|
Northeast Asia Peace and Security Network DAILY REPORT For Monday, September 14, 1998, from Berkeley, California, USA |
1. Alleged DPRK Satellite Launch
The Associated Press ("SKOREA LEADER: NKOREA FIRED MISSILE," Seoul,
09/14/98) reported that ROK Defense Minister Chun Yong-taek said Monday
that he saw no reason to change his ministry's original conclusion that
the DPRK test-fired a two-stage Taepodong 1 ballistic missile over Japan
on August 31. Chun stated, "There is a high possibility that the
projectile fired by North Korea was a missile, not a satellite." He
added that the US military in the ROK shares his view. Chun argued,
"Whatever North Korea did, it proved its capability to develop a medium-
range ballistic missile."
Reuters ("SEOUL TV SAYS NORTH KOREA ROCKET WAS SATELLITE LAUNCH," Seoul,
09/13/98) reported that the ROK's state-run Korea Broadcasting System
(KBS) quoted an anonymous top ROK government official as saying on Sunday
that the rocket launched by the DPRK was a satellite launcher, not a
missile. According to the official, the DPRK failed to put the satellite
into orbit due to the rocket's lack of "propulsive force," and it fell
into Japanese waters. He added that there was no DPRK satellite orbiting
the earth.
The Associated Press ("N. KOREA DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM JAPAN," Tokyo,
09/12/98) reported that the DPRK's official Korean Central News Agency on
Saturday accused Japan of "slander" and demanded it apologize for
criticizing the DPRK's rocket launch. The report stated, "There is no
reason why only a few particular countries can launch artificial
satellites in an effort to use space for peaceful purposes." It added,
"Japanese politicians ignorant of this internationally recognized common
sense still slander the DPRK."
2. US-ROK-Japan Policy toward DPRK
Reuters ("S.KOREA, US, JAPAN TO DISCUSS N.KOREA," Seoul, 09/14/98)
reported that a statement by the ROK foreign ministry said Wednesday that
the ROK, the US, and Japan plan to meet Monday in Washington to discuss
DPRK issues. The statement said that Kwon Jong-rak, ROK director general
for North American affairs, Anami Koreshige, Japan's Asian affairs bureau
director general, and Charles Kartman, US special envoy for Korea, were
scheduled to attend the meeting.
3. US Policy toward DPRK
The Los Angeles Times carried an opinion article by Robert A. Manning,
Senior Fellow and Director of Asian Studies at the Council on Foreign
Relations, ("NORTH KOREA: THE UNTHINKABLE MAY TURN INTO REALITY,"
Washington, 09/13/98) which said that recent events suggest that the
situation on the Korean peninsula may be drifting toward "nightmare
scenarios" that cannot be prevented through diplomacy. The author
argued, "If it is revealed that North Korea has continued a secret effort
to develop nuclear weapons even as it claimed to have frozen its known
facilities, all bets are off." He said that the DPRK's response to
attempts at engagement "calls into question the logic of the 1994 nuclear
accord and, indeed, whether it is possible to do business with North
Korea at all." He also pointed out that the US has not fulfilled its
commitments under the agreement to move toward normalizing relations and
to ease restrictions on trade and investment. He said that while some
have interpreted the DPRK recent moves as a "bargaining tactic" to get
the US to move ahead with these commitments, "there is reason to wonder
if a much darker interpretation is warranted.... What if the North's
ultimate trump card is not trading military threats for economic gifts
but, rather, nuclear blackmail to force Korean reunification on terms
acceptable to it? This is a possibility that cannot be ruled out."
However, he said that "it is too soon to conclude that military conflict
is the unavoidable outcome. The next step must be to hold higher-level
talks to gain access to the suspicious newly discovered sites." He
argued, "If Pyongyang demonstrably cooperated, the U.S., South Korea and
Japan should make one last good-faith effort to put a grand bargain on
the table." He concluded, "The tragedy of U.S. policy, so far, is that
we are drifting toward conflict without having honestly tested
Pyongyang's intentions by offering North Koreans a road map for a soft
landing that meets their legitimate interests if they meet ours. But if
Pyongyang failed to respond credibly to such an offer, it would be time
to begin thinking the unthinkable."
4. Alleged DPRK Involvement in Vietnam War
The Associated Press ("NKOREA PILOTS FOUGHT IN VIETNAM WAR," Seoul,
09/14/98) reported that Lee Chul-soo, a DPRK air force captain who
defected to the ROK in his jet fighter in 1996, told the Chosun Ilbo
newspaper Monday that more than 800 DPRK military pilots flew Soviet-
provided MiG jets against US fighters during the Vietnam War. The
newspaper said it was the first confirmation that DPRK air force pilots
participated in the Vietnam War. Lee said that between 1967 and 1972, 70
DPRK pilots were sent to Vietnam at a time on a six-month rotation to fly
MiG-17 and MiG-21 jets provided by the Soviet Union. He added, "It's
known in the North Korean air force that 80 North Korean pilots were
killed in action, in which over 100 U.S. planes were shot down." Lee
also said that 30 DPRK air force pilots flew MiG jets for Egypt in the
1973 Mideast War with Israel. He stated, "They were first sent to
Moscow, disguised as students going to school there, and then to Egypt."
5. DPRK-Pakistan Missile Cooperation
The Washington Times (Bill Gertz, "PAKISTAN'S MISSILE PROGRAM AIDED BY
NORTH KOREA," 09/14/98) reported that unnamed US officials said that the
DPRK delivered several shipments of weapons material, including warhead
canisters for the new Ghauri medium-range missile, to Pakistan's Khan
Research Laboratories (KRL) in mid-June. The article said that other US
intelligence reports indicate that Pakistan is moving ahead rapidly with
plans to develop weapons-grade fuel for nuclear weapons from several
facilities. According to one intelligence report, satellite spy
photographs revealed increased activity at the KRL's missile production
and assembly plant, indicating that "Pakistan is currently producing more
Ghauri missiles." The article said that, according to a US intelligence
report, the DPRK's Changgwang Sinyong Corp., also known as the DPRK
Mining Development Trading Corporation, obtained special "maraging steel"
from Russia last year for Pakistan's missile program. The report
identified Kang Tae-yun, the DPRK economic counselor in Pakistan and
local representative of Changgwang Sinyong, as a key figure in the deal
with an unidentified Russian company. Joseph Bermudez, a specialist on
the DPRK missile program, stated, "North Korean-Pakistani missile
cooperation dates to the early 1990s, and it is continuing, it is
significant and it does pose a threat to stability in South Asia."
Bermudez said that a senior general in the DPRK defense commission, Choe
Kwang, visited Pakistan in November 1995, when arrangements for missile
cooperation between the two countries were reportedly made.
6. US-India Nuclear Talks
The Washington Post carried an analytical article (Pamela Constable,
"INDIA PLAYS NUCLEAR WAITING GAME," New Delhi, 09/14/98, A15) which said
that India appears to be delaying the development of detailed plans for
the control, size, and composition of its nuclear arsenal in the interest
of retaining bargaining power in its negotiations with the US. Indian
Defense Minister George Fernandes, asked why the government has not moved
to set up a formal command-and-control structure for its nuclear arsenal,
stated, "There is no need to be rushed. One can work at one's own pace."
He added that India's only concern in its nuclear negotiation is "what is
best to ensure our security." Jasjit Singh, a key government adviser on
nuclear issues, stated, "Pardon me if I sound quite relaxed about this.
This is not just something we blundered into; we have given it a great
deal of thought. Our policy will be one of responsibility and
restraint." However, P. R. Chari, a defense expert who directs the
Center for Policy Research, argued, "What is a credible minimum
deterrent? Nobody has a clue. Some say it could be three to six
[warheads].... Others say 150. I have never come across a military
establishment that believes enough is enough, and I believe the entire
concept is a hoax." He added that civilian control over nuclear policy
already has been weakened by India's "scientific-military lobby." He
argued, "They feel that with the bomb, they become important." He
predicted that once India's nuclear devices are developed into usable
weapons, "India will start climbing the nuclear escalator."
7. US South Asian Policy
The Washington Post carried an opinion article by Richard Haass of the
Brookings Institution and Morton Halperin of the Century Foundation ("OUR
MISGUIDED SOUTH ASIA NUCLEAR POLICY," 09/13/98, C05) which called on the
US to dispense with ineffective sanctions and face reality regarding the
South Asian nuclear arms race. The authors argued, "Intense U.S.
diplomatic contacts with India and Pakistan have approached a decisive
point. Congress will be in session for only a few more weeks; the
president must decide soon whether to go ahead with his planned trip to
India and Pakistan in November." Pointing out that the US has important
interests in both India and Pakistan beyond the nuclear issue, they
stated, "U.S. policy should not sacrifice its many interests in South
Asia to promote unrealistic aims in the nuclear realm. Particularly
quixotic is any hope of a complete rollback to a non-nuclear South Asia."
They argued that present US policy, which requires the introduction of
economic sanctions for an indefinite period, is likely to complicate the
challenge of promoting the full range of US interests in South Asia.
They warned that "Sanctions could actually weaken political authority in
Pakistan.... A stable Pakistan in possession of nuclear weapons is
reason enough to worry; an unstable Pakistan would be that much worse."
They added, "Although it is important that India and Pakistan be seen as
paying a price (and certainly not be seen as being rewarded) for their
decision to test, reliance on economic sanctions for this purpose makes
for questionable policy." They argued that Congress should provide the
president with broad sanctions waiver authority. They concluded, "The
United States can use other tools on a case-by-case basis to frustrate
nuclear proliferation. These include security commitments, sales of
conventional arms, diplomacy that abates the source of conflict,
sanctions, economic incentives, export controls, a stronger International
Atomic Energy Agency, covert operations, preventive military strikes, and
arms control agreements."
8. PRC-Japan Economic Talks
The Associated Press (Elaine Kurtenbach, "CHINA, JAPAN TO HOLD ECONOMIC
TALKS," Beijing, 09/13/98) and Reuters ("CHINA, JAPAN SEEK JOINT APPROACH
TO ASIAN CRISIS," Beijing, 09/13/98) reported that senior PRC and
Japanese officials opened day-long talks on Monday designed to develop
cooperative efforts to deal with the Asian economic crisis. Japanese
Deputy Foreign Minister Koichi Haraguchi and PRC Vice Foreign Trade
Minister Sun Zhenyu led their respective delegations of trade and finance
officials.
9. Japanese Defense Procurement Scandal
The Associated Press ("JAPANESE DEFENSE AGENCY SEARCHED," Tokyo,
09/14/98) reported that the Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office
raided Japan's Defense Agency headquarters Monday on suspicion that
officials destroyed documents to cover up relations between military
officials and defense contractors. The investigators also questioned two
top agency officials in charge of procurement. The probe has revolved
around allegations that defense officials conspired with Toyo
Communication Equipment Co. to allow the company to keep part of profits
it made by overcharging the government for supplies in exchange for
securing jobs for retiring agency officials.
1. US-DPRK Liaison Offices
The US and the DPRK are known to have agreed at high level meetings that
ended in New York on Saturday to establish temporary liaison offices in
hotels in Pyongyang and Washington. An informed source in the ROK
government said that the DPRK has notified the US of its intention to
discuss this issue but no date or venue had been fixed. The idea of
setting up temporary liaison offices in hotels was apparently offered by
the DPRK. The topic was initially brought up in 1994 but the DPRK was
slow to react, causing negotiations to become bogged down by minor
details such as whether diplomatic pouches would be allowed to pass
through the DMZ at Panmunjom. (Chosun Ilbo, "US AND NK AGREE ON
TEMPORARY LIASON OFFICE," 09/14/98)
2. Alleged DPRK Satellite Launch
The ROK government believes that the DPRK's firing of a rocket August 31
was an unsuccessful attempt to put a satellite into orbit, a top ROK
administration official said Sunday. "It is our interim conclusion that
the North tried in vain to launch a satellite into orbit," said the ROK
official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. He said that the US
shares the ROK government's judgment, adding that the US has not found
any satellite that could have been launched by the DPRK. The first
booster of the rocket fell in the East Sea between Korea and Japan and
the second booster, which overflew Japan, landed off the Pacific coast of
northern Japan. The ROK official said that US intelligence may have lost
track of the third booster, as it had originally believed the rocket was
a two-stage Taepodong ballistic missile. However, he said the third-
stage booster is believed to have landed somewhere 27 seconds after being
separated from the rocket. He said that despite its failure to put a
satellite into orbit, the DPRK, by firing a three-stage rocket, proved
its potential for developing an inter-continental ballistic missile
(ICBM). The ROK official said that the government is maintaining close
cooperation with Russian authorities regarding the DPRK satellite issue.
Russia's ITAR-TASS news agency first confirmed the DPRK claims that it
launched a scientific satellite into orbit. (Korea Herald, "GOVERNMENT
CONCLUDES NORTH KOREAN MISSILE WAS FAILED SATELLITE ATTEMPT," 09/14/98)
1. DPRK Food Aid
[Ed. note: The following is a press release from the Institute for
Strategic Reconciliation ("'THE AMERICAN COUNCIL ON WHEAT FOR
RECONCILIATION' ADVOCATES THE EXPEDITIOUS DELIVERY OF AMERICAN WHEAT
SURPLUS TO NORTH KOREA," Washington, 09/11/98). NAPSNet presents it as
received.]
The American Council on Wheat for Reconciliation, which on August 15
initiated the Wheat for Reconciliation advocacy grassroots campaign,
seems to have influenced the recent U.S. decision to provide 300,000 tons
of wheat surplus to North Korea. The Council and its group or individual
constituents advocating the expeditious donation of 500,000 tons of
American wheat surplus to North Korea on humanitarian grounds alone, have
sent the appeal letter to each of 540 U.S. congressmen and key cabinet
members of President Clinton since August 15.
Young Chun, National Coordinator of the American Council on Wheat for
Reconciliation and Executive director of the Institute for Strategic
Reconciliation (ISR), estimates that about 50,000 to 100,000 Korean-
Americans have been mobilized in the past 3 weeks to write or call to US
Senators and Representatives and key cabinet members of the Clinton
administration, appealing for 500,000 tons of American wheat surplus
donation to North Korea.
About 30 national or local groups have joined the Council and endorsed
the appeal letter. Over 20 mega-Korean churches with memberships of
2,000 to 5,000 each in the United States have joined the campaign as of
today. The ISR, the campaign developer, has targeted Christian Korean
constituents as a primary group to mobilize, as the ISR's foundational
value of the Christian philosophy of reconciliation appeals to the
Christian public, and has expanded the campaign by appealing to all other
religious or non-religious national or local groups over time. The wheat
advocacy campaign continues in September mobilizing: national networks of
2nd-generation Korean-Americans and their partnership with first
generation ethnic Koreans; ordinary Korean-Americans; and American NGOs
and the general public.
"President Clinton included N. Korea in his radio address on July 18 as
one of the recipients of 2.5 million tons of U.S. wheat. Yet,
administrator Brian Atwood of the US Agency for International Development
announced on August 5 that North Korea is not on the aid list," noted the
Council in its advocacy appeal letter. The current grain shortfall in
the North will be 500,000 to 1 million tons by this October, according to
the WFP, FAO, and NGOs. The US has wheat surplus enough to meet this
shortage. No other tangible aid sources are available. In response, the
Council initiated the nationwide campaign on August 15, and is continuing
the appeal campaign through the end of September.
The wheat advocacy campaign material is accessible at the website. The website includes the wheat appeal letter
along with the list of about 30 currently endorsing organizations,
including: Association of Korean Churches in Greater New York, NY;
Association of Korean Churches in Greater Washington, VA; Association of
Korean Americans Separated from North Korea's Home Provinces, NY; Boston
Campaign for North Korea Famine Relief, MA; Center for Promotion of
Permanent Neutral Korea, Inc., CA; Chicago Buddhist Practice, IL;
Coalition for Sharing with People of North Korea, NY; Council of Greater
New York, "Help My People", NY; Dallas Korean-American Sharing Movement,
TX; Global Mission Church - English Service, MD; Institute for Strategic
Reconciliation, Inc., MD; Jun Deung Sa Buddhist Temple, NY; Join Together
Society of USA, Inc., NY; Korean Association of Greater New York, NY;
Korean Merchant Association of the Village, NY; Kum Kang Kyung Dok Song
Hoe, NY; Kwan Eum Sa Buddhist Temple, PA; Los Angeles Campaign to Stop
Famine in North Korea, CA; Martial Art Academy, NJ; Mun Su Sa Buddhist
Temple, Boston, MA; National Association of Korean Americans, CA; New
York Association of Buddhist Temples, NY; One Buddhist of New York, NY;
St. Paul Chong Ha-Sang Roman Catholic Chapel and Center, NY; Tae-Kwon-Do
Association of New Jersey, NJ; Tae-Kwon-Do Association of Philadelphia,
PA; Virginia Presbyterian Church, VA; Washington Christian Radio System,
MD.
The Institute for Strategic Reconciliation (ISR), the organization
coordinating the Wheat for Reconciliation grassroots advocacy campaign,
is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit think tank seeking to
restore reconciliation where conflict exists by engaging in scientific,
cultural, educational, humanitarian, and religious research. The ISR
addresses policy challenges promoting international and national
reconciliation, and facilitates conflict resolution policy developments
in civilian and government programs. The ISR is incorporated in the
state of Virginia.
For further information contact the Council, at ISR_usa@Yahoo.com or 301-
570-3948 by fax or voice, or at its website.
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][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