NAPSNet Daily Report 04 October, 1999

Recommended Citation

"NAPSNet Daily Report 04 October, 1999", NAPSNet Daily Report, October 04, 1999, https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-daily-report/napsnet-daily-report-04-october-1999/

 
CONTENTS

I. United States

II. Republic of Korea

I. United States

1. ROK-DPRK Economic Cooperation

The Associated Press (“N. KOREA PLANS NEW INDUSTRIAL PARK,” Seoul, 10/02/99) reported that Chung Ju- yung, founder and honorary chairman of the Hyundai group, said Saturday that DPRK leader Kim Jong-il has personally approved Hyundai’s plan to build a large-scale industrial park in the DPRK. Chung said his meeting with Kim also covered other subjects, but he declined to elaborate. Hyundai plans to relocate 800 to 900 garment and other plants to the industrial park on the DPRK’s southwest coast, close to the border with the ROK, and use surplus ROK electricity for the factories. The plan also includes construction of car assembly lines with an annual capacity of 50,000, as well as television and other electronic assembly plants.

2. DPRK View of Korean War Massacre

The Associated Press (“N.KOREA BLASTS U.S. ON REPORT,” Seoul, 10/04/99) reported that the DPRK demanded Monday that the US apologize for the alleged mass killing of civilian refugees by US soldiers in the Korean War. The Rodong Sinmun, the main newspaper of the DPRK’s Workers’ Party of Korea, stated, “The truth of history cannot be distorted and covered.” It said that US forces committed massacres not only in No Gun Ri but also in other areas during the war. It criticized the US and ROK governments for dismissing repeated requests for an investigation by survivors of the massacre. It argued, “The U.S. imperialists should clearly see the situation and make an official apology for their murderous crimes against the South Korean people.” The DPRK also repeated its demand that the US withdraw its troops from the ROK.

3. ROK Investigation into Korean War Massacre

The Associated Press (Sang-Hun Choe, “S. KOREA SEEKS JOINT INVESTIGATION,” Seoul, 10/02/99) reported that ROK President Kim Dae-jung on Saturday called for a joint US-ROK investigation into allegations of a US massacre of civilians during the Korean War. Kim was quoted as telling a meeting of senior presidential aides, “We must be aggressive in unveiling the truth. Investigating together with the United States will be more efficient.” Kim said that his government would give special priority to investigating the report, and would help compensate the victims. He stated, “The incident happened 50 years ago, but if such innocent civilians were indeed killed, the truth must be known and the souls of the dead and the bereaved families must be consoled.” Officials at both the foreign and defense ministries said they began contacting US officials for possible cooperation in the investigation. ROK survivors of the massacre issued a statement demanding that they be represented in any joint-investigation team organized by the two countries. They also said they would not allow any anti-US elements in their campaign, because they recognize the friendly relations between the US and the ROK and the important security role that the US plays on the Korean Peninsula. They added that they would not raise criminal responsibility for the 12 former soldiers who told about the killings, saying, “We highly appreciate their conscience and courage.” ROK Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Hong Soon-young said that he hopes the investigation will be “thorough and quick,” adding that he did not believe the inquiry would affect the “strengthening of the relationship between my country and the United States.” [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for October 4.]

4. Korean War Massacre

The Associated Press (Charles J. Hanley and Martha Mendoza, “KOREAN VETS CAN’T BE PROSECUTED,” 10/01/99) reported that Gary D. Solis, who teaches the law of war at the US Military Academy at West Point, said that US soldiers who fired on civilians at No Gun Ri could have faced court martial. Solis stated, “It’s pretty simple: Soldiers are not allowed to shoot noncombatants.” He added, however, “Effectively speaking, there is no way to prosecute these offenses, even if you could get someone to admit they purposely engaged in this kind of conduct.” Howard Levie, who was a top Army war crimes prosecutor in 1950, stated, “I can’t understand why I didn’t know about it. I guess because it was kept quiet.” Scott Silliman of Duke University, a retired colonel and Air Force lawyer for 25 years, stated, “I have never heard of orders like this, not outside the orders given by Germans that we heard about during the Nuremberg Trials.” Joseph Kelly, a retired colonel who was a Defense Department lawyer during the war, said that there were no prosecutions of anything more than individual murders of civilians by US servicemen. He noted that the Judge Advocate Generals Corps “was relatively small when the Korean War broke out. It’s now larger and permeates the structure more, and the officers tend to rely on them to keep out of trouble.” Kelly argued that for much of US military history, “we’ve done very badly in not trying cases…. What bothers me most is the fact that the American public seems to take the side of the war criminal if he’s American.”

The Washington Post carried an editorial (“MASSACRE AT NO GUN RI,” 10/02/99, 20) which attributed the massacre at No Gun Ri to poorly equipped and trained US troops and the DPRK’s tactic of infiltrating soldiers in civilian garb among refugees. The article argued, “It is possible to believe that American soldiers were not as sensitive to local populations as they subsequently became and that a single atrocity in Korea did not stand out against the real- life backdrop of multiple crimes against civilians on both sides.” It added, “Any flaws shown in the American military’s performance must be measured against the American success in rescuing South Korea from Communist aggression and enabling it eventually to become a democratic and prosperous country. There is no call for a showy guilt trip, but the truth needs to be told. The public record ought to be made reasonably complete, and the compensation question must be handled fairly, too.” [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for October 4.]

5. ROK Nuclear Industry

Reuters (“JAPAN MISHAP UNLIKELY TO SHIFT SKOREA NUCLEAR PLAN,” Seoul, 10/04/99) reported that Janet Lee, spokeswoman for the ROK Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy, said Monday that the Japanese nuclear accident is unlikely to affect the ROK’s nuclear power program. She stated, “Our nuclear power policy will not change due to Japan’s accident last week.” She added, “Our nuclear plants are well maintained, and we don’t expect similar accidents to happen.” An unnamed official at the nuclear power division at the ROK energy ministry said that the ROK government, like Japan, favored nuclear power due to low production costs and the lack of natural power resources. He said that the ROK currently runs 14 nuclear reactors with a combined capacity of 12,020 megawatts, supplying about 40 percent the country’s electricity. By 2005, the government plans to complete another six reactors, adding 5,700 megawatts capacity, and 10 more with 11,200 megawatts capacity by 2015. Lee So-young, energy coordinator at Green Korea United, warned, “The accident in Japan is likely to happen here. We are also living in the danger of a big nuclear accident.” She added, “We will continue to urge the government to remove nuclear reactors in South Korea.”

6. Japanese Nuclear Industry

The Associated Press (J.L. Hazelton, “JAPAN NUKE ACCIDENT WORRIES PUBLIC,” Tokyo, 10/02/99) reported that Japanese government spokesman Hiromu Nonaka said Friday that the accident at Tokaimura would not change the government’s plans for nuclear power. Nonaka stated, “We don’t think this will affect Japan’s nuclear power policies and development or the Japanese people’s notions about the safety of nuclear power. The accident was caused by such a simple mistake, a primitive mistake.”

The Wall Street Journal (Peter Landers, “JAPAN’S NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS FACE RENEWED CONSUMER OPPOSITION,” Tokyo, 10/04/99) reported that Japan plans to build 16 to 20 nuclear power plants during the next 10 years despite last week’s accident at the Tokaimura uranium processing plant. According to the Federation of Electric Power Companies, Japan has 51 operating nuclear power plants, and they supplied 37 percent of the country’s electricity demand in 1998. Kaoru Yosano, Japanese Trade and Industry Minister, stated, “The impact [the accident] will have on the public’s view toward nuclear power is undeniable.”

7. Japanese Nuclear Accident

The Washington Post (Kathryn Tolbert and Doug Struck, “ATOMIC PLANT IN JAPAN USED ILLEGAL PROCESS,” Tokyo, 10/03/99, A23), the Los Angeles Times (Sonni Efron, Valerie Reitman, “SHORTCOMINGS SURFACE AT NUCLEAR SITE,” Tokyo, 10/03/99) and the New York Times (Howard W. French, “UNDER PRESSURE, JAPANESE NUCLEAR WORKERS WERE LAX, REPORT SAYS,” Tokyo, 10/04/99) reported that an anonymous official at JCO Company, which operates the uranium processing plant in Tokaimura, said Sunday that the plant had been using an illegal procedure to handle uranium because it was faster. He stated, “From at least two years ago, we had an internal manual which we did not present to the government and which called for using buckets. We knew the practice was illegal but it’s faster.” The workers were involved in processing 126 pounds of uranium for use in an experimental breeder reactor program when the accident occurred. Two workers apparently skipped the procedure in which they were to pour a small amount of uranium into the measuring cylinder, and instead used a bucket to dump seven times as much uranium into a larger processing tank. The president of Sumitomo Metal, the parent company that owns the Tokaimura plant, was quoted by the newspaper Mainichi Shimbun on Saturday as saying, “We never told JCO to increase fuel production.”

The Associated Press (Koji Sasahara, “JAPAN INQUIRY FOCUSES ON MISSTEPS,” Tokaimura, 10/04/99) reported that the Japanese government Science and Technology Agency on Monday stepped up its investigation into unsafe practices at the Tokaimura uranium-processing plant. The agency also announced plans to search the offices of 20 nuclear facilities around the country, and the government issued notice that the operating procedures of all nuclear power companies will be examined.

8. US-Japan Defense Cooperation

Pacific Stars and Stripes (Rich Roesler, “SHELTON MEETS WITH JAPANESE DEFENSE OFFICIALS,” Tokyo, 09/05/99, 3) reported that General Henry Shelton, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, landed in Japan on Sunday afternoon for a two-day visit. Shelton was scheduled to meet on Monday with Japanese Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura, Japan Defense Agency Director General Hosei Norota and other senior Japanese military officials. US Embassy officials said that Shelton also received the Japanese emperor’s “Order of the Rising Sun” in appreciation of the cooperation between Japanese and US forces. [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for October 4.]

9. US-Taiwan Military Relations

The Washington Post (Robert G. Kaiser and Steven Mufson, “WHITE HOUSE OPPOSES BILL ON TAIWAN,” 10/03/99, A26) reported that the US President Bill Clinton administration has mobilized the business community and its own officials to try to block the passage of the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act. One unnamed administration official said that the bill “moves us very close, if not all the way there, to a formal military alliance with Taiwan.” The official added that such a change would vastly complicate relations with the PRC. Representative Doug Bereuter, Republican-Nebraska, chairman of the International Relations subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, on Friday disclosed the contents of this year’s US arms sales package for Taiwan to demonstrate that new legislation is not required. Bereuter said that the latest arms sales approved by the US will give Taiwan early-warning radar to detect PRC missile launches, new and upgraded Patriot 3 anti-missile batteries, and new equipment intended to ensure the technological superiority of the Taiwanese air force over its PRC counterpart. US officials added that the US and Taiwan are discussing the possible sale of submarine-hunting P-3 Orion aircraft and advanced Aegis battle- management radar for battleships.

10. PRC Anniversary

US State Department Spokesman (James Rubin, “STATE DEPARTMENT NOON BRIEFING, OCTOBER 1, 1999,” USIA Transcript, 10/04/99) congratulated the People’s Republic of China on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of its founding. Rubin stated, “China has achieved remarkable economic advances over the past two decades. We look forward to making further progress across the full range of bilateral relations in the year to come. Obviously, US- China relations have had their ups and downs. We remain committed to working with China in areas of mutual interest and engaging China in frank discussion in areas where we disagree.”

11. US Troops in Asia-Pacific

The Washington Times (Bill Gertz, “COHEN: U.S. TROOPS TO STAY IN ASIA-PACIFIC INDEFINITELY,” Bangkok, 10/02/99, 1) reported that US Defense Secretary William S. Cohen said Friday that the US plans to keep about 100,000 troops in the Asia-Pacific region “for the indefinite future.” Cohen stated, “The United States intends to continue to be an agent for promoting peace and stability and freedom throughout the Asia-Pacific region.” He argued, “Were we not actively engaged in the region, there would be a void created. Someone would move to quickly fill that void and there might be a great deal of competition as who that would be. That would lead to great instability and have an impact upon the development of prosperity and the production of prosperity in the region.” [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for October 4.]

12. US Ratification of CTBT

Reuters (Arshad Mohammed, “CLINTON TO LEAD CHARGE ON NUCLEAR TEST TREATY,” Washington, 10/04/99) reported that US President Bill Clinton was to plot strategy with his national security team Monday on how to persuade the US Senate to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). White House spokesman Joe Lockhart stated, “Given that there’s only a week, we realize that we’ve got a lot of hard work to do.” He added that Clinton would make a series of public statements and telephone senators to lobby them over the next week. He said, “After not moving it for two years, not holding a single hearing, not expressing any interest in it at all, they all of a sudden say we’re going to have a vote in a week. That clearly indicates that they want to short-circuit the process and that they are concerned, the [Republican] leadership is concerned, that a fair hearing of this issue would result in ratification.” He argued, “The concerns about verification are a strong argument for signing the CTBT. There will be on-site surveillance. There will be 300 monitoring stations around the world. It involves a strong verification regime that will increase our ability to know what’s going on around the world.” He concluded, “There’s a very simple point here when it comes to why it’s in our interest: We don’t test. There are others around the world who are trying to develop advanced nuclear systems who do need to test.”

13. Monitoring of CTBT

The New York Times (Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller, “U.S. AND RUSSIA TO SEEK NEW WAYS TO MONITOR NUCLEAR TEST BAN PACT,” Moscow, 10/04/99) reported that US Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said in an interview that he had proposed several measures to Yevgeny O. Adamov, Russian Minister of Atomic Energy, to strengthen monitoring of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Among the measures proposed were visits by US experts to the Russian nuclear test site at Novaya Zemlya to conduct seismic experiments that would enhance their ability to distinguish between a nuclear test and an earthquake. Richardson also proposed that Russia alert the US 24 hours in advance of a sub-critical test. Adamov said that he was willing to open talks on the proposals, but he insisted that such measures should be part of a package deal that would also include access to US supercomputers. He stated, “We are ready to discuss the whole range of these activities. We are opposed to accepting just one measure in isolation.” He added, “Conditions should be established so that all nations possessing nuclear weapons will have the same opportunity to engage in computer simulations.” [Ed. note: This article was one of the top stories in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for October 4.]

14. US-Russian Nuclear Cooperation

The Associated Press (“RUSSIA, U.S. SIGN NUCLEAR ACCORD,” Moscow, 10/02/99) and the New York Times (Judith Miller, “VIDEO VERSION OF HOT LINE LETS COLD WAR FOES EXPAND JOINT NUCLEAR SAFETY,” Moscow, 10/03/99) reported that the US Energy Secretary Bill Richardson and Russian Atomic Minister Yevgeny Adamov on Saturday signed an agreement on cooperation in the monitoring and safeguarding of nuclear materials. The agreement calls for a Russian national program of registration, monitoring and protection of nuclear materials, including their transportation. The two signed the agreement after the unveiling of a crisis situation center at the Russian Nuclear Power Ministry. The center will allow real-time communication between the two energy agencies in times of nuclear or environmental emergency such as accidents at nuclear power or fuel facilities, the accidental release of radioactive materials, or the theft or diversion of nuclear weapons or other nuclear materials. [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for October 4.]

15. US Missile Defense Test

The US Defense Department (“DEFENSE DEPARTMENT REPORT, MONDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1999,” 10/04/99) said that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization’s (BMDO) National Missile Defense (NMD) Joint Program Office announced on October 2 that it had successfully completed the first test involving a planned intercept of an intercontinental ballistic missile target on October 1. The report said, “A modified Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) target vehicle was launched from Vandenburg Air Force Base, California at 7:02 p.m. PDT, and a prototype NMD interceptor was launched approximately 20 minutes later and 4,300 miles away from the Kwajalein Atoll in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The intercept occurred at approximately 7:32pm Pacific Daylight Time…. An exoatmospheric kill vehicle (EKV) weighing about 120 pounds, equipped with two infrared sensors, a visible sensor, and a small propulsion system, located and tracked the target, guiding the kill vehicle to a body-to-body impact with the target and resulting in the target destruction using only the kinetic energy of the collision. This ‘hit to kill’ intercept demonstrates that a warhead carrying a weapon of mass destruction-nuclear, chemical or biological – will be totally destroyed and neutralized…. The Department of Defense is scheduled to conduct a deployment readiness review beginning next summer to review the status of the NMD program including potential program costs, an assessment of the ballistic missile threat to the U.S., and the status of arms reduction efforts involving Russia. After receiving the results of this review, the Secretary of Defense will make a recommendation to the President regarding whether or not to deploy the NMD system. If the President decides to deploy, the NMD system could be operational in 2005. If it appears more development and testing needs to take place, deployment planning will continue and actual deployment would be held in abeyance…. The successful intercept test October 1 was the first of about 20 planned intercept tests to demonstrate NMD system technology, effectiveness and reliability over the next six years. Another test of the EKV is scheduled to take place in the first quarter of 2000, followed by additional tests incorporating the different elements of a proposed NMD system, including the interceptor, space-based early warning satellites, ground based early warning radars, ground based X-band radars for precise target tracking, and a battle management, command, control and communications network to operate the system.”

II. Republic of Korea

1. DPRK-PRC Relations

Joongang Ilbo (Bong Hwa-shik, “CHINESE FOREIGN MINISTER TO VISIT NORTH KOREA,” Seoul, 10/03/99) reported that PRC Foreign Minister Tang Zha-shian will visit the DPRK from October 5 to 9, a source from the ROK Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said on Sunday. Tang will be meeting with Kim Young-nam, chairman of the Supreme People’s Assembly, and Paek Nam-soon, minister of foreign affairs, on several issues related to mutual cooperation. It has not been confirmed if Tang will meet DPRK leader Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang. The DPRK sent 5 delegates to celebrate the PRC’s 50th anniversary in Beijing on September 29.

2. DPRK Weapon Purchase

Joongang Ilbo (“KAZAKSTAN ACKNOWLEDGES MIG FIGHTER PLANES SALES TO NK,” Seoul, 10/01/99) reported that Kazakstan’s top prosecutor acknowledged on Thursday that about 40 MiG fighter planes had been illegally sold to the DPRK, a higher number than previously reported. Prosecutor-General Yuri Khitrin also identified Alexander Petrenko as the Kazak man detained two weeks ago for brokering the sale. Khitrin told a news conference that authorities had confiscated US$1.8 million from Petrenko, believed to be partial payment from the DPRK for the planes. Ginzburg claimed that the deal, worth a total of US$8 million, was legal because it was based on earlier framework agreements on military cooperation with the DPRK. In a telephone interview on Thursday, Ginzburg said that the disassembled planes were sent to the DPRK on railway across the PRC. Ginzburg said that the sale of fighters to the DPRK was linked to last spring’s scandal surrounding the sale of six MiG fighter jets that belonged to Kazakstan.

3. DPRK-ROK Military Comparison

Chosun Ilbo (Yoo Yong-won, “MND SAY ROK ARMY STRONGER THAN NK,” Seoul, 10/03/99) reported that the ROK Troop Information and Public Affairs Office of the National Defense Ministry (MND) stated in a recently published document for military education that the DPRK Army lacks the ability to run a battle compared to the ROK Army, in physical build, ability to fight, weapon systems, equipment performance, national strength, and combined defense preparedness. According to the MND’s Troop Information and Public Affairs Office’s findings, the average height and weight of ROK Army officers were 171 cm and 66 kg, while those of the DPRK soldiers were 162 cm and 48 kg., showing that the DPRK soldiers could not be a match in long-lasting wars or close combat. In addition, 15 percent of the DPRK Navy warships are more than 20 years old, and 83 percent of them are smaller than 200-tons which restricts them from exceeding a certain range in battle. Only 30 percent of the DPRK Air Force’s combat planes, such as the MIG-23/29 and the SU-25, are new models, and the rest predate the 1970’s. The DPRK was also found to be greatly behind in the aviation electronics field, including radar and navigation. As a result, the booklet on the DPRK’s recent fighting capacity revealed that there are many problems for the DPRK in all-weather air operations. Furthermore, the MND noted that the DPRK would be at an absolute disadvantage in waging a long war or in mobilizing materials once at war because its economic strength is 1/25th of the ROK’s.

4. DPRK’s View of Sunshine Policy

Chosun Ilbo (Lee Chul-min, “NK ATTACKS SUNSHINE POLICY AGAIN,” Seoul, 10/01/99) reported that DPRK Charges d’ Affaires to the UN, Kim Chang-kook, denounced the ROK’s sunshine policy on Friday, calling it an attempt to subvert his country’s political system. Kim added that any attempts to do this would lead to open conflict and war. At the 54th Assembly, in response to ROK Foreign Minister Hong Soon-young’s keynote address, Kim said that there would be no reconciliation between the two Koreas as long as the national security law exists. Kim continued that the law expressly calls for the destruction of the DPRK and makes it a crime to exchange letters. With regard to the light water reactor project, he said that the US was responsible for this and as yet no progress was being observed and so he doubted it would be completed by 2005. Kim added that the ROK had infiltrated “indecent” people with tourists visiting the Kumgang Mountains to damage the DPRK’s reputation.

5. ROK Policy toward DPRK

The Korea Times (“PM KIM URGES NK TO IMPLEMENT S-N BASIC ACCORD,” Seoul, 10/03/99) reported that ROK Prime Minister Kim Jong-pil on Saturday urged the DPRK to implement the ROK-DPRK Basic Agreement to open an era of inter-Korean reconciliation and cooperation. In a speech marking the 4,331st anniversary of the National Foundation Day on Saturday at the Sejong Cultural Center, the Prime Minister called on the DPRK not to evade the aspiration of the 70 million Koreans on both sides of the Demilitarized Zone and the current of history. He also called on the DPRK to activate the Basic Accord that the two sides signed in 1992. “The time has come for Koreans to join hands in terminating the Cold War legacy on the Korean peninsula, which has prevailed for the past half a decade,” Kim said. He noted that the ROK government would cooperate with allies to pursue the engagement policy toward the DPRK in a consistent way. “Amid a water-tight security posture, Seoul will seek to improve inter- Korean relations, ” the Prime Minister stressed. Kim said that the DPRK must fully understand that there are limits to the improvement of inter-Korean cooperation without a corresponding improvement in the government-to-government relations.

6. DPRK-ROK Economic Cooperation

The Korea Herald (Kim Ji-ho, “HYUNDAI MAY BEGIN BUILDING COMPLEX IN NORTH THIS YEAR,” Seoul, 10/04/99), The Korea Herald (Kim Ji-ho, “HYUNDAI HOPES TO SEAL RIGHTS TO BUILD INDUSTRIAL PARK AT CHUNG-KIM MEETING,” Seoul, 10/02/99), Chosun Ilbo (Lee Dong-han, “NK PARTY SECRETARY KIM YONG-SOON TO VISIT SEOUL,” Seoul, 10/03/99), and Joongang Ilbo (“NK’S BIG SHOT TO VISIT SEOUL IN DECEMBER,” Seoul, 10/03/99) and Chosun Ilbo (Kim In-gu, “HYUNDAI’S CHUNG RETURNS AFTER MEETING KIM,” Seoul, 10/03/99) reported that a top executive of Hyundai Group said on Saturday that it will likely be able to break ground for the construction of a large industrial complex on DPRK’s southwestern coast by the end of this year. To discuss this and other inter-Korean business programs, Kim Yong-sun, chairman of the DPRK’s Korean Asia- Pacific Peace and Cooperation Committee, is expected to visit Seoul as early as December, Hyundai Group Chairman Chung Mong-hun told a news conference held at group headquarters. If the meeting materializes, Kim, ranked sixth or seventh in the DPRK power hierarchy, will be the highest DPRK official to visit the ROK since 1992. In addition, foreigners as well as Korean residents abroad will be allowed to take part in cruise tours to the DPRK’s Mt. Kumgang as early as this month, Chung said. He returned from an extended five-day visit to DPRK accompanying his father and group founder, Chung Ju-yung. These and other agreements were made at a meeting between top Hyundai management and the DPRK’s supreme leader Kim Jong-il at one of Kim’s provincial villas on Friday.

7. DPRK-ROK Cultural Exchange

Joongang Ilbo (Bong Hwa-shik, “OPENING OF NORTH KOREA’S SATELLITE TV,” Seoul, 10/03/99) reported that Lim Dong-won, ROK minister of unification, on Sunday emphasized that the government will first allow broadcasts from the DPRK’s satellite TV before receiving its regular TV and radio programs. Lim, in an exclusive interview with JoongAng Ilbo, stated, “Opening ourselves to North Korean mass media will be executed gradually. Initially, our broadcasting companies will be allowed to receive and eventually supply North Korean satellite programs to the general public.” Lim mentioned the possibility of a DPRK-ROK summit meeting, predicting, “We are fully ready anytime on the matter but I don’t know exactly when nor how it will be done in the future.”

8. Korean War Massacre

The Korea Herald (Chon Shi-yong, “SEOUL LAUNCHES PROBE INTO NOGUN-RI MASS KILLING,” Seoul, 10/04/99) reported that the ROK government has launched an investigation into allegations that US troops massacred hundreds of ROK civilians during the Korean War. ROK officials said on Sunday that a task force comprising officials from relevant agencies, including the foreign, defense, and justice ministries, would convene its first full meeting Monday to draw up investigation plans. ROK President Kim Dae-jung, who issued the instruction in a weekly meeting with his top aides at Chong Wa Dae, suggested that ROK authorities work with US officials in investigating the mass killings, which allegedly occurred in July 1950. The US government, which originally tried to downplay the report, announced on Thursday that it would conduct a review of the allegations.

9. ROK Participation in East Timor Peacekeeping

The Korea Herald (“2ND CONTINGENT OF E. TIMOR PEACE FORCE TO LEAVE TODAY,” Seoul, 10/04/99) and The Korea Times (Lee Chang-sup, “SEOUL SENDING BATTALION TO E. TIMOR TO REPAY DEBT TO UN, PRES.KIM SAYS,” Seoul, 10/01/99) reported that the ROK Defense Ministry said on Sunday that the second contingent of 209 soldiers of the ROK’s 419-man peacekeeping force for East Timor would leave for Townsville, Australia, Monday aboard three C-130 aircraft. They will join the advance team of 56 soldiers who arrived there on Friday and participate in an orientation program to adjust themselves to the situation in East Timor before being deployed to the half-island territory next week. The remaining 140 soldiers will leave on Saturday.

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.
We invite you to reply to today’s report, and we welcome commentary or papers for distribution to the network.

Produced by the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development in partnership with:
International Policy Studies Institute Seoul, Republic of Korea
The Center for Global Communications, Tokyo, Japan
Center for American Studies,
Fudan University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
Asian Institute,
Monash University, Clayton, Australia

Timothy L. Savage: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States

Kim Hee-sun: khs688@hotmail.com
Seoul, Republic of Korea

Hiroyasu Akutsu: akutsu@glocomnet.or.jp
Tokyo, Japan

Peter Razvin: icipu@glas.apc.org
Moscow, Russian Federation

Chunsi Wu: dlshen@fudan.ac.cn
Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

Dingli Shen: dlshen@fudan.ac.cn
Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

Leanne Paton: anjlcake@webtime.com.au
Clayton, Australia

 


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.