Commentary

The fourth round of the Six Party Talks has reached, by latest reports, a deadlock. It may be that some deal will yet be struck, perhaps with secret clauses, but it is more likely that they will finish with pious claims that progress has been made, and that the process will continue, but with no agreement. This round of talks has been hyped up, especially by the Chinese and South Koreans who both have a claim to be mediators between Washington and Pyongyang, but in reality it was unlikely that there would be a breakthrough. Much has been made of the fact that Chris Hill, the US delegate, actually had bilateral meetings with Kim Kye-gwan, his DPRK counterpart,. However that seems merely to have proved that whilst you can't have negotiations without talks, you can have talks without negotiation. Basically, both sides have been unwilling to compromise to the degree demanded by the other. Pyongyang has claimed, probably sincerely, that it is willing to dismantle its nuclear weapons programme in exchange for 'peaceful coexistence', on a step-by-step basis. In many ways a repeat of the Agreed Framework. The United States, on the other hand, seems to have stood by its CVID approach, demanding that DPRK completely, verifiably and irreversibly dismantle programs before the US allows South Korea to provide compensation, and with issues such as normalisation of US-DPRK relations still held up as a prize that may, or may not, be delivered. Moreover, whilst in the June 2004 talks the US had merely hinted that it opposed the DPRK having a nuclear energy programme, this tine it has been more explicit. ROK had, perhaps naively, perhaps disingenuously, offer to proved electricity in lieu of the reactors pledged, but not delivered, under the Agreed Framework. Under this agreement the US promised a number of things - two light-water reactors, security guarantees, normalisation of relations, and interim delivery of heavy fuel oil. The only promise really honoured was oil, and that was cut off in late 2002. It is unlikely that the DPRK has forgotten that lesson; energy security is vital.

The DPRK position is easy enough to understand. It has few cards in its hand and needs to harbour those carefully in an attempt to secure survival and prosperity. The US position is rather more difficult to analyse, clouded as it is by obfuscation and the ‘noble lies’ espoused by neocon guru Leo Strauss. What is wrong with peaceful coexistence? Why does the US baulk at security guarantees? Harvard historian Niall Ferguson has observed that the United States is an empire in denial. That means that while the US talks, and to a large extent internalizes, the rhetoric of liberal democracy, in reality it follows the logic of empire. There are two aspects of that logic that obtain here, the global and the regional.

The global logic demands that the DPRK be made an example to other small (and not so small) countries that might have the temerity to defy the United States. It must be forced to submit to American power, with any benefits given as compensation for the loss of effective sovereignty coming afterwards as acts of generosity rather than being concessions wrested in negotiations between nations equal in sovereignty. It would be a grave mistake, according to this logic, to engage in negotiation because that would legitimise defiance. Iraq disarmed and was invaded; what would be the lessons to the likes of Iran if North Korea was able to bargain nuclear disarmament for peaceful coexistence? Moreover, as long as the DPRK resists the country, and its people (the ‘collateral damage’), must be made to suffer both the fear of attack and economic strangulation.

Intersecting this global necessity, and at some variance from it, is the regional one. Here China is seen as the main issue, with a North Korea that can be portrayed as threatening merely as a component in its containment. The United States has been assiduous in erecting a pan-Asian alliance to encircle China, with India being the latest recruit. However it is Japan that is the lynchpin of this strategy, and the US is working with domestic forces in Japan to promote remilitarisation, free from the constraints of the ‘Peace Constitution’. And if a nuclear-armed North Korea leads to a nuclear-armed Japan then perhaps so much the better. The ‘North Korean threat’ is also a key rationale for Missile Defense and the development of a new generation of low-yield nuclear weapons. By this logic the continued existence of the DPRK is desirable, as long as it is poor, hungry and seen as threatening. Here demands such as that the DPRK abandon nuclear energy are tabled not so much to devastate, but rather to place it in a position where it has to reject them thus continuing the crisis. With South Korea planning to raise the proportion of its electricity from nuclear generation to 60%, North Korea is scarcely likely to consign itself to permanent deprivation and lack of energy security.

There is constant dissension within the American government about foreign policy, but underlying them are the imperatives of empire. These imperatives may sometimes be unclear (even to policy makers), sometimes in contradiction with each other, but they are the ultimate drivers of US policy.

Tim Beal

U.S. Nukes Another Obstacle at Six-Party Talks

[Analysis] North's claims that there is a clear American nuclear threat has considerable merit

Cheong Wook Sik

Every nation at the six-party talks that began July 26 is calling for a "nuclear free Korean peninsula." The Bush Administration says that the goal is not having talks but making substantial progress towards a nuclear free peninsula. Chairman Kim Jong IL says a peninsula without nuclear arms was one of the final wishes of President Kim IL Sung and that it is North Korea's goal. It is clearly noteworthy when North Korea and the United States speak with one voice about nukes and the Korean peninsula.

They differ significantly, however, when it comes to what that should really mean. The US defines denuclearization as the "complete, verifiable, irreversible dismantlement" (CVID) of the North's nuclear program, and claims that would require the North abandoning its plutonium-based program as well as a highly enriched uranium (HEU) program the North denies even exists. In addition, the US does not want to permit the North to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes such as the light water reactor.

The North, on the other hand, claims that a nuclear free peninsula can be achieved only after the US nuclear threat is removed. Since the North declared that it is a nuclear state in a foreign ministry statement March 31, the six-party talks, according to Pyongyang, should be about arms reductions instead of a process where the North gives up its program and the US takes corresponding action. It wants to talk not only about its own program but an American nuclear threat "on and around the Korean peninsula."

The North also wants nuclear transparency regarding South Korea and it wants that verified and the US nuclear umbrella removed. It says that since it and the US are technically still at war, having nuclear arms is a deterrent that guarantees peace and stability at a time when the South is under the US's nuclear umbrella.

Source: OhmyNews (Seoul) 1 August 2005

A Moment to Seize With North Korea

Donald Gregg and Don Oberdorfer

North Korean leader Kim Jong Il's remarkable statements to a South Korean envoy last Friday present a rare opportunity to move promptly toward ending the dangerous nuclear proliferation crisis in Northeast Asia. The Bush administration should seize the moment.

The reclusive leader told South Korea's minister of unification, Chung Dong Young, that he is willing to return to the six-nation talks on his nuclear weapons program if the United States "recognizes and respects" his country. More than that, according to Chung, he raised the prospect of reversing his burgeoning nuclear program, rejoining the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which he abandoned two years ago, and welcoming back U.N. nuclear inspectors in return for a credible security guarantee.

The U.S. national interest as well as the interests of our Asian partners in the talks -- all of whom favor much greater U.S. engagement with North Korea -- call for a positive response from Washington. This would be particularly welcome in Seoul, which both of us visited last week.

[Donald Gregg is a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea and currently president of the Korea Society. Don Oberdorfer is a former diplomatic correspondent for The Post and currently journalist-in-residence at Johns Hopkins University's Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies.]

Source Washington Post, 22 June 2005

China Says U.S. Impeded North Korea Arms Talks

Joseph Kahn

BEIJING, May 12 - A senior Chinese diplomat on Thursday accused the Bush administration of undermining efforts to revive negotiations with the North Korean government and said there was "no solid evidence" that North Korea was preparing to test a nuclear weapon.

The comments by Yang Xiyu, a senior Foreign Ministry official and China's top official on the North Korean nuclear problem, were noteworthy because the Chinese authorities very rarely speak to journalists about the issue. The comments reflect growing frustration in Beijing with the Bush administration.

Source: New York Times, 13 May 2005

Despite U.S. Attempts, N. Korea Anything but Isolated

Anthony Faiola

Country's Regional Trade Boom Hints At Split Between Administration, E. Asia

SEOUL -- Some people may be worrying about a possible North Korean nuclear test, but Lee Ju Hong, a well-coiffed retail manager for South Korea's largest department store, is preoccupied with his latest sales event -- a North Korean kitchenware fair.

North Korean housewares are the rage these days. The Lotte department store sold out its first shipment of North Korean pots and pans last December and followed up with a bigger sale in January, when another 7,000 pieces of cookware were carted off by eager shoppers. ..//..

The cookware is manufactured at the new Kaesong Industrial Park just north of the heavily mined border by South Korean companies backed by a multimillion-dollar government investment, some of which has been used to employ 2,000 North Korean workers. South Korean officials hope the growing economic development across the border will promote political and social reforms in the North. But the burgeoning business relationship has also become a symbol of the divide between South Korea and the United States on how to handle North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il.

Source: Washington Post 12 May 2005

Wrong Click Publicises Workings of U.S. Korea Policy

A confidential report for the Korean Embassy in Washington on key players in the U.S.' Korea policies is no longer so confidential after it was accidentally e-mailed to 800 subscribers of a daily political tip sheet containing news and gossip from around the country.

The report titled "Players in Korea Policy in Washington, D.C." is an analysis of the powers that make Korea policy in the U.S. administration and was supposed to be sent only to the Korean embassy. ..//..

A former journalist, Nelson wrote his report based on interviews with government officials connected with Korea policy and researchers. The report said the Bush administration's views of North Korea have not changed since his first term, and that core decisions concerning the North, such as negotiations with Pyongyang, depend on U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney.

Source: Chosun Ilbo, Seoul, 30 June 2005

Seoul Simulated Bombing of N. Korean Nuclear Plant

Simulations secretly commissioned by the South Korean military suggest bombing of North Korea's nuclear facilities could in the worst case make the whole of Korea uninhabitable for a decade, it has been revealed. The military commissioned the simulations amid rising tension following North Korea's launch of a Taepodong missile over Japan in 1998 and when suspicions surfaced a year later that the North was operating underground nuclear facilities.

The simulation revealed that destruction of the Yongbyon nuclear plant could cause enormous destruction, with nuclear fallout as far away as China and Japan. U.S. research institutes have conducted similar simulations, but this is the first time it has been confirmed that South Korean military authorities commissioned them.

If the 8 megawatt research reactor and 5 megawatt test reactor at Yongbyon were destroyed by bombs while they were in operation, the simulation showed that radiation would affect people as far as 1,400 km away. Eighty to 100 percent of those living within a 10-15 km radius of the reactors would die within two months, and only 20 percent within a 30-80km radius were expected to survive. As Seoul is about 200 km away from Yongbyon, the capital would suffer direct radiation damage.

Source: Chosun Ilbo, Seoul, 6 June 2005

Greenpeace Warns of Japan, S. Korea Nuclear Programs

Reuben Staines

The advanced, civilian nuclear programs of Japan and South Korea could pose a greater proliferation threat than North Korea's nuclear weapons development, according to a visiting environmental activist.

Shaun Burnie, an anti-nuclear campaign coordinator working for Greenpeace International, said the proliferation of weapons-usable nuclear materials by the two countries is ``out of control.''

``Japan's plutonium program is on a scale that Pyongyang couldn't even dream of,'' he said during an interview with The Korea Times.

Burnie, who was visiting Seoul to present a paper to an international conference at the National Assembly, said a new reprocessing facility in Rokkasho-mura, northern Japan will allow Tokyo to produce 8,000 kilograms of plutonium a year. The $180-billion plant is schedule to begin operation next year.

The Scottish activist said Japan already has a 45-ton stockpile of plutonium and could rapidly develop a large atomic arsenal if it felt justified.

``There is a big question mark over what Japan would do in the case of a North Korean nuclear test,'' he said, adding that Japanese politicians who want the country to take a more active defense posture might use North Korea as an excuse.

Source: Korea Times, Seoul, 3 May 2005

Allies Rattled by Intelligence Fiascos

Ryu Jin

One of the most reclusive and cloistered states in the world, North Korea often has to see any suspicions surrounding it turn into truth despite its desperate pleas toward the outside world. And, indeed, the hermit kingdom seems to have something to say this time. ..//..

In a news article, headlined ``US Misled Allies About Nuclear Export,'' the Washington Post reported that it was not North Korea but Pakistan _ a key U.S. ally in its war on terror _ that sold uranium hexafluoride to Libya.

According to the report, which quoted a couple of American officials, the U.S. delivered the false allegation to its Asian allies _ South Korea and Japan _ and China, while giving briefings to them earlier this year, in an effort to increase pressure on North Korea.

The Post wrote the U.S. officials said the briefings were ``hastily arranged'' after China and South Korea indicated they were considering bolting from six-party talks on North Korea.

As the multilateral negotiations have stalled, some U.S. hardliners revealed their vexation calling for tougher measures against the communist North. But Seoul and Beijing asked for a ``more flexible'' attitude from the U.S., frustrating the hawkish officials in Washington.

The alleged cover-up, a reminder of the earlier dispute over its intelligence fiasco in the run-up to the Iraqi invasion, has raised a strong suspicion here that the U.S. has joined hands with Japan to spread falsified information in order to topple the Kim Jong-il regime in North Korea.

In the Japanese version of the alleged information cook-up, the Tokyo government condemned Pyongyang last December saying it concluded that the bone ashes sent from North Korea were not those of Megumi Yokota, who was abducted by the North's agents decades ago.

Much similar to the American case, which neo-conservatives apparently attempted to utilize for a harder line policy shift against the communist North, Tokyo also tried to use its own conclusion to suggest punitive measures such as economic sanctions.

But the abduction dispute has recently entered a new phase after a Japanese scientist's recognition that his DNA tests on the ashes were not conclusive. According to Nature, a British science magazine, Tomio Yoshii, one of Japan's leading forensics experts, admitted his DNA tests were not conclusive and that it is possible the samples were contaminated.

Source: Korea Times Seoul 22 March 2005

Message of Sympathy to U.K. Prime Minister

Pak Pong Ju, premier of the DPRK Cabinet, sent a message of sympathy to Tony Blair, prime minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The message expressed deep sympathy with and consolation to the prime minister and, through him, to the U.K. government and all victims in connection with the casualties of many innocent people caused by a series of explosions in London on July 7.

Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun sent a similar message to his U.K. counterpart Jack Straw.

Source: KCNA, Pyongyang, 8 July 2005

KT Employs NK Agency to Develop Software

Kim Tae-gyu

KT, South Korea's leading fixed-line telecom operator, will develop sophisticated software via an outsourcing contract with a Northern program maker.

KT announced yesterday that the North's Samcholli General Corp. agreed to complete a pair of smart telecom software until the end of November for 164,000 euro.

The two programs are seamless voice recognition software and a control system of intelligence network, which can be run under the Internet environment.

``This is not a symbolic move aimed at improving the South-North relationship. We made a contract to develop software that will be used in the South,'' KT director Kim Tae-hwan said after signing the deal on Wednesday.

Source: Korea Times Seoul 28 April 2005