| THE NORTH KOREA REPORT: JANUARY 13, 2003 Our statement on why North Korea must be liberated, and how it can happen, can be found here. NEWS BUSH SAYS U.S. �WILLING TO TALK� WITH NORTH KOREA ASSISTANT SECRETARY KELLY: ENGERY �HELP� IF NUCLEAR PROGRAM IS DROPPED The continuing collapse of the Administration�s policy continued over the weekend, as Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly actually held out the prospect of more energy �help� to North Korea if it drops its nuclear ambitions. The U.S. had shelled out millions in fuel oil to the Stalinists as part of the 1994 Agreed Framework, which was supposed to �freeze� the North�s nuclear weapons program. Kelly�s exact phrase was as follows: �Once we get beyond nuclear weapons, there may be opportunities with the US, with private investors, with other countries to help North Korea in the energy area� (BBC). The fact that the Stalinists already had such a deal in place in the 1990s, and went ahead with their uranium-based weapons program anyway, has apparently been lost on the Administration. No one in the Administration discussed possible actions or policies to help liberate the people of northern Korea trapped in and by the Stalinists. Also reporting: Fox News, CNN, Washington Post GOVERNOR RICHARDSON, TAPPED TO SPEAK FOR U.S., HINTS OF WRITTEN �ASSURANCES� AGAINST ANY U.S. ATTACK AGAINST STALINIST REGIME Meanwhile, in talks backed by the Administration last week, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson (D), former UN Ambassador and Energy Secretary � during part of the Los Alamos nuclear code fiasco � relayed an Administration message �that the United States may be willing to give assurances in writing that it has no intention of attacking North Korea� (CNN 1/10) as part of a deal with the Stalinists. In other words, the Stalinists get exactly what they want � an American guarantee in writing against a military action, plus more energy �help� � in exchange for simply doing what they were supposed to do, and agreed to do in 1994. All the while, the missile sales to rogue states and the suffering of the people trapped in North Korea continues unabated. Richardson has quite a bit of experience with the Stalinists, including being �a key player in negotiating the 1994 deal� (CNN 1/13) � not exactly encouraging. For its part, the North insisted it �wanted to improve relations with the United States and that it was not going to build nuclear weapons� (Washington Times) in its talks with Richardson. Sure. Also Reporting: BBC, Fox News, Washington Post LUGAR BACKS TALKS WITH NORTH KOREA Senator Richard Lugar (R-Indiana), Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, repeated his call for a �diplomatic� solution that gives the Stalinist regime �some light at the end of the tunnel.� Given the above news, the light looks almost blinding from here. Report: Cybercast News SOUTH KOREAN AMBASSADOR CRITICIZES FUEL OIL CUTOFF South Korean Ambassador Yang Sung-chol said the U.S. should not have cut off fuel oil shipments to North Korea in reaction to its uranium-based nuclear weapons program admission (see 11/18/02 NK Report). Perhaps Yang forgot the fact that the South Korean government itself agreed to cut off the oil � part of the agreement violated by the North. Report: Washington Times, second paragraph STALINIST REGIME PULLS OUT OF NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY Mere hours after the talks began with Richardson, the Stalinists were kind enough to show where appeasement and concession offering really lead: they pulled out of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the treaty designed to halt the spread of nuclear weapons (BBC Transcript). All the while, the North insisted it was not looking to build nuclear weapons. Sure. Reports: CNN, BBC, Cybercast News NORTH BLAMES U.S. FOR LEAVING NPT AS OTHERS CONDEMN MOVE South Korea and Japan quickly called on North Korea to reverse course on the NPT (CNN 1/10, BBC 1/10-1), as did Britain, France, Russia, Germany and Sweden (Washington Times). Meanwhile, Communist China, again, resorted to its boilerplate no-nukes-but-let�s-talk-it-over line. The Stalinists, for their part, blamed the U.S. for its decision to pull out of the treaty (CNN 1/12, BBC 1/10-2). STALINIST REGIME THREATENS MISSILE TESTS As the rest of the world was reacting to the nuclear news, the North threw in one more card � a threat to resume missile testing. The last North Korean missile tests were in 1998, when a test missile was flown over Japan, who was � naturally � highly displeased with the news. Reports: BBC, CNN, Fox News, Washington Post, Washington Times, Cybercast News NORTH KOREA DENIES IT EVER ADMITTED TO A NUCLEAR PROGRAM The Stalinists tried again to rewrite history, insisting it never admitted to continuing its nuclear weapons program in violation of the 1994 Agreed Framework, which won it millions in fuel oil and the continuing construction of two nuclear power plants. This isn�t the first time the Stalinist tried this tack (see 10/21/02 and 12/02/02 NK Reports). Report: Fox News Stop the North Korean Nuclear Power Plants: North Korea announced that it would restart the pre-1994 plutonium power plants. Despite this, talk of negotiations continues, and building the two nuclear power plants that were part of the deal has still not been ruled out. Use this China e-Lobby fact sheet and tell the President to stand firm against the Stalinist regime, and not to build the power plants. NORTH KOREA RIPS U.S.FOR SCUD SHIPMENT, PROPOSED SANCTIONS North Korea said sanctions against it would lead to a war that �knows no mercy� (BBC transcript). The North also ripped the temporary seizure of a Scud shipment ostensibly meant for Yemen but possibly headed for Iraq (see 12/16/02 and 12/30/02 NK Report). The North said the U.S. would pay �a very high price� for messing with its international arms bazaar. Also reporting: Fox News, Washington Post COMMUNIST CHINA CALLS FOR DIRECT NORTH KOREA-U.S. TALKS Communist Chinese President and Central Military Commission Chairman Jiang Zemin called for �direct dialogue� (CNN) between the U.S. and North Korea on the PRC ally�s nuclear weapons program. Communist Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan also called for talks between the U.S. and the Stalinists. NORTH KOREA BOUGHT MISSILE AND NUCLEAR EQUIPMENT, SOME FROM PRC North Korea was the recipient of �equipment suitable for use in uranium feed and withdrawal systems� and �raw materials and components for missiles� (Bill Gertz, Washington Times). The latter came from �North Korean firms based in China.� The Stalinists also had military help from Russia, and maintained its brisk missile trade with �the Middle East, South Asia and North Africa.� STALINISTS AGREE TO TALKS WITH SOUTH KOREA, PUSH DATE BACK A WEEK North Korea asked for a one-week delay in ministerial talks slated with democratic South Korea next week. Why the delay was sought was not known (CNN). South Korea said they would �put pressure on the North over its nuclear programme� (BBC) during the talks. COMMENTARY/ANALYSIS WHAT'S GOING ON IN SOUTH KOREA? Peter S. Goodman and Joohee Cho (Washington Post), Charles Scanlon (BBC), and CNN examine disturbing trends in South Korea � rising opposition to American troops and growing romanticism of North Korea, with little or no concern as to how the Stalinist regime treats those trapped inside it. Paul Reynolds, BBC, notes South Korea�s role in the �a shift of emphasis in the American position.� ON NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA: DOVISH VIEWS Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-Connecticut) also calls on the Administration to give North Korea �political recognition and regional economic investment� (Washington Post) in exchange for the North doing what it promised in 1994. In a troubling rhetorical move, Lieberman says the Stalinists �kept that central part of the 1994 agreement,� and deliberately downplays their uranium weapons program. Former Defense Secretary William Cohen calls for �concessions by another name� (Washington Post) for North Korea to resolve the issue. Bill Taylor calls for the same thing, dressing it up as �diplomacy in pursuit of U.S. and international interests in peace and stability in Northeast Asia,� (Washington Times). Roger D. Carstens , of the Council for Emerging National Security Affairs, insists that Iraq is a greater danger than North Korea. Carstens also feels �peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula� (Washington Times) can occur with just North Korea dropping its nuclear program, not dropping the Stalinist regime. ON NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA: HAWKISH VIEWS The editors of the Washington Times rip the Bush Administration for its �slippery slope to Pyongyang,� i.e., its growing dovishness toward the North. While the Times did not mention liberating North Korea � not that anyone else did last week � it did note, �The United States cannot isolate Pyongyang by talking to it.� The editors of The New Republic also call for the Administration to be tougher on the North. Dennis Ross, ex-director for policy planning in the State Department under President George Bush I, tells the Administration to put the military option back on the table, in the Washington Post. Senator John McCain also tells the President to keep a tough line, and not to rule out the use of force, in the Weekly Standard. Michael Crowley takes note of McCain�s hawkish view in The New Republic. William R. Hawkins, of the U.S. Business and Industry Council, says this in the Washington Times, �The only way to halt the spread of weapons is to send a clear message that . . . any leader who decides to acquire weapons of mass destruction is donning a uniform with a big target painted on it.� The editors of the Post make note that they would like to see the following subjects added to the U.S-North Korean talks: �an end to its missile program and its foreign military sales, a reduction of the forces that threaten South Korea, and concrete improvements in its treatment of its people.� Also calling for a tough line, and an end to those two nuclear power plants from the 1994 deal, are Victor Gilinsky, former member of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and one of our favorites, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center executive director Henry Sokolski, also in the Standard. ON NUCLEAR NORTH KOREA: OTHER VIEWS Romesh Ratnesar, Time Asia, examines the North�s latest moves and what they might mean, as does Jim Hoagland, from a slightly different angel, in the Washington Post. Meanwhile, Sarah Buckley, BBC, and David Sands, Washington Times, see no option besides �engagement� � pushing for liberation was not on their lists, however. William F. Buckley, National Review Online, and Rob Watson, BBC, also weigh in. Jack Kelly, in the Washington Times, calls for a pullout of American troops plus helping our allies in East Asia � Japan, South Korea and Taiwan � acquire nuclear weapons as a counteraction. WHAT DOES NORTH KOREA WANT? FOR THAT MATTER, WHAT DOES THE U.S. WANT? While Peter S. Goodman, Washington Post, tries to determine North Korea�s motives in pulling out of the NPT, Glenn Kessler, also in the Post, takes on an equal challenge: trying to determine how the deeply divided, see-sawing Bush Administration will react. ON NORTH KOREA AND THE U.S. MILITARY William Kristol and Robert Kagan, in the Weekly Standard, find that the situation in North Korea is exacerbated by the widely acknowledged fact that the American military is no longer capable of fighting on several fronts. Mac Owens, in National Review Online, agrees. ON KIM JONG-IL Donald Macintyre and Massimo Calabresi, both of Time Asia, make their attempt to profile the tyrant. SOME BAD MISREADING OF COMMUNIST CHINA'S ROLE Neither John O�Sullivan, Editor-at-Large of National Review, nor Austin Bay, focuses on Communist China's role in dealing with North Korea. However, they do make some odd comments on the PRC. O�Sullivan, who makes his prediction in NR Online, calls Communist China a �regional ally� of the U.S. Bay in the Washington Times, goes even further and suggests a possible �pre-emptive action by the U.S. and China, to include the possible use of small-yield nuclear weapons on North Korean military targets.� Have these men forgotten that the PRC and North Korea have been allies for over fifty years? The editors of NR also see possible cooperation from the PRC, but only if the U.S. makes clear the alternative could be �a nuclearized Japan and South Korea.� Victor Davis Hanson, also in NRO, gives the most plausible reason Communist China might be of help: �the cynical advantages of peace, capitalism, and open trade . . . to beat the West at its own game by acquiring hi-tech weaponry.� Adam Garfinkle comes closest to correct on Communist China in noting that the PRC �prefers, however . . . that Korea not be unified.� However, in his NRO piece, he opines that the Communists will take a unified anti-Communist Korea over a nuclearized Japan, a debatable proposition at best. MORE ON COMMUNIST CHINA'S ROLE Charles R. Smith, in Newsmax.com, rips opponents of a hard line on North Korea, and details Communist China�s support for the Stalinist regime. The plight of North Korean refugees in Communist China are detailed by two sites recommended by John Miller of National Review: Chosun Journal and a Human Rights Watch report on the subject. Philip Pan, Washington Post, takes a much more sympathetic look at Communist China's ties to North Korea, which Pan reports are quite frayed. All the same, the PRC is not willing to get to tough on the Stalinists, lest the regime fall and thus the Communists must �face the unwelcome prospect of sharing a border with a unified Korea that would be a U.S. ally� (perhaps he should relay this to Garfinkle). ON THE COLLAPSING NORTH KOREAN ECONOMY Martin Sieff (United Press International, via Washington Times), with help from analysts and defectors, details the horrifying reality of the disaster that is Stalinist North Korea�s economy, including a largely man-made famine that has killed at least 2 million. ON NORTH KOREA AND IRAQ Columnist Mark Steyn, in the Spectator (UK), says the antics of Kim Jong-Il will have less of an impact, and maybe become less frequent, if �Saddam was blown to pieces in his bunker.� Check out the latest on Communist China and the Terrorist War. Sign the petition for an American boycott of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Miss an Update, Weekly Links, or a North Korea Report? Find it on our web site. Feel free to forward this to anyone you think might be interested in receiving it. Anyone who wishes to join can send his/her name and e-mail address to [email protected]. Please feel free to send any news on Communist China or North Korea that you happen to find to the same address. |