NAPSNet Daily Report 05 August, 1999

Recommended Citation

"NAPSNet Daily Report 05 August, 1999", NAPSNet Daily Report, August 05, 1999,


I. United States

II. Republic of Korea

III. Announcements

I. United States

1. Four Party Talks

The Associated Press (Geir Moulson, “KOREAS, U.S., CHINA MEET IN GENEVA,” Geneva, 08/05/99) and Reuters (Elif Kaban, “KOREAS MEET IN SHADOW OF MISSILE CRISIS,” Geneva, 08/05/99) reported that the two Koreas, the US, and the PRC opened their latest round of four-party talks on Thursday. PRC ambassador and chairman of this session Qian Yongnian stated, “Particularly in view of recent tensions on the peninsula, we hope all parties will take a positive and cooperative attitude.” Qian said that the missile issue was not on the agenda in Geneva, although it could come up on the sidelines. Qian said, “This is a subject discussed between the United States and North Korea.” DPRK Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye-gwan stated, “We have consistent principles and it is impossible to make any change.”

2. Mt. Kumkang Tour

The Associated Press (“SIGHTSEEING TOUR RESUMES IN N. KOREA,” Seoul, 08/05/99) reported that the ROK resumed the Mt. Kumkang tour on Thursday. A cruise ship carrying ROK tourists was scheduled to arrive at the DPRK port of Changjon early Friday.

3. ROK Arms Purchase

Aerospace Daily (“SOUTH KOREA NEGOTIATES TO BUY LOCKHEED MARTIN AGM-142 MISSILES,” 08/05/99) reported that the ROK will buy US$150 million worth of AGM-142 Have Nap missiles, a deal made through a joint venture between Lockheed Martin and Israel’s Rafael. ROK officials announced in September 1996 that they planned to buy about 100 of the weapons but later shelved the plan because of the economic crisis. With a stronger financial status, the ROK informed the US Air Force in mid-July that it is ready to go ahead with the purchase. According to Tom Noethen, deputy director of U.S. Air Force Precision Strike Weapons at Eglin AFB, Florida, negotiations are still underway to finalize the Foreign Military Sale (FMS) between the AF and the joint venture, called Pegasus. The deal is expected to be similar to the original agreement made in 1996. Noethen said that once the deal is signed, the missiles will be produced at Lockheed Martin’s Troy, Alabama facility. [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for August 5.]

4. DPRK Missile Test

The New York Times carried an editorial (“NORTH KOREA’S DANGEROUS MISSILES,” 08/05/99) which argued that if the DPRK test-fires a missile, it should get a “chilly response” rather than economic or diplomatic awards. The editorial said, “Washington should withdraw its recent proposal offering the North an end to most economic sanctions and steps toward diplomatic recognition.” The editorial added that this offer is conditioned on constructive DPRK behavior. The editorial concluded, “A missile test would not violate any international treaty or agreement with the United States. But it would be a clear sign that North Korea is more interested in developing its military strength and capacity to export dangerous weapons than in pursuing the American offers of help and cooperation.”

5. US Radar Deployment in Japan

The Washington Times (Bill Gertz, “PENTAGON CONSIDERS RADAR FOR N. KOREA,” 08/05/99) reported that the US Defense Department is considering a request from the US Space Command to deploy a new missile defense radar in Japan to monitor the DPRK’s expected missile test. According to US Defense Department officials, US Air Force Space Command chief General Richard Myers asked the US Defense Department last month to use the tracking radar from the Theater High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) to monitor the test of the Taepodong-2 missile. The officials said that General Henry H. Shelton, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, is questioning the plan and expressed concerns that the radar deployment could violate US arms-control agreements and anger Russia. An unidentified official said, “A request has been made, but there has been no decision on whether to deploy it.” Another defense official added, “Gen. Shelton passed Myers’ request down to his staff with a handwritten admonition that it might raise ABM treaty issues, which might upset the Russians.” A third defense official said the policymakers discussed whether “there are any implications with respect to [theater missile defense] protocols…. These issues have not been resolved, so we’re not close to a decision.” [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for August 5.]

6. Japanese Military Posture

Knight Ridder News Services (Michael Zielenziger, “ASIAN THREATS NUDGE JAPAN’S DEFENSE THINKING,” Tokyo, 08/05/99) reported that, according to analysts, concern that the DPRK will test-fire another missile is prompting Japan to reassess its foreign policy. Ronald Morse, a professor at Reitaku University outside Tokyo, argued that these latest security developments emerge not from a sense of strength but from a fear of weakness. Morse said, “In this tailspin, the Japanese have been forced to build not on their accumulated power but have been forced to reassess who they are as their power declines. As they decline, they are saying, ‘We may not be an economic superpower, but there’s no reason we should be wimpy.'” Akitaka Saiki, a representative of Japanese Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, said the changes were provoked by the fact the “security situation in the region has changed in the last decade or so.” However, he refused to say that Japan’s moves represent a real policy shift. Saiki stated, “It’s not relevant to attribute a set of measures to a single factor. It’s based on a broader context.” Other analysts give Obuchi credit for bringing an element of reality to a security environment. Yukio Okamoto, a former top official of the Foreign Ministry who frequently consults with the prime minister, said, “Obuchi was not afraid to confront taboos that have constrained the movement of Japanese politics for a long time.” However, Okamoto said, “You can easily categorize recent trends as demonstrating rising nationalism, but in substance it’s not really true.” [Ed. note: This article was one of the top stories in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for August 5.]

7. Tokyo Disarmament Forum

The Associated Press (Edith M. Lederer, “PANEL URGES NUKE DANGER REVERSAL,” United Nations, 08/04/99) reported that a panel of nuclear experts from 16 countries, who are members of the Tokyo Forum for Nuclear Nonproliferation and Disarmament, issued a report commissioned by the Japanese government. The report stated, “The risks of cataclysmic war between major powers have subsided, but those of regional aggression with weapons of mass destruction have increased. Warnings have been sounded, including in Kashmir, the Persian Gulf and the Korean peninsula.” The report said that these and other “alarming developments” have led to the unraveling of the fabric of international security and the growth of nuclear dangers “at a disturbing rate.” The report also called on the nuclear states to reaffirm their commitments to eliminate nuclear weapons, and start taking concrete steps to reach that goal. Former UN Undersecretary-General Yasushi Akashi, co-chairman of the Tokyo Forum, said, “The onus is very much on the nuclear powers, particularly on the United States and Russia, more particularly on the United States.”

8. US Military Sales to Taiwan

The Associated Press (“CHINA WARNS U.S. ON TAIWAN,” Beijing, 08/04/99) reported that the PRC demanded that the US Congress shelve legislation for increasing military aid to Taiwan. The PRC’s state-run Xinhua news agency quoted an unidentified senior member of the PRC Foreign Affairs Committee as saying, “We … hope that the U.S. congressmen are fully aware of the seriousness, the damage, and the risk they will take if they support separatist activities in Taiwan. We will defend the state sovereignty and territorial integrity of our motherland at any price.”

9. PRC Military Exercises

Reuters (Dan Martin, “TAIWAN SAYS CHINA USING SCARE TACTICS,” Taipei, 08/05/99) reported that Taiwanese Defense Ministry spokesman Major General Kung Fan-ding on Thursday dismissed reports that the PRC is gearing up for an assault on Taiwan. Kung stated, “We must let the people know the truth so they are not hurt by these rumors, which will affect our mood, cause the stock market to fall and cause people to panic. The Chinese Communists have always used Hong Kong’s media to wage psychological warfare and spread groundless rumors.” Kung also attributed exercises by PRC military to normal summer training procedures. Kung said, “All armed forces have regular training. It’s just like how students must undergo regular examinations.” Kung added that an increase in PRC military activity was to be expected anyway since August 1 was Army Day in the PRC and October 1 will mark the 50th anniversary of the founding of the PRC.

Reuters (“TAIPEI SEES NO THREAT FROM CHINA JET SORTIES,” Taipei, 08/05/99) reported that Taiwan Vice Air Force Chief of Staff Jen Yu-sheng said on Thursday that a slight increase of fighter jet sorties by the PRC posed no immediate threat. Jen said, however, that Taiwan’s air force would take “appropriate action” if national security were threatened. He said, “We will not be provocative, but we will not avoid (conflict) or show weakness.” US Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern and Pacific Affairs Stanley Roth said, “All I can say is we have laid down every marker that we know how to lay down about the seriousness of this issue. The risk of an accident, much less a deliberate confrontation, is high.” Kurt Campbell, Deputy US Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, said that some inadvertent action in the current atmosphere could trigger a full-blown confrontation. Campbell said, “Both sides tend to use military force as a signal. And that kind of signaling is often very much misunderstood by the other side. The greatest concern the Administration has is for an inadvertent, or an accidental act.”

10. Taiwan Air Show

The Associated Press (Annie Huang, “AIR SHOW NOT AIMED AT CHINA,” Taipei, 08/05/99) reported that Taiwan Vice Air Force Chief of Staff Jen Yu-sheng said on Thursday that Taiwan will stage an air show to boost public confidence in its air defense. Jen denied that the move is intended as a display of force for the PRC. Jen said that the show, which is scheduled for September 1, is not aimed at countering increased PRC flights and ship cruises over the Taiwan Strait. Other Taiwanese officials said that the planned air show, to be preceded by up to five rehearsals, will display the US-built F-16s, France-built Mirages and the Taiwan-built Indigenous Defensive Fighters. The show, planned a year ago, will mark the 50th anniversary of the Taiwanese Air Force Academy.

11. Taiwan-US Relations

The Associated Press (“TAIWAN CARRIER MAY CANCEL BOEING ORDER,” Tacoma, 08/05/99) reported that, according to Tacoma News Tribune, the Taiwanese government has apparently told Taiwan’s China Airlines to cancel an order for 12 Boeing 777s in protest of the US Clinton administration’s PRC policy. Boeing had been expecting the US$2 billion deal to be formally announced at any time. It has been working on it since China Airlines signed a letter of intent to buy the jets in 1995. Citing US congressional and industry sources, the Tacoma News Tribune reported on Thursday that instead, China Airlines is expected to announce a major purchase of A-340 planes from the European consortium Airbus Industries, perhaps as early as next week. Marta Newhart, a Boeing spokeswoman in Seattle, said, “All the major Asian airlines have chosen 777s. Twelve (Asian) airlines have them on order. We believe it is the right airplane for China Airlines, but it is up to them.” US Senator Slade Gorton, Republican-Washington, will head to Taiwan on Saturday in an effort to salvage the Boeing order.

12. US Policy toward Taiwan

The Wall Street Journal (Eduardo Lachica, “U.S. URGES CHINA, TAIWAN TO ACT WITH RESTRAINT,” Washington, 08/05/99), the New York Times (Jane Perlez, “A TIGHTROPE ACT OVER TAIWAN,” Washington, 08/05/99) and Reuters (Christopher Wilson, “U.S. SENATE PANEL WARNED OVER TAIWAN DEFENSE BILL,” Washington, 08/04/99) reported that, according to US officials, the passage of the proposed Taiwan Security Enhancement Act would only aggravate tensions amid the dangerous face-off between the PRC and Taiwan. US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Stanley Roth and US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Kurt Campbell said that the proposed law might heighten the risk of a military confrontation. Roth told the US Congress, “Your vote on this bill is a serious decision. It is a potentially dangerous vote against a policy that has worked through four administrations and continues to work today.” Roth added that the US Clinton administration had made it clear to both PRC and Taiwan “how determined we are to have a peaceful resolution through dialogue” and was seeking to calm tensions. Campbell also said that some inadvertent action in the current atmosphere could trigger a full-blown confrontation. Campbell said, “Both sides tend to use military force as a signal. And that kind of signaling is often very much misunderstood by the other side. The greatest concern the administration has is for an inadvertent, or an accidental act.” US Senator Joseph Biden, Democrat- Delaware, said, “Far from enhancing Taiwan’s security, I am convinced that passage of this legislation would be the equivalent of waving a red cape in front of Beijing and inviting China to charge.” [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for August 5.]

US Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jesse Helms (“SENATOR JESSE HELMS OPENING STATEMENT FOR HEARING ON THE TAIWAN SECURITY ENHANCEMENT ACT,” Washington, USIA Text, 08/04/99) said that Taiwan Security Enhancement Act will ensure that Taiwan will have the essential self-defense capabilities. Helms stated, “To accomplish this we propose to bolster the process for defense sales to Taiwan, and help Taiwan achieve and maintain an adequate military readiness. The need to enhance our defense relationship with Taiwan is obvious. First, the reunification of Taiwan has become an increasingly high agitation issue for Beijing, now that they have reabsorbed Hong Kong and, as of this coming December, Macau. Second, Beijing constantly demonstrates a willingness to use intimidation to achieve its goal…. If one adds to this buildup the ugly, threatening rhetoric aimed at Taiwan by the highest levels of the Chinese government recently, one can see the very real threat that Taiwan faces. Third, part of Beijing’s strategy is to continue its pressure on the U.S. to limit or cease arm sales to Taiwan…. Finally, our friends in Taiwan have a military capability that has operated in virtual isolation for over twenty years…. This has certainly had a corrosive effect on Taiwan’s military preparedness, at exactly the time Taiwan faces a growing military threat from China. The United States’ strategic interests, United States law and United States moral values dictate that we assist our long-time friends on Taiwan in meeting these challenges and that is why Senator Torricelli and I introduced this bill.”

The Washington Times (Sean Scully, “CLINTON’S POLICY PUSHING ASIA TOWARD WAR, SENATE PANEL TOLD,” 08/05/99, Pg. 6) reported that US senators and former US Reagan administration officials on Wednesday said that the US Clinton administration’s policy toward the PRC is pushing Asia toward war over Taiwan, and that Congress needs to step in and stop it. Former US CIA chief R. James Woolsey said, “The administration is appeasing the People’s Republic of China, there really is no other word for it. I believe this is encouraging the policies of hard-line factions of the PRC.” Former US Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Weinberger said that recent PRC moves show that the PRC is interested in “the subjugation of Taiwan, preferably by the threat of force, in extremis with the use of force, while deterring the United States from intervening.” However, US Assistant Secretary of State Stanley O. Roth said, “The notion that this administration simply accepts any Chinese behavior is ridiculous … we’ve gone ahead [with policies that irritate China] and we haven’t been intimidated by Beijing.” [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for August 5.]

13. Philippines-PRC Relations

Agence France-Presse (“ESTRADA REBUFFS WARNING,” Manila, 08/05/99) reported that Philippine President Joseph Estrada rebuffed a warning from PRC Ambassador to the Philippines Fu Ying against holding US-Philippine military exercises near the Spratly Islands. Estrada said, “I see no reason why they should warn us. This is not within their territory. So I don’t think they should interfere with our agreement with the US Government.” Philippine military chief General Angelo Reyes announced last week that the US and the Philippines would hold joint exercises from February to May on the western island of Palawan, the closest major Philippine island to the disputed Spratlys. However, Reyes said the exercises were “not near the disputed areas” and were not connected to the disputes over the Spratlys. Philippine Defense Secretary Orlando Mercado said that no third country could question the exercises since they would be staged on Philippine territory. [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for August 5.]

II. Republic of Korea

1. DPRK warns US

Joongang Ilbo (“NK WARNS US OF UNPREDICTABLE ACTION,” Seoul, 08/04/99) reported that the DPRK on Tuesday warned the US that attempts to pressure it into abandoning suspected plans to launch a new missile could trigger “unpredictable consequences,” including a test launch. The statement from the DPRK foreign ministry came just hours before top DPRK and US officials were due to discuss the DPRK’s missile program in Geneva. A DPRK foreign ministry spokesman said, “The further the United States escalates pressure upon us, the stronger our reaction will become to bring unpredictable consequences.” The DPRK branded the remarks of Cohen last week “threatening,” saying that warnings could have the opposite reaction intended by the US, the ROK and Japan. Accusing the three of plotting military action against the DPRK, the spokesman said Cohen was bunching the DPRK together with states like Iraq and Serbia, believing it was weak and lacking in will. “It is a serious miscalculation and a ridiculous gambling,” the spokesman said. “For the United States to return challenge for our good faith will encourage us to significantly increase our national defense capabilities and continue to push ahead with the missile firing test, to say nothing of satellite launch.” “The touch-and-go situation prevailing on the Korean peninsula reminds one of a time bomb that may go off any moment,” the spokesman said. “The US has never gone to such extremes in its military moves as today.”

2. Asian Missile Tests

The Korea Herald (Shin Yong-bae, “N.K. BRINKMANSHIP AIMED AT ECONOMIC, DIPLOMATIC GAINS,” Seoul, 08/05/99) reported that missiles have emerged as a top security concern in East Asia in the wake of the PRC’s testing of a new long-range missile and the DPRK’s apparent plan to test-fire a ballistic missile. Monday’s test by the RPC further heightened tension in its relations with Taiwan. Although US officials try to downplay the significance of the PRC move, saying it had been expected for some time, the timing of the missile firing prompted speculation that it was related to Taiwan President Lee Tung-hui’s recent call for a “special state to state relationship” with the PRC. ROK government and private DPRK watchers in Seoul said that the DPRK is certainly engaging in brinkmanship with its expected missile test to gain more economic and diplomatic benefits in future negotiations with the US. “The North seems to be trying to gain the upper hand in talks with the United States,” said an ROK government official, speaking on condition of anonymity. Professor Yun Duk-min of the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security (IFANS), an ROK government think tank, argued, “Pyongyang used to take an adventurous action, on purpose, ahead of important talks (with Washington) to have leverage in negotiations.” Yun added, “The North’s brinkmanship has always been successful.”

3. Mt. Kumgang Tour

The Korea Herald (Shin Yong-bae, “CRUISE TO LEAVE FOR MT. KUMGANG TODAY AFTER 46-DAY SUSPENSION OF OPERATION,” Seoul, 08/05/99) reported that the suspended cruise to Mt. Kumgang resumes on Thursday amid a dispute in the political community over the ROK government’s decision to allow the tour to run again. The cruise liner “Pongrae” was to leave Tonghae port in the ROK for Changjon, the gateway to the mountain in the DPRK, at 5:00 p.m., officials at the Hyundai Group, the operator of the tour, said on Wednesday. They said a total of 510 people had signed up for the boat cruise to the mountain and that Hyundai had sent the list to the DPRK’s Asia- Pacific Peace Committee.

III. Announcements

1. Hawaii Security Conference

The Biennial Conference of the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies will be held at the Hilton Hawaiian Village from August 30 – September 2, on the subject “Security in a Time of Economic Recovery.” Policy-makers, government officials and academics from throughout the Asia-Pacific region will present an update of security concerns in the region. The Attendees, including Dr. Dewi Fortuna Anwar, Indonesian State Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Desmond Ball, Australian National University, and Ronnie Chan, chairman of Hong Kong’s Hang Lung Development Company, Ltd., will take part in discussions on arms proliferation governance, Asian capitalism, the changing roles of the military and population dynamics. The attendees will be welcomed to the four-day event by Honolulu Mayor Jeremy Harris, and Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies president H.C. “Hank” Stackpole, III. The general public may sign up for open seats via the Asia-Pacific Center website:, under the conference section. A conference fee of $175 will be charged ($50 without meals). The Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies is a Honolulu-based regional security studies, conference and research center. It is designed to enhance cooperation and build relationships through the mutual understanding and study of comprehensive security issues among military and civilian representatives of the United States and other Asia-Pacific nations.

2. Job Opportunities

The Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS) of the Monterey Institute for International Studies has two positions available. The Monterey office is seeking an Assistant to the Deputy Director, Center for Nonproliferation Studies. Under general supervision of the Deputy Director of CNS, the Assistant to the Deputy Director is responsible for advancing the mission of CNS/CRES by providing support as described in the duties. This is a full-time, non-exempt staff position, requiring a high level of diplomacy, strong analytical skills and ability to prioritize tasks in a fast-paced office. The position requires a B.A. in political science, international relations or a related field and previous office experience, preferably supporting executive or director-level position. Some experience in the field of arms control and nonproliferation is desirable. To apply for his position, submit a completed application form with a 2-3 page recent writing to: Search Committee – Assistant To Deputy Director, CNS, Monterey Institute Of International Studies, 425 Van Buren St., Monterey, Ca 93940. Priority Deadline is August 20, 1999. Applications Received after that date will be reviewed at the discretion of the Search Committee. For more information, please visit the CNS website at:

The Washington Office of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies is seeking a Research Associate. Under the supervision of the Senior Associate of the Washington, D.C. office of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS), the Research Associate will assist in the operations and implementation of activities tasked to and performed in the Washington office of the CNS. This is a full-time, exempt staff position. It requires an M.A. degree in political science, international relations, or equivalent experience in the field. Priority deadline is August 31, 1999. Applications received after that date will be reviewed at the discretion of the Search Committee. To apply, send a letter of interest, resume, unofficial transcript, at least one letter of recommendation, and brief (2-3 pages) writing sample to: Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Monterey Institute of International Studies, Attn: RA Search Committee, 11 Dupont Circle, NW, 9th Floor Washington, DC 20036. For more information, please visit the CNS website at:

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

Timothy L. Savage:
Berkeley, California, United States

Wade L. Huntley:
Berkeley, California, United States

Lee Dong-young:
Seoul, Republic of Korea

Hiroyasu Akutsu:
Tokyo, Japan

Peter Razvin:
Moscow, Russian Federation

Chunsi Wu:
Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

Dingli Shen:
Shanghai, People’s Republic of China


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.