|
Northeast Asia Peace and Security Network DAILY REPORT For Wednesday, September 2, 1998, from Berkeley, California, USA |
1a. DPRK Missile Test: DPRK Statements
The Associated Press ("N. KOREA KNOCKS JAPAN MISSILE FLAP," Seoul,
09/02/98) and Reuters ("N.KOREA BREAKS SILENCE OVER MISSILE FIRING,"
Tokyo, 08/02/98) reported that the Korean Asia-Pacific Peace Committee, a
high-level organ of the DPRK's ruling Workers' Party, in a statement
Wednesday criticized Japan for making a "fuss" over Monday's missile
test. The statement, carried by the DPRK's official Korean Central News
Agency, said, "We bitterly denounce Japan for making a fuss over the
matter that belongs to our sovereignty while being unaware of its
background. It is imprudent for Japan to say this or that, unaware of
what the DPRK did, a missile test or anything else." It added, "Japan's
behavior is ridiculous, indeed, in view of the fact that Japan is
zealously developing long-distance vehicles and other up-to-date weapons
and paving the way for overseas aggression." It also said that is was
unfair of Japan to single out the DPRK when "many countries around Japan
possess or have developed missiles." The statement also demanded that
Japan compensate the DPRK for sufferings inflicted during its colonial
rule of Korea.
1b. DPRK Missile Test: Japanese Reaction
The Associated Press (Yuri Kageyama, "JAPAN ENDS FLIGHTS TO N. KOREA,"
Tokyo, 09/02/98) and Reuters (Teruaki Ueno, "N. KOREA ENDS MISSILE
SILENCE, JAPAN CANCELS FLIGHTS," Tokyo, 09/02/98) reported that Japan on
Wednesday banned all flights between Japan and the DPRK in protest over
Monday's missile test. Top government spokesman Hiromu Nonaka told
reporters that nine flights scheduled to leave Nagoya in central Japan
for the DPRK from now until the end of this year were all canceled. He
added that 14 additional flights currently under discussion for the same
period were also canceled. There are about 30 chartered flights a year
between the two countries, all involving DPRK aircraft. Nonaka stated,
"Further measures against North Korea are still open to debate, and we
must cautiously consider various options, including whether it is legally
possible to inspect or freeze financial transactions of institutions in
Japan over this incident." Japanese Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura
told the Diet, "We will take measures that will not result in North Korea
somehow benefiting from firing a missile, that enables North Korea to
understand it will be to their disadvantage when it does something
internationally unacceptable."
The Associated Press (Yuri Kageyama, "JAPAN PROTESTS N. KOREAN MISSILE,"
Tokyo, 09/01/98) reported that the Japanese government said Tuesday that
Japan has no independent monitoring system to warn of missile launchings
and is reliant on the US for such information. Meanwhile, outside the
Defense Agency in Tokyo, right-wing sound trucks denounced the DPRK
missile test, saying, "If the missile had landed on Japan, what a
disaster it would have been!"
1c. DPRK Missile Test: US Reaction
The United States Information Agency (Judy Aita, "CONGRESS WILL REASSESS
NORTH KOREA AID, GILMAN SAYS," New York, 09/02/98) reported that US
Representative Benjamin Gilman (R-NY), chairman of the House
International Relations Committee, said that the Congress would reassess
US aid to the DPRK in the wake of Monday's missile test. Gilman earlier
had a scheduled appointment with senior DPRK negotiators canceled for the
second time in a week. He stated, "If the missile test was a negotiating
tactic, it surely backfired." He added, "The test clearly damages the
political atmosphere between our two nations and prospects for
maintaining peace and stability in the region. How long will it be
before this new missile finds its way around the world to some other
rogue nation?" Gilman said that when Congress returns from vacation it
would consider "withholding further funding until there is a successful
negotiation and to show our dissatisfaction with the manner in which the
North Koreans reacted to our attempt to resolve these problems." Gilman
said that he is not advocating that the US "walk away" from talks with
the DPRK, but he added, "it is time for the Administration to reappraise
our policy toward North Korea. It's evident our current policies have
been ineffective in engaging the North Korean machine and reducing
military tensions on the Korean Peninsula." He called for "an intensive
round of consultations" with Japan and the ROK "about missile defense to
counter the North Korean threat." Gilman stated, "Food aid is already on
the high seas and that food aid should continue to North Korea," but he
added that "talk of any new assistance should be suspended until we are
certain that North Korea is going to become a responsible international
actor." He said he and Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, have "a hold on" appropriations for aid to
the DPRK for the coming year as well as for additional emergency food aid
for this year. He argued, "We supported food aid to North Korea in the
past to save lives -- that kind of assistance cannot continue without
some basic reform in the North Korean economy."
1d. DPRK Missile Test: Russian Reaction
The Associated Press (Yuri Kageyama, "JAPAN ENDS FLIGHTS TO N. KOREA,"
Tokyo, 09/02/98) reported that Russian officials said Wednesday that they
had asked the DPRK for an explanation of its missile test. Russian
Foreign Ministry spokesman Vladimir Rakhmanin told the Interfax news
agency, "It is our principled stance that we want a normal, neighborly
relationship with North Korea."
1e. DPRK Missile Test: Israeli Reaction
Reuters ("ISRAEL SAYS N. KOREA TEST 'DANGEROUS DEVELOPMENT'," Beijing,
09/01/98) reported that Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Mordechai said
on Wednesday that the DPRK's test-firing of a ballistic missile was a
"dangerous development" in light of its close ties with Iran and Syria.
Mordechai, after a 90-minute meeting with PRC President Jiang Zemin,
stated, "I think there are two dangers here -- one that North Korea has
this capability and the other that it has ties and relations with
countries like Iran and Syria."
1f. DPRK Missile Test: Military Implications
The Associated Press (Susanne M. Schafer, "NKOREAN MISSILE SEEN AS
STRATEGIC," Washington, 09/01/98) (AP) reported that an anonymous senior
US military official said Tuesday that the DPRK's missile test
demonstrates its ability to attack US military bases in Japan. He
stated, "There's no reason to believe it didn't go exactly where they
intended it to go." The official, who works with US military forces in
the ROK, said that the launch also confirms that the DPRK is continuing
to develop missiles despite international pressure. He said that the
DPRK does not appear to be readying another missile test. He argued that
the DPRK's leadership intended the test-firing as a show of power in
advance of the expected ascension of Kim Jong-il to the presidency. He
added that, despite such provocative actions as the missile test and a
recent submarine infiltration of the ROK, some positive developments have
occurred recently with the DPRK, including a recent series of talks
between high-level military officers.
1g. DPRK Missile Test: Commentary
The Los Angeles Times carried an opinion article by Bruce Cumings of the
University of Chicago ("MISSILE LAUNCH IS A SHOT OVER U.S BOW," 09/02/98)
which said that the DPRK's missile test was designed to gain
international attention on the eve of the nation's 50th anniversary. The
author argued that the US "policy of nonrecognition and embargo has done
little to help peace and stability." He added, "In spite of many
predictions, the regime has not collapsed." He stated that "U.S. inertia
has persisted in spite of far-reaching changes in the South's policy
toward the North in the past nine months, as part of President Kim Dae
Jung's 'sunshine policy.'" Noting that "The North has sought better
relations with the U.S. since 1992," the author argued "As long as the
American embargo persists, elder hard-liners in the North have an
impregnable argument to use against younger people--many of them close to
Kim Jong Il--who support a modest program of reform and opening." He
concluded, "The choice for Washington is whether it wants to spend a
relatively small amount to build relations with Pyongyang and effectively
buy out its missile program, or let threatening regimes in the Middle
East buy them instead, and whether finally to recognize a regime that
does not seem to be going away soon and lift the embargo, or to continue
a 50-year policy that has not achieved its goals."
The Los Angeles Times carried an opinion article by William J. Taylor
Jr., Senior Vice President of the Center for Strategic and International
Studies in Washington, ("THE BEST STRATEGY IS DO NOTHING," 09/02/98)
which said that the DPRK's missile launch must be put into context of the
DPRK's ability to inflict severe damage on the ROK and Japan "in any
given two-to-three-day period." The author argued, "That context is the
basis for North Korea's well-documented traditional pattern of
'brinksmanship' diplomacy to wring concessions from the United States and
its allies in South Korea and Japan. Brinkmanship has worked in the past
and there is no reason for the leadership in Pyongyang to abandon it now.
In fact, there is every reason to push harder, given the economic crises
in South Korea and Japan and the leadership vacuum in America." He
stated, "The trouble is that, in the absence of strategy based on power
politics by the U.S. and its allies, North Korea's pattern of
brinkmanship and periods of high tension will continue." He called for
the US to "Do nothing to either harm or help North Korea, while letting
the Stalinist government in Pyongyang go down under the weight of its own
economic mismanagement, horribly repressive political system and the
forces of nature. Meanwhile, put a missile defense around Seoul and
upgrade Japan's missile defenses now to remove the primary factor
allowing North Korean brinksmanship."
2. US-DPRK Talks
The New York Times (Barbara Crossette, "NORTH KOREA DRAWS ANGER WITH TEST
OF A MISSILE," United Nations, 09/02/98) and the Washington Post ("Sandra
Sugawara, "JAPAN SUSPENDS TALKS AFTER N. KOREA TEST FIRING," Tokyo,
09/02/98, A19) reported that US-DPRK talks were halted Tuesday when the
DPRK delegation failed to show up for a meeting. Sources familiar with
the talks expressed surprise at the move, saying that the two sides
appeared to be close to agreement on such issues as inspection of DPRK
nuclear research facilities. The DPRK delegates to the talks said that
they were awaiting new instructions from their government. US officials
said that the DPRK officials were surprised and embarrassed by the
missile test on Monday.
3. US-DPRK Agreed Framework
The United States Information Agency (Jane A. Morse, "DESPITE NORTH
KOREAN MISSILE TESTS, US SUPPORTS AGREED FRAMEWORK," Washington,
09/01/98) reported that an unnamed State Department official said during
a background briefing on September 1 that, despite Monday's missile test,
the DPRK remains in compliance with the Agreed Framework. He stated, "We
think KEDO is a good deal for the United States. It's a good deal for
the DPRK, and it's a good deal for South Korea and Japan." The official
said that KEDO members had been set to finalize plans to share costs for
the light water reactor project but postponed these decisions in order to
weigh the security ramifications of the missile launch. He said, "The
KEDO members will remain in consultation to determine an appropriate time
to finalize any agreement." He added, "no member government has
withdrawn its support for the LWR (light water reactor) project. We
simply halted finalization of the burdensharing agreement." He said that
the US believes "it's important to go forward with the Agreed Framework
... just as it's important to hold the North Koreans to the commitments
they've made within the Agreed Framework."
4. Japanese Theater Missile Defense
The Christian Science Monitor (Cameron W. Barr, "MISSILE TEST REMINDS
JAPANESE OF THEIR VULNERABILITY," 09/02/98) reported that Japanese
analysts said that the DPRK's missile test could give momentum to the
development of a Theater Missile Defense (TMD) system. Akira Kato, a
defense specialist at Obirin University in Tokyo, stated, "The North
Korean testing will create a favorable wind for the pro-TMD thinkers in
the Defense Agency." He added, however, that he remains skeptical that
the project will ever work as envisioned. He argued that regardless,
"Japan should definitely go ahead with the TMD project." He also said
that the project would have the added benefit "of keeping Japan's defense
industry going." A senior government official said that the government's
delay in budgeting for TMD development is due to the need for continued
study of US proposals for Japan's participation.
5. US Theater Missile Defense
Reuters (Charles Aldinger, "U.S. MISSILE DEFENSE COST WILL BE 'HUGE' -
GENERAL," Washington, 09/02/98) and Dow Jones Newswires (Thomas E. Ricks,
"PENTAGON MAY DISCARD INVENTORY OF TROUBLED THAAD MISSILES," Washington,
09/02/98) reported that US Air Force Lieutenant General Lester Lyles,
head of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, said Wednesday that
the cost of developing a missile defense system will be enormous. Lyles
said that costs were growing and technical troubles could force the US to
stop testing its Theater High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) system after
five successive failures. He stressed that he was not asking for more
money for anti-missile development, but noted that the US military is
operating within tight budgets even as many in Congress are pressing for
development of US national missile defense. He added that the military
expects the results of studies this month on whether to conduct a new
test of the Theater High-Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) later in the year.
He predicted that there was a better-than-even chance that such a test
would succeed, although he conceded that others in the Defense Department
disagreed. He warned that a further failure could result in discarding
the current inventory and allowing Lockheed-Martin or Raytheon Co. to
develop a new THAAD missile, a move that could delay the program for up
to two years.
6. US-Russian Summit Agreements
The White House issued a fact sheet ("THE EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON
MISSILE LAUNCHES," 09/02/98) on the agreement signed between the US and
Russia on Wednesday for the exchange of information on missile launches
and early warning. The sheet said that the agreement "will significantly
reduce the danger that ballistic missiles could be launched inadvertently
on the basis of false warning of attack. It will also promote increased
mutual confidence in the capabilities of the ballistic missile early
warning systems of both sides." Under the agreement, "The US and Russia
will develop arrangements for providing each other with continuous
information on the launches of strategic and theater ballistic missiles
and space launch vehicles detected by their respective early warning
systems. Missile launch information could be sent to each side's
national early warning centers, and possibly to a center operated by US
and Russian personnel working together, side-by-side. The US and Russia
will also work towards establishing a multilateral ballistic missile and
space launch vehicle pre-launch notification regime in which other states
would be invited to participate."
The White House issued a fact sheet ("PLUTONIUM DISPOSITION," Moscow,
09/02/98) on the agreement signed Wednesday between US President Bill
Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin on the disposition of
plutonium from decommissioned nuclear arms. The sheet stated, "The US
and Russia each pledged to remove from their weapons programs some 50
metric tons of plutonium each." It added, "The Presidents agreed on
principles to guide implementation of this conversion by building
industrial-scale facilities in both countries. The disposition of the
plutonium will be carried out either by consuming the plutonium as fuel
in existing civil nuclear reactors or through mixing the plutonium with
high-level radioactive waste and storing it in a long-term spent fuel
repository. Appropriate transparency and international verification
measures will apply to this program, as will stringent standards of
safety, environmental protection, and material protection, control and
accounting." It stated, "US-Russian cooperation on plutonium disposition
will be carried out in close cooperation and coordination with parallel
efforts involving Russia and other G-8 countries. The Presidents
directed their experts to initiate negotiations to transform these agreed
principles into bilateral agreement that will lay out the concrete steps
for plutonium disposition and govern their future cooperation in this
area. President Clinton and President Yeltsin agreed to begin
negotiations for this bilateral agreement promptly, with the intention of
completing the agreement by the end of this year."
The White House issued a fact sheet ("U.S.-RUSSIAN EXPORT CONTROL
COOPERATION," Moscow, 09/02/98) on the agreement Wednesday between US
President Bill Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin to expand
cooperation on export controls to halt the spread of weapons of mass
destruction and their means of delivery. The sheet stated, "The two
presidents agreed to regularize and develop a series of interagency
subgroups to enhance export control cooperation in seven principal areas:
missile technology, nuclear weapons and material, implementation of so-
called 'catch-all' legislation, conventional arms transfers, law
enforcement, customs and licensing. The subgroups will begin meeting
this month to share information, experience and expertise on export
control issues and practices." It added, "To facilitate rapid and
reliable means of communication when faced with fast-breaking cases of
export control concern, the United States and Russia have agreed to
establish a protected communications capability channel between senior
officials of both countries. This communications capability channel
ensures the immediate and confidential exchange of information on a broad
range of nonproliferation matters."
7. PRC Economic Aid to Russia
The Wall Street Journal (Ian Johnson, "CHINA, SEEKING IMAGE OF STABILITY,
TO GIVE $540 MILLION TO AID RUSSIA," Beijing, 09/02/98) reported that a
Foreign Ministry spokesman said Wednesday that the PRC would give US$540
million to aid Russia. He said that the aid would be channeled through
the International Monetary Fund. Fred Hu, China economist at Goldman
Sachs (Asia) L.L.C. in Hong Kong, stated, "The image [the PRC] want to
project is of a government that is proactive and forceful. The contrast
they have in mind is with Japan, where political paralysis has left the
government unable to take action."
1. ROK Response to DPRK Missile Test
The ROK Ministry of National Defense (MOND) concluded Tuesday that the
DPRK test of its Taepodong-1 missile was successful. MOND is preparing
multilateral measures to deal with the test, including close cooperation
with the US and Japan. A MOND official said it would take a month for a
complete analysis of the test but said the range of the missile's flight
indicates initial success. ROK defense minister Chun Yong-taek flew to
Tokyo Tuesday and met his Japanese counterpart, Fukushiro Nukaga, for
discussions on the test. The Japanese government convened an emergency
National Security Council meeting headed by Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi,
who said that the incident was extremely serious and ordered the cabinet
to strengthen intelligence gathering and to take sanction measures,
including suspending food assistance. Japan also decided to propose an
international meeting to limit mid-range missiles at the UN session
commencing at the end of the month. Additionally, it is to seek
sanctions on the DPRK through international organizations. Foreign
minister Masahika Komura said that there had been many attempts to
normalize relations with the DPRK, but the situation is now
deteriorating, and he sees difficulty in supplying aid in the future.
The US government, at a high-level meeting in New York, expressed strong
concerns and called for an early resumption to missile talks on freezing
the development of long-range missiles. (Chosun Ilbo, "GOVERNMENT
STUDIES MEASURES ON NK TEST," 09/02/98)
2. Japanese Response to DPRK Missile Test
The Japanese government decided Wednesday to suspend all direct flights
between Japan and the DPRK if the DPRK does not show any noticeable
change in its attitude and fails to acknowledge any wrongdoing in
conducting Monday's missile test over Japan. Flights between Japan and
the DPRK began in 1982, peaking at about 80 flights annually connecting
Japan's Niigata and Nagoya Airports to Pyongyang. Last year, 21
passenger flights and 8 cargo flights departed the DPRK for Japan. The
Japanese government and its ruling party are known to be considering
sanctions against DPRK citizens residing in Japan by freezing assets as
well as banning the remittance of funds from Japan to the DPRK. (Chosun
Ilbo, "JAPAN CONSIDERS SANCTIONS AGAINST NK," 09/02/98)
Japan's government vowed Wednesday to bolster defense technology,
possibly with a spy satellite. "We have been given a new sense of
urgency," Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiromu Nonaka told a news conference.
He added, "We felt powerless as we strove for our security based only on
occasional information provided to us." He said that the DPRK missile
test "made us realize the fear of not being able to obtain security
information from our own satellite." The DPRK's unannounced missile test
triggered alarm Monday in Japan after evading its surveillance systems.
The headquarters of US forces in Japan tipped off Japanese defense
authorities about the launch. The US monitored the firing on a spy
satellite, according to a Japanese report. Nonaka said that Japan would
press forward with consideration of launching its own surveillance
satellite and bolstering cooperation with the US-led development of
theater and ballistic missile defense. (Korea Times, "NK MISSILE GOADS
JAPAN INTO DEFENSE ACTION," 09/02/98)
3. US Response to DPRK Missile Test
An influential US congressman on Tuesday threatened to cut off new food
aid to the DPRK after the DPRK fired a missile across Japan. Benjamin
Gilman, chairman of the House of Representatives' International Relations
Committee, issued the threat after DPRK Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye-
gwan failed to show up for a meeting at the US mission to the UN. Though
food aid should continue to the famine-threatened DPRK, "talks of any new
assistance should be suspended until we are certain that the DPRK is
going to become a responsible international actor," Gilman said. He
described the latest developments as "provocative acts" by the DPRK. "If
it is a negotiation tactic it surely backfired," he said about the
missile test. (Korea Times, "US THREAT TO NORTH KOREAN FOOD AID AFTER
MISSILE FIRING," 09/02/98)
The NAPSNet Daily Report aims to serve as a forum for dialogue
and exchange among peace and security specialists.
Conventions for readers and a list of acronyms and
abbreviations are available to all recipients.
For descriptions of the world wide web sites used to gather
information for this report, or for more information on web
sites with related information, see the collection of
other NAPSNet resources.
Produced by the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development in partnership with:
Wade L. Huntley: napsnet@nautilus.org
Timothy L. Savage: napsnet@nautilus.org
Choi Chung-moon: cily@star.elim.co.kr
Hiroyasu Akutsu: akutsu@glocomnet.or.jp
Peter Razvin: icipu@glas.apc.org
Chunsi Wu: dlshen@fudan.ac.cn
Dingli Shen: dlshen@fudan.ac.cn
Return to the Top of this Daily Report
[Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Next Item][Contents]
[Prev. Item][Contents][Credits]
We invite you to reply to today's report, and we welcome
commentary or papers for distribution to the network.
The Center for Global Communications, Tokyo, Japan
Center for American Studies,
Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
Berkeley, California, United States
Berkeley, California, United States
Seoul, Republic of Korea
Tokyo, Japan
Moscow, Russian Federation
Shanghai, People's Republic of China
Shanghai, People's Republic of China