POSE THREAT TO US TROOPS IN SOUTH KOREA," Jeongok, South Korea, 2/26/03)
Joongang Ilbo reported that DPRK has an active Internet propaganda program directed at ROK, the Joint Chiefs of Staff said in a report Tuesday. DPRK is turning to the Internet to escape legal restrictions on such propaganda here, the report said. The report was the first since April 2000 on DPRK's propaganda activities. DPRK operates Web sites that carry full versions of reports and editorials and is aimed at ROK youth, the paper said. The most frequent themes are calls for the withdrawal of the US military from ROK to allow reunification, justifications of its nuclear program and calls to scrap the National Security Law. The joint chiefs also said there has been a sharp increase in the number of loudspeakers north of the Demilitarized Zone that broadcast propaganda messages. ("NORTH TURNS TO INTERNET TO GET ITS MESSAGE OUT," Seoul, 02/26/03)
Joongang Ilbo reported that DPRK Tuesday presented a blueprint of the Gaeseong industrial complex. Lee Jong-hyeok, deputy chair of DPRK's Korea Asia-Pacific Peace Committee, said DPRK will build a new satellite city to support the Gaeseong industrial complex, which was agreed to in a recent inter-Korean agreement that paved the way for easier cross-border commerce. Representatives of The ROK companies involved in the project, such as Hyundai Asan Corp. and Korea Land Corp., would be able to travel to Gaeseong to work on the complex.
The satellite city will house more than 200,000 residents in a 2,000-hectare (5,000-acre) area, Mr. Lee said. He said a power plant will be built near the complex by Hyundai Asan. Water for industrial use at the complex will be drawn from either the Imjin River, which is 20 kilometers (12 miles) south of Gaeseong, or the Yeseong River, which is 20 kilometers north of the city. Mr. Lee said DPRK plans to create an organization to oversee the development of the complex. The organization would be composed of economic development officials from the National Planning Commission and DPRK's parliament. (Jung Chang-hyun, "NORTH LAYS OUT PLANS FOR GAESEONG COMPLEX, NEW CITY," Seoul, 02/26/03)
by GEORGE GEDDA, The Associated Press, Wednesday, February 26, 2003; 6:07 PM
North Korea has reactivated a reactor at its main nuclear complex, the first step toward production of additional nuclear weapons, U.S. officials said Wednesday. North Korea currently has the ability to produce five or six plutonium bombs from 8,000 spent fuel rods in a matter of a few months. The new step, disclosed by two officials familiar with the North's military activities, could enable the Koreans to build additional weapons in about a year. The administration believes that North Korea now has one or two nuclear weapons. The disclosure of the new activity came a day after the installation of a new South Korea president, Roh Moo-hyun.
[...] The administration learned Wednesday morning that the reactor had been reactivated, said the U.S. officials, asking not to be identified. One official recalled that the North had said earlier it was going to restart the reactor. He called the move a step in the wrong direction and said it would take the country into further isolation. When operating, the reactor gives off a plume that can be detected by spy satellites. The reactor can produce about 13 pounds of plutonium per year. North Korea's weapon designs are estimated to require slightly less than that amount of plutonium for each bomb.
[...]
On Wednesday, North Korea warned its citizens to prepare for war, saying the country may be the next U.S. target after Iraq. Powell said anew on Tuesday that the United States has no intention of attacking North Korea. He also said all options are on the table. Earlier in the week, hours before Roh's inauguration, the North tested a short-range missile off its northeast coast. It also threatened recently to abandon the armistice that ended the Korean War 50 years ago.
Peter Brookes, Asian expert at the Heritage Foundation, said Pyongyang "is trying to bring the United States to the negotiating table on terms favorable to North Korea." Leonard Spector, an arms control expert at the Monterey Institute, said, "Politically, it's one more poke at us, one more provocation." He said the step is not as serious as restarting the reprocessing plant, which would enable the North to have to have additional nuclear weapons by summer.
Commentary by Haesook Chae, The Los Angeles Times, February 25, 2003
Why won't China rein in North Korea in the current nuclear crisis? The answer lies in Beijing's secret goal of getting U.S. troops off the peninsula. This LA Times Commentary by Professor Chae is posted in its entirety to the Korean American Forum at the SKAS website.
The prevailing understanding on China is fundamentally flawed. The consensus is that China shares common interests with the U.S. and nations in the region in denuclearizing North Korea. Therefore, it ought to play an active and leading role in resolving the crisis, especially because Beijing seems to have the most leverage over North Korea. Much to the disappointment of the U.S., however, China has excused itself from the "relevant parties." Beijing insists that this is really a matter exclusively between the United States and North Korea. Furthermore, China does not believe that the U.S.- North Korean dialogue ought to include the United Nations; Beijing has
vociferously opposed efforts to bring in the world body to bear on the issue. The question is, why?
The key to understanding China's behavior is realizing that exclusively bilateral talks could produce what China secretly craves: the removal of the U.S. military presence from the Korean peninsula. In a multilateral setting, the emphasis would be on North Korea's violation of the international Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and its threat to the region and the world. Thus, various multinational measures to disarm North Korea would be discussed. U.N. involvement would remove the onus on the U.S. to negotiate on its own.
However, if the situation were framed solely as a dispute between the U.S. and North Korea, the focus would be shifted to what North Korea is demanding in exchange for nuclear disarmament. North Korea, with its far-reaching missile capability, would then be perceived as a direct threat to U.S. security. Combined with South Korea's strong resistance to taking military action against the North, the U.S. could well be cornered into conceding to North Korean demands, namely, a nonaggression treaty and a military withdrawal from South Korea. China would then have achieved its short-term goal of removing U.S. troops from the peninsula.
Ejection of the U.S. military presence is an essential first step toward China's ultimate long-term goals: reunification with Taiwan and reassertion as the dominant regional power. After a U.S. withdrawal, China would be likely to find two friendly Koreas on its southern border. Post-Cold War South Korea is no longer a hostile country but an important trading partner. And if a united Korea emerges, it would probably be amicable toward China. Further, if Japan rearms and goes nuclear in reaction to the new circumstances on the Korean peninsula, the rationale for the U.S. military presence there may be diminished as well.
In this best-case scenario for China, with American forces removed from Korea and Japan, Far East geopolitics would enter a new era. China could reassert its historical status as the dominant regional power and eventually reabsorb Taiwan. This crisis may well drive the U.S. off the Korean peninsula. With this in mind, why should China help the U.S. to maintain its military presence in South Korea by pressuring North Korea to give up nuclear weapons?
That China appears constrained by anxieties over the potential flood of starving refugees that would be created by North Korea's economic collapse only serves as a cover for China to prop up North Korea's bargaining position. China's sales of a key chemical ingredient for nuclear weapons development to North Korea, as recently as December, should be understood within this context. China wants North Korea to maintain its strong leverage in any bilateral talks with the U.S. Only when viewed from this perspective are China's inaction and stubborn insistence on direct talks between Pyongyang and Washington comprehensible; indeed, it is a profound and brilliant
strategy.
The Associated Press reported that US Secretary of State, Colin Powell announced today that the United States government will provide an initial donation of 40,000 metric tons of agricultural commodities and is prepared to contribute as much as 60,000 metric tons more of such aid to North Korea in response to the World Food Program s appeal for its 2003 emergency feeding operation. Our decision to provide 40,000 metric tons of food at this time is based on demonstrated need in North Korea, competing needs elsewhere, and donors ability to access all vulnerable groups and monitor distribution.
Additional U.S. food aid contributions for North Korea in 2003 will be based on these same factors. Funding for the initial donation will come from the U.S. Agency for International Development s PL-480 program and the U.S. Department of Agriculture s Section 416(b) program. This donation will bring total US food aid to the DPRK since 1995 to nearly 2.0 million metric tons, valued at approximately $650 million. The mix of commodities for this donation will be determined soon in consultation with the World Food Program. (George Gedda, "POWELL: US TO GIVE NORTH KOREA MORE FOOD," Seoul, 2/25/03)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK said Tuesday that a US reconnaissance plane intruded into its air space on a spying mission. "This is a premeditated move to find an opportunity to mount a pre-emptive attack on the DPRK," said the DPRK's Korean Central News Agency. The DPRK regularly makes such accusations, saying the US is preparing for an invasion. The US military had no comment on the latest claim, but has said in the past its maneuvers are defensive. The accusation came hours after the ROK said the DPRK had test-fired a missile Monday that landed harmlessly in the sea between the Korean Peninsula and Japan. ("NORTH KOREA ACCUSES US OF AIR INTRUSION," Seoul, 2/25/03) and CNN News ("NORTH KOREA PROTESTS 'SPY' FLIGHTS," Seoul, 2/25/03)
The Associated Press reported that hours after the DPRK test fired a missile into the sea near Japan, the DPRK No. 2 leader Tuesday tried to assure a summit of worried developing world leaders that DPRK is not developing nuclear weapons "at this stage." A DPRK diplomat, who declined to give his name, said he had not heard about the missile launch, but played down its significance. "Big incident? What big incident? Everybody has missiles. Is there a country that doesn't have them?" The ROK believed the missile was a small, conventional one - not a long-range, ballistic rocket that US officials fear could possibly hit the continental US. (Jae-Suk Yoo, "NORTH KOREA SAYS IT HAS NO INTENTIONS TO DEVELOP NUCLEAR WEAPONS; CHINA URGES RESTRAINT," Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2/25/03)
Kyodo reported that the ROK Defense Ministry said Tuesday that DPRK launched a ground-to-ship missile on Monday. The ministry said it is still looking into the details to determine if it was a test-firing of a new weapon or part of regular winter drills by DPRK's army, while it is gathering information on the kind of weapon, its trajectory and the locations of launch and impact. The missile appeared to have been fired from South Hamyong Province, eastern DPRK, and fallen into the Sea of Japan, about 60 kilometers from the launch site, the JoongAng Ilbo said.
According to the Japanese Defense Agency, the missile is believed to be a 2.3-ton Silkworm, with a range of about 100 km, developed by the former Soviet Union and produced in PRC. Speaking to reporters in Seoul, US Secretary of State Colin Powell called the launch "fairly innocuous" and "not surprising" as DPRK had given advance notice to shipping of a possible test in the region some days ago. In Washington, the US State Department on Monday night confirmed DPRK launched a short-range, tactical missile. "We are very aware of the situation," a State Department official told Kyodo News. "These events, as you know, happen periodically," he said. In Tokyo on Tuesday, Taku Yamasaki, secretary general of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, said DPRK launched the missile in a northeastern direction, away from Japan. Sources suggested the North tried to fire a missile earlier Monday, but failed, and then carried out the successful launch later in the day. They said the North may try another launch Wednesday.
Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi said the firing would not be considered a violation of a joint declaration signed by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and DPRK leader Kim Jong Il last year if the missile was a ground-to-ship weapon as reported. In the Malaysian capital Kuala Lumpur, where No. 2 DPRK leader Kim Yong Nam was attending the Non-Aligned Movement summit (NAM), an unnamed DPRK official was nonchalant about the missile launch, telling Kyodo News, "What big incident? Everybody has missiles." But Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda, also at the NAM summit, said the firing will "complicate" efforts to bring DPRK and the US to the negotiating table over the DPRK's nuclear weapons program. ("N KOREA FIRED GROUND TO SHIP MISSILE MON.," Seoul, 02/25/03)
The Associated Press reported that Japan's top diplomat on Monday urged a United Nations envoy to confront the DPRK about its suspected smuggling of methamphetamines and other stimulants, and coax the isolated communist nation to halt its illicit trade. Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi asked Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, to approach Pyongyang with an offer to join international anti-drug treaties, the Foreign Ministry said. "We want (the United Nations) to expand its dialogue with North Korea to find a solution to the country's trade in stimulants in Northeast Asia," Kawaguchi was quoted as telling Costa, who was visiting Tokyo from the agency's headquarters in Vienna. Japan and the DPRK have no diplomatic relations, and Tokyo's efforts to get Pyongyang to stop its suspected drug trade have gone nowhere. The DPRK denies it sponsors such trade. ("JAPAN ASKS UN FOR HELP IN CURBING NORTH KOREA'S SUSPECTED DRUG SMUGGLING," Tokyo, 2/24/03)
Chosun Ilbo reported that Hyundai Asan announced Sunday that an overland trip by 364 paying tourists to DPRK's Mount Kumgang had finally crossed the border after being delayed from Friday, when DPRK began blasting alongside the road to lay the base for railway lines. An official said that Hyundai Asan would begin negotiations concerning the 15 trips planned for March to which 30,000 people have applied. The first Mount Kumgang land tours for civilians were to have started on Friday, but because DPRK notified that passing through the expressway was difficult because of railway construction, the trip was postponed. (Kim Hui-seop, "OVERLAND KUMAGANG TOUR FINALLY LEAVES," Seoul, 02/24/03)
While North Korea has a good claim to describe itself as an injured party, its woeful public relations efforts serve only to help other nations demonise it, writes Jonathan Watts. Friday February 21, 2003
Given North Korea's manifold woes, public relations probably ranks very low on the list of the Pyongyang government's priorities, but if there was ever a country in need of an image consultant it is this one.
Scapegoats rarely come so perfectly packaged. No bullying victim could make life easier for its tormentors. Not even the most wretched, maladjusted child could make itself so unloveable.
North Korea manages to infuriate everyone. It is as if the country has a dose of Tourette syndrome, the hereditary malady often associated with involuntary swearing and obscene gestures. As a sign of how Pyongyang is detested, George Bush's "axis of evil" comment may have grabbed the most headlines, but it is the least surprising: after all, the United States has technically been at war with the North for more than 50 years.
Less expected is the growing frustration of China, which once described itself as being as close to the north as "lips and teeth". Now, though, Beijing looks askance at the antics of its disturbed neighbour. The rising middle classes in China laugh embarrassingly at the backward yokel on their northeastern border. The political elite worry that their old friend's nuclear ambitions have made it a dangerously erratic liability...
The Korean Options. By Gavan McCormack
The recent outpourings of analysis and comment on the "Korean problem" around the world are characterized by righteous indignation and denunciation. They tend to be shaped, consciously or unconsciously, by an "imperial" frame of reference, insisting that Pyongyang submit to the will of the "international community" when what is really meant is the will of Washington. To the extent that one adopts an alternative, Korean, frame of reference, and a Seoul-centered approach, the problem begins to look different. Nobody understands North Korea better, is in the present climate more positive and encouraging about dealing with it, and has more to lose from getting it
wrong, than the government and people of South Korea.
Years of "Sunshine" and multiple layers of contact and negotiation have begun to thaw the long-frozen "Demilitarized" line that divides North and South. The challenge for Seoul now is to build a buffer of protection and a bridge of communication linking Pyongyang to the world, while guaranteeing that international obligations are met and ensuring that Pyongyang's legitimate security concerns are fulfilled; the task ahead for the new Korean government is nothing less than internationalizing "sunshine." In the world empire currently under construction, however, "sunshine" is not only not a priority but it smacks of appeasement, and its exponents are to be
restrained.
China Daily reported that an fighter plane of DPRK's flew passing the sky above the Northern Limit Line (NLL) in the Yellow Sea on February 20, according to the ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). The DPRK's fighter plane MIG-19 flew to the southern side sky over the NLL at 10:03 a.m. (01:03 GMT) and then retreated two minutes later, said JCS. South Korean airforce rightly dispatched 6 F-5E planes to survey the situation, and the ballistic aerial defense troops were ordered prepared for possible attack, said JCS in a release. It was the first time that the DPRK's fighter plane flew passing the sky over the NLL since 1983, it said. The JCS said the DPRK's action may aim at several forthcoming US-ROK joint war games. (Xu Baokang, "DPRK PLANE PASSES SKY OVER NLL: S. KOREA MEDIA," Seoul, 02/21/03, P3)
The Associated Press reported that a DPRK fighter jet briefly crossed the western sea border with the ROK on Thursday but retreated without incident when two ROK jets raced to the area, the ROK Defense Ministry
said. The provocation, which a lso prompted the ROK to put an anti-aircraft missile unit on battle alert. The incursion, the first by a DPRK military jet since 1983. The ROK Defense Ministry said the air incursion ended in just two minutes when the intruding MiG-19 was chased back across the maritime border by the ROK's F-5E fighters.
The crisis has seen other infringements along the borders. In six separate incidents in December, troops from the DPRK briefly brought machine guns into the buffer zone between the two Koreas, where only rifles and small arms are allowed under the 1953 armistice. "Our military sternly protests the DPRK provocation and demands that the North take actions to prevent a recurrence of similar incidents," defense ministry spokesman Brig. Gen. Hwang Young-soo said in a statement after the jet incursion. ROK jets were 19 miles, or a two-minute flight, from the enemy jet when it began retreating, said air force Col. Oh Sung-dae. (Sang-Huh Choe, "NORTH KOREAN JET BRIEFLY ENTERS SOUTH KOREA," Seoul, 2/20/03)
China Daily carried a commentary article noting that as the Korea crisis unfolds, the international community has turned its attention only to the issue of nuclear proliferation, but unfortunately overlooked the fact that the country is evidently working hard to try out new economic reform and opening-up policies. It is reasonable to assume that the crisis may move Pyongyang and Washington towards armed confrontation and is likely to lead to the spread of nuclear weapons and great disorder in Northeast Asia, the article said.
But, if the players in the crisis could shift their attention to the important policy adjustments made by DPRK, we will have more reasons to be optimistic about a peaceful solution, it noted. The article raised much evidence, proving that the DPRK leadership is determined to open up and pursue economic reform. The international community should closely watch these policy changes in the DPRK, because it is natural for it to target the security of the state as top priorities.
In recent years, the DPRK leadership has made a lot of efforts to create such a friendly and encouraging external environment. However, Pyongyang has encountered obvious obstacles, mainly from the US, as it abandoned its support for Seoul's "sunshine" policy, halted the process of normalization of US-DPRK relations and, more seriously, labeled the DPRK as one of three states in an "axis of evil."
Currently, the US only treats the crisis in the Korean peninsula as an issue of proliferation and has not yet seriously considered DPRK's concerns about security and reform, the article commended. And also, US must know that threats to use force can only harvest the opposite result. The international community, including the US, has the responsibility to give serious consideration to the DPRK's security concerns to boost its experimental programs of opening-up and reform, concluded the article. (Wang Yong, "DPRK REFORM IS OTHER SIDE OF STORY," 02/19/03, P4)
As tensions between the two Koreas keep rising, the North Korea-China border is a nervous place. Hamish McDonald reports from north-eastern China. Tumen, PRC, February 22 2003
'Beef or dog?" asks the woman in Korean and then Chinese, running through the breakfast menu at her kitchen above Tumen's central market. The soup, when it arrives, has some tasteless grey bits of grisly meat that could be anything floating in the mix of water and spring onion, but all around market workers and taxi drivers are adding liberal dashes of chilli, MSG and salt and then slurping it down with gusto.
The official dividing line between Korea and China is a few hundred metres away, in the middle of an empty bridge across the Tumen River, where the frozen water is bright and glittering in the winter sun. But Korea shades deeply into this region of China's Jilin province, where millions of ethnic Koreans live. Small villages have distinctive Korean-style cottages, signs are written in both the Korean "Hangul" script and Chinese characters, and South Korean money shows in big new hotels, churches and colleges...
by Robyn Lim International Herald Trubune, Thursday, February 20, 2003
NAGOYA, Japan The Cold War ice has finally melted around Korea, historically the vortex of great power rivalry. South Korea now seems to see China rather than the United States as its protector. As a result, Washington must rethink the premises upon which it has based its East Asia strategy since the Korean War 50 years ago. America's objective is unchanged - to maintain a balance of power that suits its interests. But it has reason and opportunity to adjust its tactics. The process should begin with removal of U.S. ground forces from South Korea. That will force all the other powers to define their interests and say what they are willing to do. The big question
is which way Japan will jump.
.
In December, South Koreans chose a president who had said in the election campaign that if war occurred between North Korea and America, South Korea would be neutral. President-elect Roh Moo Hyun will take office next Tuesday. Because willingness to share risk is the bedrock of alliances, the U.S.-South Korean pact is effectively defunct. U.S. ground forces in South Korea are hostages to North Korea, China's quasi ally. Keeping American forces in the South inhibits the Bush administration from pursuing the hostile policy toward Pyongyang that will be necessary to end Kim Jong Il's rule once the United States has changed the regime in Iraq.
The United States, mindful of its own security, cannot allow North Korea to develop and sell nuclear weapons. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is already indicating that America will not keep its forces at risk in places where they are not welcome. In relation to broader U.S. interests in East Asia, China is the critical issue. It was greatly to America's advantage that China decided to pursue capitalism to avoid the fate of the Soviet Union. And neither Washington nor Beijing wants another Korean war...
By Catherine Armitage, China correspondent and AFP, February 19, 2003
BRINKMANSHIP on the Korean peninsula reached new levels yesterday as North Korea threatened to pull out of the uneasy 50-year-old armistice, while across the demilitarised zone the South warned it might be forced to compete in a nuclear arms race. North Korea threatened to withdraw from the 1953 Korean War armistice if the US imposed extra sanctions in response to the current crisis.
Meanwhile, outgoing South Korean President Kim Dae-jung warned that his country and Japan could be forced into a nuclear arms race if North Korea got nuclear weapons. Pyongyang should not "even dream of having nuclear weapons", he said. "The stance of Japan and our country towards nukes would change," Mr Kim said.
Tokyo said last week it would not hesitate to "launch a strike" against North Korea if the rogue Stalinist state appeared ready to attack Japan. A Japanese newspaper has reported that the country's defence agency is seeking 20 billion yen ($283 million) to test an anti-ballistic missile system it has been developing with the US.
Since the crisis started last October, North Korea has issued threats of war almost daily. Through brinkmanship it is seeking direct bilateral talks with the US, but the White House has so far insisted on multilateral talks to negotiate the dismantling of the North's nuclear weapons program...
People's Daily reported that the Korean People's Army (KPA) of the DPRK warned of a possible withdrawal from its obligations under the Armistice Agreement, a spokesman for the Panmujom Mission of the KPA as saying on February 17. Accusing the US of using the agreement to implement its hostile policy against the DPRK, the spokesman said in a statement that the KPA side "will be left with no option but to take a decisive step to abandon its commitment to implement the Armistice Agreement as a signatory to it and free itself from the binding force of all its provisions". There would be no obligation for the DPRK to remain bound to the agreement if the US continues violating and misusing it, he said, adding that the future of the agreement depends entirely on the US side. (Zhao Jiaming, "DPRK WARNS OF POSSIBLE WITHDRAWAL FROM ARMISTICE AGREEMENT," Pyongyang, 02/19/03, P3)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK could soon face another deadly famine unless foreign donors resume food supplies cut off because of the current nuclear standoff, a leading aid official said Wednesday. "The people are living on the edge. It doesn't need much until we could slip back into the hunger of 1995-1997," Kathi Zellweger of the charity Caritas Hong Kong said upon her return from the isolated country. Zellweger, one of the few foreigners allowed to visit the DPRK regularly, said the country began to suffer huge cutbacks in foreign aid when US officials confronted the DPRK over its alleged nuclear program. "The political tensions now of course are making donors think more carefully," she said. "We have to continue as we are helping people in need, and we do not like to mix humanitarian aid and politics."
The United Nations says donors have only provided 6.7 percent of the US$225 million in supplies the DPRK sought so far this year. Its World Food Program, the DPRK's biggest food supplier, has been forced to cut its rations to some 3 million people, including children, pregnant women and the elderly, and close down subsidized factories that produce biscuits. "I do believe if no aid is forthcoming in the next few months, we will have severe crisis again in early summer," Zellweger warned. (Margaret Wong, "AID WORKER SAYS NORTH KOREA FACES FAMINE AS FOREIGN AID PLUNGES," Hong Kong, 02/19/03)
The Washington Post reported that the ROK shrugged off a threat by the DPRK today to abandon the armistice agreement that ended the 1950-53 Korean War. Officials in the ROK said the dispute over the DPRK's nuclear program is not as dangerous as some people in Washington believe. "I believe the danger of war on the Korean Peninsula is slight -- in fact, nonexistent," ROK President Kim Dae Jung told his cabinet this morning, according to a statement from his office. Kim did not mention the armistice threat specifically, a spokesman said.
In Washington, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the DPRK's threat would "only serve to hurt, isolate and move North Korea backward." He advised being "judicious" about it, saying, "there is a lengthy history of bravado to some of their statements." The DPRK declared it would have "no option but to take a decisive step to abandon its commitment" to the armistice if the US imposed sanctions, such as a naval blockade, and continued what the statement called plans to build up forces for a preemptive attack on the DPRK. (Joohee Cho and Doug Struck, "SEOUL PLAYS DOWN NORTH KOREA'S THREAT ON ARMISTICE," Seoul, 02/19/03)
The US has described North Korea's threat to abandon the Korean War armistice as "rather predictable". "What you've seen is a rather predictable series of escalatory statements from North Korea," said White House spokesman Ari Fleischer. He was speaking after the DPRK said it would no longer feel obliged to observe the armistice which halted the 1950-53 war in response to what it called US violations of the truce. A US State Department official said the DPRK was going about things the wrong way if it wanted direct talks with the US. "The US will not respond to threats, broken commitments or blackmail by North Korea," he said. "Any further escalation by North Korea of the situation on the peninsula will bring international condemnation and further self-isolation." (BBC News. "US PLAYS DOWN NORTH KOREAN THREAT," 02/19/03)
Reuters reported that the DPRK said on Wednesday the US' rejection of bilateral talks to solve a deepening nuclear crisis was illogical and aimed to thwart the DPRK's efforts to improve its economy and communist system. War warnings and assertions the US was poised to attack the DPRK have been daily fare in Pyongyang's official media since the crisis flared up nearly five months ago. The DPRK threatened on Tuesday to pull out of the 1953 armistice that ended the Korean War if sanctions were imposed on it.
The US dismissed that as "strident rhetoric" but the DPRK hit back with its own dig at the US. "The US is insisting on its strange assertion that it cannot respond to the DPRK-US talks as they mean a sort of reward for the DPRK despite the unanimous world public opinion that DPRK-US direct talks should take place to find a peaceful solution to the nuclear issue," the DPRK's KCNA news agency quoted the foreign ministry as saying in a statement. "This is an illogical far-fetched assertion," the ministry added. The Rodong Sinmun described ties with the US as "a dangerous state of confrontation with no gunfire". (Martin Nesirky and Arshad Mohammed, "NORTH KOREA AND US TRADE TOUGH TALK ON NUCLEAR CRISIS," Seoul/Washington, 02/19/03) and CNN News ("NORTH KOREA: US STANCE 'ILLOGICAL,'" Pyongyang, 02/19/03)
The New York Times reported that the Bush administration is developing plans for sanctions against the DPRK, that would include halting its weapons shipments and cutting off money sent there by Koreans living in Japan, in the event that the DPRK continues its march toward developing nuclear weapons, senior administration officials say. The officials said late last week the administration had no plans to push for the sanctions soon, since the US' Pacific allies still oppose the idea and the United Nations Security Council is likely to remain focused on Iraq for weeks. But the Pentagon and State Department are developing detailed plans for sanctions, and perhaps other actions, so that the US has a forceful response ready in case the DPRK takes aggressive new steps toward developing nuclear weapons, senior officials said.
Many administration officials believe that it is just a matter of time before the DPRK resumes testing long-range missiles, for example, or starts reprocessing nuclear fuel for weapons production. Many officials also worry that if the US attacks Iraq, the DPRK will use the opportunity to push forward with weapons production. "If they start to dismantle their weapons programs, then we can talk about incentives," a senior administration official said. "But if they torque up the pressure, you're looking at the other direction. That's when sanctions become much more likely." The officials said the possibility of sanctions would be part of a broader diplomatic campaign intended to get the DPRK to step back from its nuclear programs. (James Dao, "US PLANNING SANCTIONS AGAINST NORTH KOREA," Washington, 02/18/03)
The Washington Post reported that the DPRK turned out by the millions today to praise Kim Jong Il's birthday. Fireworks, nationwide displays of loyalty and huge musical and art performances marked the birthday today of Kim Jong Il, 61, the man at the center of an extraordinary personality cult in his isolated nation. A new song written for Kim's birthday is titled "The Road of the Military-First Long March." The Rodong Sinmun newspaper picked up the theme today, saying the US was pushing the country "to the brink of war" and urging DPRK citizens to "burn with hatred and hostility in their heart" toward the US.
Descriptions of Kim's past birthday celebrations by DPRK refugees who have left the country provide a glimpse of that zealous mix. "For the children, it's more joyful than Christmas," said Lee, a farmer who fled to China with her grown son when life became unbearable. "Every child up to junior high school gets a boxed present. You'd have cookies and candies, good enough for the whole year. "The children are told it is the present from our Dear Leader because he loves all children.
This is the most awaited day of the year, not just for the children, but for the adults as well. "If it is some kind of [five-year] anniversary, we got special presents, like blankets for every household," she said. "Blankets might not mean much here in South Korea, but in North Korea, it is a very precious commodity. We once got a clock for the house, too. And for the military, the soldiers would get more valuable presents like an electronic wristwatch. They would come home and flash those presents to their families. It makes you feel important and special. So for the soldiers, too, it's a great celebration." (Joohee Cho and Doug Struck, "'DEAR LEADER' FETED IN NORTH KOREA, KIM'S BIRTHDAY FEATURES DISPLAYS OF LOYALTY, MILITARY READINESS THEMES," Seoul, 02/18/03)
The LA Times carried a story that read it is so cold inside the restaurant that the waitresses are sporting long underwear beneath the short green polyester skirts of their uniforms. When customers inquire about heat, a waitress with a brisk military demeanour snaps that there is only an air conditioner. No apologies are offered. Such kinks still need to be worked out at the newly opened Kumgang Hall restaurant. Even at midday, the interior, decorated with dark wood panelling and beaded curtains, doesn't have enough light to illuminate a menu -- not that there is one.
Still, the $9 lunch of steamed crab, dumplings and bibimbap, a rice and vegetable dish, is surprisingly tasty. And the mere fact that the restaurant exists is an achievement. Kumgang Hall is one of the first DPRK-run restaurants devoted exclusively to ROK tourists, and it is part of a new wave of cooperation projects between the estranged halves of the peninsula. Even as a dispute has been raging with the US over the DPRK's nuclear program, the DPRK and ROK have been making huge strides in their relations. Last week, they opened the first civilian road through the demilitarized zone that separates them.
The thoroughfare is expected to bring more than 300,000 visitors annually to a 4-year-old tourist enclave around Mt. Kumgang, on the southeastern coast of North Korea. In recent weeks, two DPRK-run restaurants have opened here for the ROK. A third is scheduled to open soon. Development is expected to begin in a few months on a golf course and a ski lift. Estranged DPRK and ROK relatives are scheduled to meet here next weekend. Groundbreaking is also expected soon for a huge ROK-run industrial park in Kaesong, a city 32 miles into DPRK. (Barbara Demick, "NORTH KOREA TRYING HARD TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR," Mt. Kumgang, North Korea, 02/18/03)
China Daily reported that the ROK and the DPRK on February 14 opened their heavily fortified border for the first time in five decades to allow hundreds of civilians to travel overland to the DPRK. The report said that DPRK decided to allow ROK citizens to use a recently opened temporary road along its east coast for the sixth reunion of separated families and relatives to be held in Mount Kumgang. A group of 498 ROK people embarked on an overland trial tour to Mount Kumgang in the DPRK aboard 20 or so buses through a temporary road on February 14.
Before the departure, the ROK government held a celebratory ceremony to mark the opening of the temporary road which links the ROK Gangwon Province to the DPRK resort passing through the demilitarized zone. The pilot trip will last three days, and the tourists will return to the ROK on February 16 also through the road, according to the program. In another development, ROK President Kim Dae-jung apologized to his people over a controversial cash transfer by the Hyundai Group to the DPRK, said the report. ("DPRK OPENS ITS BORDER," Seoul, 02/15-16/03, P8)
Yonhap News, By Kwan-Hyun Moon, February 18, 2003
It is reported that the North Korean government has been preparing to replace the old Citizens’ Registration Card with a new one, in order to regulate the North Korean citizens who cross its border. According to a North Korean defector who entered South Korea, December last year, North Korean government had distributed an official document announcing the issuing of the new Citizens’ Registration Card to be started from March this year.
Up to now, North Korean government has issued a pink colored Registration Card for the citizens who live in Pyongyang, and a blue colored Registration Card for the rest residences. In case of citizens of non-city provinces, the Registration Card included the information of an individual citizen’s name, ethnicity, date of birth, place of residence, marital status, date of issue, place of issue, bar code, and etc as well as a color picture are the upper right corner of the card.
North Korea has issued the card for the citizens of over 17 years old in regional basis. The new Citizens’ Registration Card would be bigger than the old one, and several categories such a s occupation and family relations are to be included in the card, so as to facilitate regulation of the movement of the citizens.
It has been known that North Korea had once replaced the Citizens’ Registration Card in 1999, when the food crisis hit the country and people fled from their own homeland. According to a South Korean official, “The new Citizens’ Registration Card would create higher possibility of threat to those North Korean citizens who are moving into China as well as those already in China.”
William Safire NYT Tuesday, February 18, 2003
WASHINGTON The menace of Saddam Hussein has driven a wedge in the world, with Paris-Berlin-Moscow-Beijing on the side of unending delay, and with the great majority of democratic nations with Washington and London-led Europe on the side of action. But an even greater divide - a glaring inconsistency in argument that exposes a weakness in principle - exists within the camp that opposes the United States. For the past year, the central message that Saddam's protectors have been sending to the United States is: Do not "go it alone." On the contrary, take the multilateral route. Seek the world's support through UN consensus.
But when it comes to the weaponry menace on the other side of the world, the message of Paris-Berlin-Moscow-Beijing is exactly the opposite. The clear message that the coalition of the unwilling sends Washington about North Korea, which confessed its secret nuclear buildup, then ejected UN inspectors just as Saddam did four years ago, is this: Go it alone, America. North Korea's nukes and long-range missiles are your problem, not the world's. Hold bilateral talks as the North Koreans insist, pay them off as you tried to do before and forget all we have been saying about multilateralism. You work it out with them alone; we'll hold your coat...
Time Magazine carried a story that reported that Japan's Defense Agency's Chief of Military Intelligence, Fumio Ota, came to the conclusion in a briefing to parliamentarians last week: DPRK President Kim Jong Il wants nukes, not some new carrots from the West. For North Asia, that renders irrelevant the debate over who is a bigger threat to the world-Kim Jong Il or far-off Saddam Hussein. If the DPRK gets a nuclear armory, technologically advanced Japan and the ROK will also be tempted to build atom bombs. And Kim, with his boilersuits and bouffant hairdo, could succeed in dismantling the whole postwar security structure of the region and the attendant and prosperous economic ties that peace has fostered. As the CIA's Tenet told the Senate Intelligence Committee last week: "The domino theory of the 21st century may well be nuclear." (Anthony Spaeth, "IT IS A CRISIS: NORTH KOREA'S ATOMIC AMBITIONS ARE REAL. SO, TOO, IS THE PROSPECT OF A NUCLEAR ARMS RACE ACROSS ASIA," 02/17/04)
By Paul Eckert, Reuters, Monday, February 17, 2003; 7:56 PM
SEOUL (Reuters) - Communist North Korea threatened on Tuesday to abandon its commitment to the entire 1953 Korean War armistice if sanctions such as a naval blockade are imposed on it because of its suspected nuclear weapons ambitions. War warnings and comments the United States is poised to attack the North have been almost daily fare in Pyongyang's official media since the nuclear crisis flared up late last year. Washington wants multilateral talks on the crisis.
It was not immediately clear whether the latest statement, from the North's Korean People's Army (KPA) broke that pattern or was more of the same. South Korean shares drifted in tight ranges at the opening, supported by pension fund stock buying but held back by renewed concerns about North Korea. Many people in South Korea -- which has lived with the threat of a potential Northern invasion for half a century -- simply ignore the rhetoric and focus on everyday concerns.
"The KPA side will be left with no option but to take a decisive step to abandon its commitment to implement the Armistice Agreement as a signatory to it and free itself from the binding force of all its provisions, regarding the possible sanctions to be taken by the U.S. side against the DPRK (North Korea)," said the North's army in a statement. "If the U.S. side continues violating and misusing the Armistice Agreement as it pleases, there will be no need for the DPRK to remain bound to the AA uncomfortably," said the statement published by the North's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA)...
By Peter Harmsen in Pyongyang, The Australian, February 17, 2003
NORTH Korea, once one of Asia's wealthiest countries, is in free fall towards the living standards of sub-Saharan Africa with its rigid economy failing to provide even basic necessities. Price rises introduced last year to better reflect market conditions are making matters worse, because only the privileged classes have been given significant salary hikes to match. "It has crystallised the existing gap between haves and have-nots, and the pain of the low classes is severer than before," said Katy Oh, co-author of the book North Korea Through the Looking Glass. "It's a failure."
One Pyongyang official said his monthly salary was increased overnight to 2000 won ($22) from 100 won last July. This 20-fold rise has, however, been dwarfed by steep price hikes for several daily items. A kilogram of rice, which previously went for 0.1 won, now costs 40 won, while one kilo of pork is priced at 170 won, up from eight won before the reforms, locals said. That is, of course, if potential buyers can lay their hands on these products in the first place.
"You have to understand that our country is not so rich in commodities as some foreign countries," said an official experienced in explaining away the economic trouble to foreign visitors. "But we are able to provide the necessities." That might be an exaggeration, since numerous reports describe empty shop shelves, even in the capital, which is by far the richest part of the country. In the provinces, the situation remains near-catastrophic, as malnutrition stunts the physical growth and mental development of a whole generation.
People are reportedly dying. North Korea was not destined to end up in its current mess.In 1945, when the peninsula was liberated from Japanese rule, the Soviet-occupied North was a far more industrialised society than the largely agricultural South, controlled by the United States. Initial high growth started slowing in the early 1970s, and the economy is now 32 per cent smaller than its peak year in 1990.
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK accused the U.N. nuclear watchdog Friday of interfering in Pyongyang's internal affairs by referring the dispute over its nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council. The official KCNA news agency called the International Atomic Energy Agency "America's lapdog" and said North Korea has no legal obligations to the Vienna-based agency because it withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in January. "Thus discussing the nuclear issue through the IAEA is an act of interference in internal affairs," said KCNA, which was monitored by the South Korean news agency Yonhap. KCNA also urged the nuclear agency to investigate "the illegal US behavior that brought a nuclear crisis to the Korean peninsula." ("NORTH KOREA ACCUSES NUKE AGENCY OF MEDDLING," Seoul, 02/14/03)
Reuters reported that the DPRK accused the US on Friday of building up its forces along the Demilitarized Zone separating and said US armor was entering the zone illegally. "There have been some aggressive moves by the US in the southern part of the DMZ," Major Kim Kwang-kil said as the two countries remained locked in crisis over the US allegation that the DPRK is pursuing a secret nuclear arms program. "We have seen armored cars and tanks inside the DMZ, which is a violation of the armistice because only officers can carry side arms inside the DMZ," he said of the agreement, which ended the fighting in the 1950-53 Korean War. "They have increased the number of soldiers and they are carrying heavy weapons," he stated. "They're increasing the movement of their army," he added. (Julian Rake, "North Korea Accuses US of Military Moves on Border," Panmunjom, North Korea, 02/14/03)
The Associated Press reported that amid firecrackers and soaring balloons, about 500 ROK tourists travelled to North Korea on Friday along the first cross-border overland route opened since the peninsula was divided in 1945. About 20 buses carrying the tourists drove into the 4 kilometre (2.5-mile) -wide demilitarized zone on their way to the North's scenic Diamond Mountain resort, less than an hour away. Last week, ROK officials tested the road, but the overland route was officially opened on Friday. Organizers said Friday's delegation consisted mainly of officials from the government and business circles and that tours will be available to ordinary citizens beginning next week.
"Today is a meaningful and historic day," Kim Hyung-ki, vice unification minister, said at an opening ceremony in Kosung, a town of the ROK's east coast. "Recently, inter-Korean relations are suffering difficulties due to North Korea's nuclear issue," he said. "But the North's nuclear issue must be resolved peacefully and inter-Korean cooperative projects must continue as well." Firecrackers soared into the winter sky and colourful balloons were released to celebrate the occasion. ("FIRST OVERLAND ROUTE CONNECTING NORTH AND SOUTH KOREA OFFICIALLY OPENS," Seoul, 02/14/03)
The New York Times reported that the governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna today found the DPRK in breach of international nuclear weapons agreements and sent the issue to the United Nations Security Council. The move is a crucial first step toward intensifying international pressure on the DPRK to abandon its weapons program, which the Bush administration has pledged to halt through diplomatic rather than military means. Russia and Cuba abstained from the vote. Russia had contended that referring the issue to the Security Council would only provoke the DPRK leader, Kim Jong Il, and inflame the crisis. Russia had called for delaying action to allow time for its own diplomatic initiatives to Pyongyang, Western and Russian diplomats said. The resolution by the agency's 35-member board, which had been widely expected to pass, also called on the DPRK to peacefully resolve the crisis through diplomatic means. (James Dao, "ATOM AGENCY FINDS PYONGYANG IN VIOLATION OF ARMS ACCORDS," Washington, 02/12/03), The Associated Press (George Jahn, "UN NUKE AGENCY SET TO CITE NORTH KOREA," Vienna, 02/12/03), BBC News ("UN DECLARES NORTH KOREA IN NUCLEAR BREACH," 02/12/03), the Agence France-Presse ("UN NUCLEAR AGENCY SENDS NORTH KOREAN CRISIS TO SECURITY COUNCIL," 02/12/03)
NYT-AP ONLINE, February 12, 2003
A timeline on nuclear weapons development in North Korea:
--1993: North Korea shocks the world by saying it will quit the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but it later suspends its withdrawal.
--1994: North Korea and United States sign nuclear agreement in Geneva. North Korea pledges to freeze and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons program in exchange for international aid to build two power-producing nuclear reactors.
--August 1998: North Korea fires a multistage rocket that flies over Japan and lands in the Pacific Ocean, proving the Koreans can strike any part of Japan's territory.
--May 1999: Former Defense Secretary William Perry visits North Korea and delivers a U.S. disarmament proposal during four days of talks.
--September 1999: North Korea pledges to freeze testing of long-range missiles for the duration of negotiations to improve relations.
--Sept. 17, 1999: President Clinton agrees to the first significant easing of economic sanctions against North
Korea since the Korean War ended in 1953.
--December 1999: A U.S.-led international consortium signs a $4.6 billion contract to build two safer, Western-developed light-water nuclear reactors in North Korea.
--July 2000: North Korea renews its threat to restart its nuclear program if Washington does not compensate for the loss of electricity caused by delays in building nuclear power plants.
--June 2001: North Korea warns it will reconsider its moratorium on missile tests if the Bush administration
doesn't resume contacts aimed at normalizing relations.
--July 2001: State Department reports North Korea is going ahead with development of its long-range missile. A senior Bush administration official says North Korea has conducted an engine test of the Taepodong-1 missile.
--December 2001: President Bush warns Iraq and North Korea that they would be "held accountable" if they developed weapons of mass destruction "that will be used to terrorize nations."
--Jan. 29, 2002: Bush labels North Korea, Iran and Iraq an "axis of evil" in his State of the Union address.
--Oct. 4: North Korean officials tell visiting U.S. delegation that the country has a second covert nuclear weapons program in violation of the 1994 agreement -- a program using enriched uranium.
--Oct. 16: U.S. officials publicly reveal discovery of North Korea's nuclear weapons program.
--Nov. 11: The U.S. and its key Asian allies -- Japan and South Korea -- decide to halt oil supplies to North Korea promised under the 1994 deal.
--Dec. 12: North Korea announces that it is reactivating nuclear facilities at Yongbyon that were frozen under the 1994 deal with the United States.
--Dec. 13: North Korea asks the U.N. nuclear watchdog to remove monitoring seals and cameras from its nuclear facilities.
--Dec. 14: The U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency urges North Korea to retract its decision to reactivate its nuclear facilities and abide by its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
--Dec. 21: North Korea begin removing monitoring seals and cameras from its nuclear facilities
--Jan. 10, 2003: North Korea says it will withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
--Feb. 6, 2003: North Korea says it has reactivated its nuclear facilities.
--Feb. 12, 2003: IAEA holds emergency meeting to refer standoff to the Security Council.
CNN News reported that CIA Director George Tenet and top US intelligence officials said Wednesday that the DPRK has an untested ballistic missile capable of hitting the US. While testifying at a Senate committee hearing in Washington, Tenet was asked whether the DPRK had a ballistic missile capable of reaching the US West Coast. Before answering, Tenet turned to very quickly consult with aides sitting behind him. "I think the declassified answer, is yes, they can do that," Tenet said.
Defense Intelligence Agency Director Vice Adm. Lowell Jacoby, also testifying at the hearing, said outside the hearing room that the DPRK missile has not yet been flight tested. Moments earlier Tenet said it was likely that the DPRK had been able to produce as many as two plutonium-based nuclear weapons. The estimate is not new -- it was laid out in an unclassified CIA document in December 2001-- but Tenet is the most senior US official to say so publicly. The 2001 report said North Korea's Taepo Dong 2 missile may be capable of hitting the West Coast of the US, as well Alaska and Hawaii. ("TENET: NORTH KOREA HAS BALLISTIC MISSILE CAPABLE OF HITTING US," Washington, 02/12/03)
The Washington Post reported that the DPRK today appealed to Britain to persuade the US to enter negotiations aimed at resolving its nuclear crisis, as the U.N.'s top atomic agency monitoring group prepared to refer the issue to the Security Council. While repeating its threats to retaliate against a military threat, the DPRK's Foreign Ministry made an unusual suggestion of involvement by Britain in resolving the standoff over its nuclear intentions. The Foreign Ministry said the DPRK sought a peaceful resolution of the nuclear crisis, but stopped short of saying the regime would cooperate with a Security Council debate on the matter.
(Doug Struck, "NORTH KOREA APPEALS FOR TALKS WITH US UN ATOMIC MONITORS PREPARE TO SEEK SECURITY COUNCIL ACTION," Tokyo, 02/12/03)
CNN News reported that the PRC says it does not advocate taking the issue of the DPRK's nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council and has instead called for early dialogue between the US and the DPRK. "Despite constant developments on the North Korean issue, diplomacy is the only way out," Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Zhang Qiyue said. Explaining the difference between the PRC's support for U.N. consensus in resolving the Iraqi issue while insisting that the DPRK can only be dealt with through dialogue between two parties, Zhang said that U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 already provides a mechanism for weapons inspections and a diplomatic approach that
involves several countries. "Regarding the DPRK question, although it touches on regional security and nuclear proliferation issues, undoubtedly the key to the solution of this issue is the restoration of dialogue between the US and the DPRK," said Zhang. Zhang added Pyongyang's "particular security concerns" have to be taken into consideration in dealing with North Korea.
(Lisa Rose Weaver, "CHINA AGAINST UN NORTH KOREA DEBATE," Beijing, 02/12/03)
CNN News reported that the DPRK says it is ready to talk with the US over its nuclear program but warned a military build-up in the region will have a negative effect on any peaceful resolution of the issue. The DPRK accused the US of not being genuine in its desire to have direct talks on the matter and reportedly urged the United Kingdom to act as a go-between for negotiations. The DPRK also reiterated that it had no intention of developing nuclear weapons despite pulling out of the global nuclear non-proliferation treaty and moving to re-start a reactor capable of producing weapons grade plutonium. "The peaceful solution to the nuclear issue on the Korean
peninsula and an arms build-up can never go together," the Rodong Sinmun said. However, "The DPRK is ready for both dialogue and confrontation," the news agency reported.
("NORTH KOREA 'READY TO TALK' ON NUKES," Pyongyang, 02/12/03)
The Korean Central News Agency of DPRK carried a story which read "The US is going to have direct talks with North Korea to discuss Pyongyang's suspected nuclear weapons program but we do not want the nuclear issue to become simply a problem to the US and North Korea. US deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage was reported to have said on Feb. 4 in a hearing before the US senate foreign relations committee. After his remarks some media claimed that the US policy and stand toward the DPRK have changed, saying it proposed "direct dialogue," "direct talks to the DPRK" and "there is no doubt in starting dialogue." But a scrutiny of the US stand and attitude after
his remarks shows that the US proposed "direct dialogue" is nothing but a broad hoax. There is nothing new in Armitage's proposal for "direct dialogue."
("KCNA ON US CONTRADICTORY ASSERTION ABOUT 'DIRECT DIALOGUE,'" Pyongyang, 02/12/03)
by Gordon G. Chang Internation Herald Tribune
The writer, a lawyer based in Hong Kong, is the author of "The Coming Collapse of China."
HONG KONG Conventional wisdom says that China cannot do much to influence North Korea. The Pyongyang regime, the argument goes, can ignore Chinese pressure because Beijing can't afford to see its partner in communism collapse. But Beijing is in the midst of a once-in-a-lifetime realignment of its foreign policy, and the moment of truth is fast approaching for Pyongyang.
.
On Wednesday the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear oversight body, will meet in Vienna to vote on referring the North Korean crisis to the UN Security Council. The agency's 35-member board, of which China is a member, seems set to decide that Pyongyang is not in compliance with its international obligations to forgo nuclear weapons. If the Security Council then takes up the issue of imposing sanctions on North Korea, Beijing will maneuver to delay or sidetrack the debate to save its communist cousin. Should that fail and the matter move to a vote, however, the spotlight will fall on China, one of the five permanent
members of the council, as it is forced to decide whether to exercise its veto to protect the Kim regime.
.
What will China do? Unfortunately for North Korea, the conventional wisdom no longer applies. As China's export-driven economy becomes dependent on the world to take its products, diplomats and politicians in Beijing are harmonizing their worldview with that of their customers, especially the United States. Ta Kung Pao, a pro-Beijing newspaper in Hong Kong, recently ran a commentary from a prominent Chinese foreign policy expert who was sharply critical of Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program. The writer, Shi Yinhong, said that China should put its security and development interests first. "And this means with regard to the Korean nuclear crisis that China's first
objective is to firmly cause North Korea to get rid of its nuclear weapons," he wrote.
.
Ta Kung Pao is often used by China to signal its intentions. In June 1994 the paper suggested that Beijing might adhere to any embargo imposed on North Korea and halt food and oil supplies. Pyongyang took the hint and quickly softened its position on the impending nuclear crisis. In 1994 China was spared from having to take a stand in public. Today it may not be so fortunate. China is North Korea's largest source of food and energy. Indeed, aid from Beijing may be the only reason that North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, is still in power. The best way to stop the nuclear program is to stop the foreign aid. Beijing will have to make a choice between its past and its
future.
Pyongyang, February 11 (KCNA) -- A symposium of officials and workers in the field of railway transport on the idea of giving priority to railways set forth by Kim Jong Il took place at the hall of the ministry of railways on Feb. 10. At the symposium Minister of Railways Kim Yong Sam and academician, professor and doctor Choe Ki Bok, head of a chair of Pyongyang University of railways, and others made speeches. The speakers said that Kim Jong Il recently stressed the need to give priority to railways several times and clearly indicated the orientation and ways to do so.
Kim Jong Il's idea of giving priority to railways is an original idea which is in line with the law governing the development of railway transport in the era of army-based policy and the specific conditions of the DPRK, they said, and continued: The idea of giving priority to railways is unique in that it clarified from a new angle the importance of railway transport in relation with the mode of army-based policy and set out the idea of building socialist railway transport to step up its modernization and bring about a signal turn in the field to meet the specific conditions.
They reiterated the need for the officials and all other working people in the field of railway transport to uphold Kim Jong Il's idea of giving priority to railways and effect a fresh revolutionary turn in transportation in the transparent spirit of devotedly defending the leader and implementing his instructions.
The Washington File reported that a panel of top government officials agreed that cosmetic solutions on the Korean peninsula are no longer an option. "We're looking for something that will once and for all get the nuclear weapons issue off of the Korean peninsula," said James Kelly, assistant secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific affairs. The panel, co-hosted by the Washington Post and ROK newspaper JoongAng Ilbo on February 6, brought together 17 experts on Korea.
In addition to Kelly, among them were: Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz; Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana), chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; Senator John Rockefeller (D-West Virginia), member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and ranking member of the Select Committee on Intelligence; Donald Gregg, president of the Korea Society and former US Ambassador to South Korea; Hong-Koo Lee, chairman of the Seoul Forum for International Affairs and former prime minister of the Republic of Korea; and Kyung-Won Kim, president of the Institute of Social Sciences and Seoul Forum and former ROK national security advisor and ambassador to the United Nations.
The panel talked at length about the possibility of a regime change in the DPRK, but there was no suggestion of the use of military force. Kelly said: "We are still dedicated to a diplomatic solution. We're trying to avoid a crisis." Kim said he was skeptical of the current emphasis on dialogue. "Talking, itself, will not have that much impact. What is important is the substance." Kim called for an intense inspection regime that is "more reliable and more thorough than what we had in the 1994 agreed framework." He warned that intrusive inspections intended to rid DPRK of weapons of mass destruction would require significant incentives.
Lugar, expressed hope that if and when the DPRK clearly agrees to forgo its nuclear program that an enduring peace can prevail. If the North Koreans cooperate, he said, "the Congress of the US can pass a non-aggression pact." Wolfowitz said a nuclear-armed DPRK that has normal relations with the rest of the world is "not gonna happen." Wolfowitz also spoke of his sincere concern for the "true humanitarian catastrophe" in the DPRK. He said that accepting large numbers DPRK refugees, similar to a mass humanitarian evacuation in Indochina about 20 years ago, was an idea the Bush administration would "take seriously."
Rockefeller warned that ousting North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il would be complicated. "I think if we're waiting for a regime to collapse, that's not going to happen. I think if the North Koreans have to pull in their belts another 2 or 3 inches, they will do that." Rockefeller further described the DPRK state of affairs as a "major crisis." The DPRK , he said, is in the midst of a prolonged and ruinous economic situation and seems fixed on clinging to what sources of power they have. Rockefeller said: "That's all they have. When you have [nuclear weapons] and others are scared of it that puts you at the center of the world's attention." (Kristofer Angle, "SENIOR OFFICIALS URGE PERMANENT END TO NORTH KOREA CRISIS," Washington, 02/11/03)
by Peter Hayes, The Nautilus Institute, February 11, 2003
The United States is adrift in the North Pacific. It's heading straight for a jagged reef--North Korea. The captain is asleep at the wheel. His senior officers on the bridge are squabbling about what to do.
Meanwhile, North Korea is charging across a nuclear red line. After throwing out the international inspectors, it has now fired up its puny research reactor to make more plutonium. It may also be reprocessing spent fuel to get more plutonium for bombs. And, it has a uranium enrichment program- a second track to acquiring nuclear weapons capability. The longer these plants operate, the greater the radiological damage from an American surgical strike. And the harder it will be to ever determine how much plutonium was made and so far, not declared-the source of the initial confrontation ten years ago...
The Washington Post reported that allegations that ROK president, Kim Dae Jung, bought his historic summit with the leader of the DPRK in June 2000 are tarnishing the Nobel Peace Prize winner's last days in office. Opposition politicians are demanding that a special prosecutor be named to investigate why government loans worth $186 million were moved through a corporate ally of the president to a North Korean bank account in the days before Kim went to the North Korean capital, Pyongyang. The opposition members allege that the money was paid to persuade the DPRK leader, Kim Jong Il, to receive the ROK president for a summit.
Kim Dae Jung's office has denied wrongdoing in connection with the payments, but with qualifications that has left the ROK unconvinced, opinion polls show. Some of the president's allies say that funnelling payments to the DPRK is the price of opening up its closed society and economy and is therefore in the ROK's interest. A government audit late last month confirmed a complex money trail that funnelled money through at least three banks in three countries using 71 checks. The audit has prompted debate on the possibility of charges against Kim Dae Jung. It is complicating plans of the president-elect, Roh Moo Hyun, to continue Kim's "sunshine policy" of assistance to North Korea. "This scandal will be a burden for the new government," said a top official on Roh's transition team, Suh Dongman. "It's a hot issue, so for the time being we can't have economic aid to North Korea." (Doug Struck, "ALLEGED PAYOFF TO NORTH TARNISHES SOUTH KOREA'S KIM CRITICS WANT PROBE OF LOANS GIVEN BEFORE SUMMIT," Seoul, 02/10/03)
The New York Times reported that on the Korean Peninsula, millions of people in the North are suffering for lack of rice, the staple of Asia, while people in the South face the opposite problem. There is more rice around than people can possibly eat. No one knows quite what to do about it. "The condition is very severe," said Kim Hyun Soo, director of policy for South Korea's Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. "Every year we have a surplus of 150,000 metric tons. We now have 1,500,000 metric tons in storage." Shipping the surplus to the DPRK might seem an obvious way to dispose of it - and the ROK gave the DPRK 400,000 tons of rice last year. But simply giving the rice away is more complicated than it appears. "It's a very sensitive issue," an Agriculture Ministry official said today.
Although President-elect Roh Moo Hyun wants to provide aid to the DPRK, the official said, "because of the nuclear issue, many people don't want to send more." The ROK must also worry about conforming to the rules of the World Trade Organization, which wants the forces of supply and demand to control the ROK's rice market. That market has become increasingly distorted because the government tightly restricts imports and pays farmers artificially high prices for rice, encouraging them to grow even more. The ROK government's main solution for the rice glut was announced on Tuesday in a bill that would reduce the price to discourage production. Many politicians, however, are likely to oppose the bill for fear of alienating rice farmers, a powerful political force. Any reduction in price paid to rice farmers would be the first since the founding of the Republic of Korea in 1948, two years before the Korean War. (Don Kirk, "SOUTH KOREA HAS TOO MUCH RICE AND A STICKY POLITICAL PROBLEM," Seoul, 02/10/03)
by Alexandre Y. Mansourov,
Associate Professor of Security Studies Asia-Pacific Center for Security
Studies, University of Hawaii,
February 10, 2003
As the war of words between the United States and North Korea intensifies, the real intentions of both sides become more obscure. Far from being clarified, the message from both sides gets increasingly muddied. Do they still jockey for a better bargaining position at the start of bilateral negotiations whenever the latter may be launched? Or, are they inescapably falling into the war trap?
The fundamental reality of the unfolding U.S.-DPRK nuclear crisis is that both sides completely lost trust in each other. On one hand, Kim Jong Il's credibility in Washington is below zero. On the other hand, the U.S. President George W. Bush is again public enemy number one in Pyongyang. Almost all inter-governmental agreements and mutual understandings binding North Korea and the United States together are torn apart and thrown away. Arguably, the bilateral relationship is at its nadir. Pyongyang and Washington talk peace, but, indeed, they actively prepare for war. It is obvious that both sides are still in the escalation phase, clearing the debris leading
toward the warpath...
Kyodo reported that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will almost certainly seek UN action on DPRK's nuclear development program, Yonhap News Agency reported Monday. "Negotiations among key members of the governing board over how to draft the resolution have almost come to an end," Yonhap quoted a ROK source as saying. "It's almost certain that the issue will be sent to the UNSC at Wednesday's meeting," the source was quoted as saying. The source also added the ROK government would respect any decision the Vienna-based nuclear watchdog makes on the nuclear issue if international consensus is reached.
The IAEA board plans to hold an emergency meeting of its 35 member countries on Wednesday to discuss escalating tensions sparked by DPRK's defiance of international calls to abandon its nuclear ambitions. Meanwhile, other sources, quoted by Yonhap, said Russia still opposes bringing the nuclear issue before the Security Council, where possible imposition of sanctions may be discussed, and is expected to demand a vote on the issue. But Russian opposition is not expected to delay the referral, the sources said. ("IAEA ALMOST CERTAIN TO SEEK UN ACTION ON N.KOREA NUKE ISSUE," Seoul, 02/10/03)
by Nautilus Institute, February 7, 2003
This Special Report provides two documents from the DPRK that are important reference material for analysts concerned with the DPRK's perception of historical and current events.
Document 1 was issued by the Korean Anti-Nuke Peace Committee in Pyongyang on January 28, 2003. In particular, we draw readers' attention to the penultimate paragraphs which state: "If the US legally commits itself to non-aggression including the no-use of nuclear weapons against the DPRK through the non-aggression pact, the DPRK will be able to rid the US of its security concerns... Although the DPRK has left the NPT, its nuclear activity at present is limited to the peaceful purpose of power generation... If the US gives up its hostile policy toward the DPRK and refrains from posing a nuclear threat to it, it may prove that it does not manufacture nuclear
weapons through a special verification between the DPRK and the US... It is the consistent stand of the DPRK government to settle the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula peacefully through fair negotiations for removing the concerns of both sides on an equal footing between the DPRK and the US."
In the editors' experience, policymakers in the DPRK often preface their remarks with incendiary, ideological rhetoric to assert their hardline credentials as they introduce pragmatic negotiating proposals.
Document 2 was issued by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on January 28, 2003. It concerns the DPRK perception and response to US military activities in East Asia. Analysts who have long read KCNA texts were particularly struck by the final paragraph of this text: "The self-defensive step to be taken by the DPRK unavoidably when the U.S. preemptive attack is considered imminent cannot but involve an unlimited use of means corresponding to what the U.S. mobilized."
Although ambiguous, the text can be read to assert that the DPRK may conduct a pre-emptive military strike if it finds a US preemptive attack to be pending. Like the statement in Document 1 that the DPRK's "nuclear activity at present is limited to the peaceful purpose of power generation," this text states DPRK intentions very clearly...
People's Daily reported that the DPRK will counter the US's military buildup around the Korean Peninsula with powerful self-defense means, the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said on February 5. It reported that the Pentagon is considering sending another aircraft carrier to waters off the Korean Peninsula in addition to the Kitty Hawk, as well as sending twelve B-52 and B-1 fighter-bombers to be stationed in the west-Pacific area. The DPRK will face the US military buildup with powerful counter-measures, as US is becoming more undisguised in its bid to throttle the DPRK, the KCNA warned. (Zhao Jiaming, "DPRK WARN ON US MILITARY BUILDUP," Pyongyang, 02/06/03, P4)
China Daily carried a photo report displaying a convoy of buses crossing into the ROK territory to carry a ROK's delegation at the demilitarized zone (DMZ) city of Kosung on February 5. The opening of the overland route from the ROK through the heavily fortified DMZ to the DPRK scenic Mount Kumgang is a centerpiece project of President Kim Dae-jung's "sunshine policy" of economic co-operation with DPRK, said the report. ("BUSES CROSSING DMZ," 02/06/03, P4)
The Washington Post reported that the DPRK said today it had carried out its vow to restart a small nuclear power plant that US officials suspect will be used to produce plutonium for weapons. In an announcement carried by its state-run news agency, the DPRK said the plant had resumed "normal footing" operation. The DPRK statement said the small research plant at Yongbyon, 55 miles north of the capital, would produce electricity for the power-starved nation. But experts say the five-megawatt plant is not large enough to provide any meaningful electrical power. By their account, its main purpose would be to irradiate natural uranium rods to produce plutonium that could be used in nuclear weapons. Experts say it would take about one year of operation for the small plant to produce enough fuel for a bomb of the size dropped on Hiroshima. More immediately worrisome for the analysts is the disposition of about 8,000 fuel rods produced when the nuclear plant was operating and stored at the site since it was closed. That material can be processed at a reopened plant nearby into weapons-grade fuel in two to four weeks, nuclear experts said. (Doug Struck, "REACTOR RESTARTED, NORTH KOREA SAYS PLUTONIUM COULD BE USED FOR BOMBS," Seoul, 02/06/03)
Reuters reported that the ROK was unable to confirm on Thursday that the DPRK had restarted a nuclear reactor, Yonhap news agency quoted a Seoul official as saying. "So far, nobody has confirmed a restart of the DPRK's nuclear facilities," the ROK news agency quoted the ROK government official as saying. An overnight statement from the DPRK Foreign Ministry saying that the DPRK "is now putting the operation of its nuclear facilities for the production of electricity on a normal footing after their restart" pointed to a likely move to restart the facility at Yongbyon, the official was quoted as saying. "Carefully going over the text of the Korean Central
News Agency report it looks more like language saying they were about to restart the facility, rather than they had actually restarted it," the unnamed official said. "But because they have already declared their aim to restart it, the possibility that they will move to reactivate the nuclear facility is great," the official said.
("SOUTH KOREA UNABLE TO CONFIRM NORTH REACTOR MOVE-YONHAP," Seoul, 02/06/03)
The Associated Press reported that the DPRK warned Thursday that US pre-emptive attacks on its nuclear facilities would provoke a "total war." In an English-language statement, the DPRK said Wednesday that it "is now putting the operation of its nuclear facilities for the production of electricity on a normal footing after their restart." That triggered fears that Pyongyang was poised to produce weapons materials. However, a Korean-language statement monitored by the ROK's Yonhap news agency referred only to "our process to restart nuclear facilities for generating electricity and normalize their operation." Both DPRK statements were carried on KCNA, the DPRK's official news agency. "We are trying various channels to confirm what it means," an official at the ROK Foreign Ministry said on condition of anonymity.
The DPRK said Thursday it was prepared to fight a war with the US. "When the US makes a surprise attack on our peaceful facilities, it will spark off a total war," said the DPRK's state-run newspaper Rodong Sinmun in a commentary carried by the DPRK's official news agency, KCNA. In Pyongyang, a spokesman and deputy director at the DPRK's Foreign Ministry told the London-based Guardian newspaper that his country was entitled to launch a pre-emptive strike against the United States. (Sang-Huh Choe, "NORTH KOREA WARNS US ON PRE-EMPTIVE MOVES," Seoul, 02/06/03) and the Associated Press (Jae-Suk Yoo, "NORTH KOREA WARNS 'TOTAL WAR' IN CASE OF US ATTACK ON NUKE FACILITIES," Seoul, 02/06/03)
Reuters reported that bibles, pornography, mini-skirts and women wearing "very strange make-up" and artefacts of western culture has found its way to the DPRK, and DPRK government officials aren't happy about it, a Japanese newspaper reported Wednesday. Citing internal DPRK documents, the Sankei Shimbun daily said DPRK citizens who travel overseas on business were bringing home some unwelcome souvenirs. The result: a decline in morals, a growing divorce rate and rising popularity of fortune tellers. "This is a harsh situation and the impact is significant," the conservative newspaper quoted the document as saying.
The 16-page document, which Sankei said was issued by a DPRK ruling party publisher and given to senior officials last year, contains ideas to be drawn upon in public speeches. "Women are using very strange make-up, putting foreign-style make-up on their lips and eyelashes," the document said, adding that women were also wearing "short skirts." "Divorce is increasing among the people...fortune-tellers are becoming popular," Sankei quoted the document as saying. The document also said those who own television sets and radios were listening to broadcasts from the ROK and other neighbouring countries, and that young people in particular were memorizing ROK songs and bragging about it. Recent visitors to the DPRK, however, have seen no evidence of Western fads, even in the capital of Pyongyang. ("INFLUX OF WESTERN CULTURE WORRYING NORTH KOREA," Tokyo, 02/05/03)
BBC News reported that the DPRK said Wednesday that it had reactivated its nuclear facilities and is going ahead with their operation "on a normal footing." The DPRK will use the facilities to generate electricity "at the present stage," an unidentified North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman said. His remarks were carried by the official KCNA news agency. The DPRK's main nuclear facility at Yongbyon has been dormant since a 1994 deal with the US, but the DPRK announced in December that it would revive it. The Yongbyon facility was the center of a suspected nuclear weapons program in the 1990s.
"The DPRK is now putting the operation of its nuclear facilities for the production of electricity on a normal footing after their restart," the spokesman said. "The DPRK government has already solemnly declared that its nuclear activity would be limited to the peaceful purposes including the production of electricity at the present stage," the spokesman said. In Washington, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said he was unaware of the reports. US officials and nuclear experts say the amount of electricity that North Korea can produce at its nuclear facilities is negligible. ("NORTH KOREA NUCLEAR SITE 'REACTIVATED,'" 02/05/03) and The Associated Press ("NORTH KOREA RESTARTS NUCLEAR PLANT," Seoul, 02/05/03)
The Associated Press reported that defying international pressure to abandon its nuclear ambitions, the DPRK accused the US Tuesday of beefing up its military presence around the Korean Peninsula to "crush" the DPRK. DPRK leader Kim Jong Il also reviewed a naval unit and praised the sailors as "human bombs," the DPRK's KCNA news agency said. The DPRK's latest actions followed comments by US officials in Washington that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is considering sending an aircraft carrier to the waters off the Korean Peninsula and adding bombers in Guam. "In an attempt to crush us to death, the US military is scheming to beef up forces in Japan and South Korea," said the DPRK's Central Radio, monitored by South Korea's Yonhap news agency. KCNA said Kim inspected a naval unit at an undisclosed location Monday and was greatly satisfied with its combat readiness. Kim commended the sailors, calling them "invincible fighters" armed with "the spirit of becoming human bombs and the spirit of blowing oneself up as their invariable faith," it said. (Paul Shin, "NORTH KOREA SHOWING NO SIGN OF BACKING DOWN; US MOVING TO BEEF UP MILITARY AROUND KOREAN PENINSULA," Seoul, 02/05/03) and The Agence France-Presse ("NORTH KOREA WARNS OF STRONG MEASURES AGAINST US MILITARY BUILD-UP," 02/05/03)
The Associated Press reported that the ROK opened a road across its heavily militarized border with the DPRK on Wednesday, the first such connection between the countries in more than five decades. The ROK also said it wanted to take further steps toward reconciliation despite the DPRK's defiance over its nuclear program. In a conciliatory move on Wednesday, a group of 107 ROK tourism officials and business people traveled to a scenic mountain resort in the DPRK on a recently built cross-border road. The 10 buses moved slowly along the narrow dirt road to the northern side as snow fell. The ROK's Hyundai business group started a money-losing cruise to the Diamond Mountain resort in 1998. The company hopes the cheaper overland trip will attract more ROK tourists. The road is the first overland route linking the two Koreas since they were divided in 1945. Wednesday's trip was hoped to pave the way for organized tours by South Korean tourists. (Sang-Huh Choe, "SOUTH KOREA PUSHES EXCHANGES WITH NORTH," Seoul, 02/05/03), BBC News ("FIRST KOREAN BORDER CROSSING OPENS," 02/05/03) and the Agence France-Presse ("SOUTH KOREAN TOUR CONVEY SNAKES THROUGH LAST COLD WAR FRONTIER, 02/05/03)
Reuters reported that the DPRK said Tuesday that the US approach to Korea was a "policy of evil against the DPRK, its reunification and peace" that aimed to dominate the peninsula. "The US policy toward the DPRK (North Korea) is a policy of aggression and a policy of war to stifle the DPRK and its basic goal is to strangle the DPRK by force," said a commentary in the DPRK's Rodong Sinmun. The excerpt from the commentary carried by the Korean Central News Agency made no mention of the nuclear crisis unfolding on the peninsula. The US "aimed to swallow up the DPRK and put the whole of Korea under its domination," it said. ("NORTH SAYS US PURSUES 'POLICY OF EVIL' ON KOREA," Seoul, 02/04/03)
The Los Angeles Times reported that the Bush administration confirmed on January 31, 2003 that recent satellite photos show the DPRK may be resuming production of weapons-grade plutonium, and warned the DPRK not to build nuclear bombs. Satellite photos taken have shown covered trucks pulling up to a building at the Yongbyon nuclear complex, where about 8,000 spent fuel rods are stored. US officials said the purpose of the activity at Yongbyon is not completely clear, but it could mean that the DPRK is making good on threats to begin extracting plutonium from spent fuel to build nuclear weapons, a process that could yield weapons within several months.
Although "we don't know for sure what's happening ... you've got to be concerned that spent fuel rods are being brought out of the facility," said one US official. The satellite pictures were taken so recently that there has not been enough time to establish a pattern or determine exactly what the North Koreans are doing, US officials said. One official said there is no way of knowing for certain from the images whether rods have been loaded into the trucks and moved. Trucks do not need to be specially equipped to handle fuel rods, which can be transported in containers. (Paul Richter and George Miller, "US WARNS NORTH KOREA OVER SATELLITE IMAGES," 02/01/03)
By GREGORY CLARK, The Japan Times, 1 February 2003
The response to my Jan. 10 article "Pyongyang is the real victim," which blames the United States for its mishandling of the North Korean nuclear problem, tells me two things: First, Japan Times articles are followed abroad much more widely than I realized; second, many believe firmly in the incorrigibly evil nature of the North Korean regime.
It is true that North Korea is no candidate for sainthood. Its hardliners have behaved much like their counterparts in other dictatorial regimes -- leftwing and rightwing -- who believe they are under threat and who have a monopoly over truth. A dynamic of torture and forced confessions leading to tens of thousands being imprisoned or killed for alleged spying and sabotage can easily get under way. Deviations from official ideology are cruelly punished. Constant praise for leaders is demanded.
But is this "evil" incorrigible? The Cold War gave us the doctrine of communist irreversibility, which said that the totalitarian nature of communist regimes was crucial to the survival of those regimes and could only be changed by unrelenting Western confrontation. One result was the Indochina tragedy of the 1960s. Another was the loss of an early chance to end the Cold War...