NAPSNet Daily Report 06 February, 2002

Recommended Citation

"NAPSNet Daily Report 06 February, 2002", NAPSNet Daily Report, February 06, 2002, https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-daily-report/napsnet-daily-report-06-february-2002/

 
CONTENTS

I. United States

1. US Anti-terror War
2. US-Philippines Anti-terror War
3. US-Russia Nuclear Diplomacy
4. Cross-Straits Relations
5. Taiwan Military Development
6. PRC-US Relations
7. ROK Domestic Politics
8. DPRK-US Relations
9. ROK Anti-US Protests
10. DPRK’s View of Japan’s Rocket Launch
11. Japan-DPRK Relations
II. Japan 1. NGO Participation in Afghan Reconstruction
2. Japanese New Foreign Minister
3. US Bases in Okinawa

I. United States

1. US Anti-terror War

The Washington Times (Rowan Scarborough, “RUMSFELD HINTS WAR MAY NOT END IN ’02,” Washington, 02/06/02) reported that US Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld yesterday held out the possibility that US commandos will still be in Afghanistan next year hunting down Taliban and al Qaeda fighters. Rumsfeld told the Senate Armed Services Committee that one purpose of President Bush’s request for US$10 billion advance for the war against terrorism is to fund operations in Afghanistan in fiscal 2003, which begins October 1st. The US has spent $7 billion in the war’s first four months. Questioned by Chairman Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat, on whether the $10 billion was a down payment for war against Iran, Iraq or the DPRK, Rumsfeld said it was not. Senator Robert C. Byrd, West Virginia Democrat and chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, questioned the conflict’s long-term costs. “How many more years will we be appropriating at the rate of a billion dollars a day?” Byrd asked. [This article also appeared in the US State Department’s Early Bird Report for February 6, 2002.]

2. US-Philippines Anti-terror War

Agence France-Presse, “US PREPARED FOR CASUALTIES IN WAR ON TERROR IN PHILIPPINES” 02/06/02) reported that US Pacific Command special operations chief Brigadier General Donald Wurster stated that US troops are prepared to take casualties in joint operations in the southern Philippines against the Abu Sayyaf. “No question (about it), American soldiers could be there where they could become injured or killed if the Philippine army is attacked,” Wurster said Wednesday. Wurster explained, “The security of our troops is of high priority to us, but the mission is to be accomplished in support of our allies.” US troops will be armed and authorized to fire back in self-defense.

Agence France-Presse (“US COMMANDER SAYS PHILIPPINES OPERATIONS TEMPORARY, NO PLAN TO STAY,” Zamboanga, Philipines, 02/06/02) reported that US troops mounting anti-terror action in the southern Philippines are on a limited mission to aid their hosts and do not plan a permanent stay, their commander said Wednesday. “We intend to come here as good citizens and good neighbors,” US Pacific Command special forces chief Brigadier General Donald Wurster. The deployments are the largest by US troops overseas since the US-led campaign in Afghanistan. Both the US and Philippine governments say the Abu Sayyaf has links with al-Qaeda network of Osama bin Laden. Wurster stated, “Let me state this categorically. The United States has no interest in establishing military bases in the Philippines.”

3. US-Russia Nuclear Diplomacy

The New York Times (Todd S. Purdum, “POWELL SAYS U.S. PLANS TO WORK OUT BINDING ARMS PACT,” Washington, 02/06/02) reported that US Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said today that the US expected to meet Russia’s demand for a “legally binding” agreement on reducing nuclear warheads. “We do expect that as we codify this framework, it will be something that will be legally binding, and we are examining different ways in which this can happen,” Secretary Powell stated. “We’re exploring with Russia and we’re discussing within the administration the best way to make this a legally binding or codified agreement in some way.” Powell did not address another Russian demand, that the US destroy any excess warheads and not simply store them as the Bush administration has proposed. Joseph Cirincione, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, commented, “The administration may be willing to give a legally binding agreement to reduce to a specified level, and to provide verification of those reductions, but not commit to irreversibility,” he said. “What the Russians want is a legally binding, verifiable agreement to deep, irreversible reductions.” [This article also appeared in the US State Department’s Early Bird Report for February 6, 2002.]

The Associated Press (Vladimir Isachenkov, “RUSSIA PRAISES U.S. ON NUKE STAND,” Moscow, 02/06/02) and Reuters (Jon Boyle, “RUSSIA UPBEAT ON ARMS DEAL, WARNS OF PROBLEMS AHEAD,” Moscow, 02/06/02) reported that Russian Colonel General Yuri Baluyevsky, first deputy chief of staff of Russia’s armed forces on Wednesday enthusiastically welcomed the US government’s willingness to codify proposed nuclear arms cuts and said the deal could be reached by the time President Bush visits Russia in May. Baluyevsky stated, “We can prepare an agreement that would satisfy both sides and receive understanding of the world community, which expects exactly such decisions from the two top nuclear powers. Despite differences on a number of issues, the accord, or series of accords on mutual cuts to strategic offensive weapons, will, I hope, be worked out by the spring of 2002.”

4. Cross-Straits Relations

The Washington Post (“CHINA MOVES TO OPEN ‘3 LINKS’ WITH TAIWAN; POLICY SHIFT SIGNALS SOFTER STANCE BY BEIJING,” Beijing, 02/06/02) reported that a PRC senior official stated that the PRC is pushing to open direct shipping, trade and mail links with Taiwan and is ready to do so without involving the governments of either side. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, gave the briefing as part of an attempt to call attention to the modifications, which were announced January 24 in a speech by PRC Vice Premier Qian Qichen. The senior official declared that the PRC is willing to drop its precondition that Taiwan’s government recognize the “one China” principle before opening what is known as the “three links” with Taiwan: shipping, mail and trade. The senior official explained, “Some colleagues said, ‘You are giving up the “one China” principle,’ but as long as both sides treat the issue as a domestic affair, no flags are used, we can get three links going. Anyway, we didn’t ask Taiwan businessmen to state the ‘one China’ principle before they started doing business here” more than two decades ago.” There was no immediate response from Taiwan.

Reuters (“CHINA SAYS POLICY ON TAIWAN UNCHANGED DESPITE REPORT,” Beijing, 02/06/02) reported that the PRC stated on Wednesday that its policy toward Taiwan has not changed despite a report that it has abandoned a key precondition for talks on establishing direct links with the island. The Washington Post quoted an unnamed official as saying the PRC was willing to drop its requirement that Taiwan recognize the “one-China principle” before opening the “three links,” but an official at the cabinet’s Office of Taiwan Affairs said there had been no change in policy. “All documents and statements by central leaders are consistent and clear. It is in all the recent documents and talks, which are consistent. I can say that there has been no change.”

5. Taiwan Military Development

Agence France-Presse (“TAIWAN TO CUT MILITARY PERSONNEL, MODERNIZE WEAPONRY,” 02/02/02) reported that new Taiwan Defense Minister Tang Yao- ming said Taiwan would cut its military personnel and develop modern weaponry to counter the PRC with more efficient armed forces. The ministry planned to cut military manpower by an average 15,000 servicemen every year from 2003 to 2006, said Tang, who was sworn in Friday after stepping down from the post of Chief of the General Staff. Taiwan currently has some 370,000 servicemen. The government will instead concentrate on developing more modern weaponry to raise the island’s combat capability, Tang said. “We must have sufficient defense capabilities to protect the island in the face of military threats from communist China.” The PRC has at least 300 ballistic missiles along its southeast coast targeted at Taiwan, according to Taiwanese estimates. The island’s defense ministry expects the number to reach 800 by 2006. “Other than Patriot (anti-missile) weaponry, the Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology is developing low-altitude anti-missile systems to defend the island,” Tang said. The Anti-Tactical Ballistic Missile (ATBN) is scheduled to go into service in 2005 to defend central and southern Taiwan. Taiwan has installed three US-made batteries of PAC-II Plus missiles, the improved version of the first Patriot system, to defend the densely populated greater Taipei area. The United States in April approved the most comprehensive arms package to Taiwan since 1992, including eight diesel-engined submarines, 12 P-3C submarine-hunting aircraft, and four Kidd-class frigates.

6. PRC-US Relations

Agence France-Presse (“US-CHINA RELATIONS GOING “RATHER SMOOTHLY” AHEAD OF BUSH VISIT: POWELL,” 02/06/02) reported that Secretary of State Colin Powell stated that US-PRC relations are developing “rather smoothly” ahead of President George W. Bush’s visit to Beijing this month. “The relationship is back on an improving track,” Powell told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Powell stressed that the US and the PRC should cooperate in areas where they had common interests, including the PRC entry into the World Trade Organization, peace efforts on the Korean peninsula and battling HIV/AIDS. “On such issues we can talk, and produce constructive outcomes,” Powell said. Powell did acknowledge that there were areas in which the US and the PRC “decidedly did not see eye to eye,” for example on Taiwan, missile proliferation and religious freedom. “On such issues we can have a dialogue and try to make progress. But we do not want the issues where we differ to restrain us from pursuing those where we share common goals,” Powell said. “That is the basis on which our relations are going rather smoothly at present.”

7. ROK Domestic Politics

Reuters (“S.KOREA TAKES GAMBLE WITH NEW FOREIGN MINISTER,” Seoul, 02/04/02) reported that ROK President Kim Dae-jung, less than three weeks before US President Bush visits for talk, replaced foreign minister Han Seung-soo with vice foreign minister Choi Sung-hong. The ROK Blue House stated, “The decision has nothing to do with Bush’s toughened stance against Pyongyang. Han’s replacement is simply part of last week’s cabinet reshuffle, which was related more to domestic politics.”

8. DPRK-US Relations

Agence France-Presse (“‘BALL’ IN NORTH KOREA’S COURT: POWELL,” 02/06/02) reported that US Secretary of State Colin Powell argued that President George W. Bush’s harsh rhetoric directed at the DPRK did not contradict US calls for dialogue. Powell told the Senate Foreign Relations committee that he saw no harm in calling the DPRK situation “the way it is” despite international criticism of Bush’s designation of the DPRK as part of an “axis of evil” in his State of the Union address. “Both we and the Republic of Korea are ready to resume dialogue with Pyongyang at any time the North Koreans decide to come back to the table,” Powell said. “The ball is in their court,” said Powell.

9. ROK Anti-US Protests

Agence France-Presse (“SOUTH KOREAN ACTIVISTS STAGE ANTI-US PROTESTS,” 02/06/02) reported that ROK activists staged anti-US protests and attacked US President George W. Bush for heightening tension on the Korean peninsula. Civic and religious groups also issued statements Wednesday opposing Bush’s planned visit to Seoul on February 19. Riot police tightened security around the US embassy in Seoul and blocked a march by some 30 civic leaders accusing Bush of raising the specter of war on the peninsula. The protestors held up slogans reading “No Bush. No war!” “We oppose Bush’s visit,” they said in a statement which also urged Bush to scrap his “hostile” policy towards the DPRK.

10. DPRK’s View of Japan’s Rocket Launch

Agence France-Presse (“NORTH KOREA DENOUNCES JAPAN’S ROCKET LAUNCH,” 02/06/02) reported that a DPRK foreign ministry spokesman, in a statement released late Tuesday, said Japan’s launch of a satellite carrier this week was a covert attempt to bolster its arms program. The spokesperson accused the US of double standards in condemning the DPRK but doing nothing over Japan’s weapons buildup. The ministry said Japan’s launch of an H-2A rocket on Monday sought “to revive militarism.” “This situation compels the DPRK to further increase its independent defense capabilities,” a foreign ministry spokesperson warned. Japan has said its H-2A rocket is intended for commercial satellite launches. But the DPRK ministry said Japan’s “moves to revive militarism, which is getting pronounced as never before these days, have reached a dangerous phase.” The official claimed Japan was secretly developing missiles, and had technology and enough plutonium to produce nuclear weapons.

11. Japan-DPRK Relations

Agence France-Presse (“JAPAN’S NKOREA POLICY UNCHANGED AFTER BUSH SPEECH,” 02/06/02) reported that Japan Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said that Japan would work patiently towards restoring diplomatic ties with the DPRK despite the hard line taken by US President George W. Bush. “Through this effort, we will aim to settle security and humanitarian issues,” he said. Koizumi made no mention of the DPRK foreign ministry statement issued late Tuesday which charged that Japan’s launch of an H-2A rocket this week was a covert attempt to bolster its arms program.

II. Japan

1. NGO Participation in Afghan Reconstruction

The Asahi Shimbun (“ONISHI SAYS MUNEO SUZUKI RANTED ABOUT NGOS,” Tokyo, 02/01/02) reported that activist Kensuke Onishi of Peace Winds Japan accused lawmaker Muneo Suzuki of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) as the primary instigator in the NGO flap that toppled Makiko Tanaka. Days before an NGO conference on rebuilding Afghanistan in Tokyo, a Foreign Ministry official reported that Suzuki made clear he would do everything in his power to prevent domestic NGOs from attending, Onishi said. Consequently, Onishi’s groups were barred by the Foreign Ministry from attending the meeting. Suzuki is also said to have stopped government funding for an NGO meeting on Afghanistan in Tokyo in December. told The Asahi Shimbun, “I have never said Japanese NGOs should not be allowed to attend.” He added, “They are going public and claiming things I never said and distorting other comments I may have made.”

2. Japanese New Foreign Minister

The Asahi Shimbun (“NEW MINISTER GETS MIXED RATINGS,” Tokyo, 02/02/02) reported that the appointment of Yoriko Kawaguchi as Japan’s new Foreign Minister was a surprise to many and a question mark to others. Kawaguchi has already earned her stripes in the minds of many top ministry officials because of her deftness in negotiating and mediating among diplomats at international conference on the issue of global warming in conjunction with the Kyoto Protocol. Others, however, said it is not clear how diligently Kawaguchi will press to carry out reforms in the ministry that Makiko Tanaka had struggled to initiate. As a former bureaucrat in what was the Ministry of International Trade and Industry, her loyalties are a question mark. One official in the Foreign Ministry said, “I’m worried that she would be lenient to bureaucrats because she was one of them. Compared with Tanaka, you can’t help feeling Kawaguchi lacks dynamism.” Yoshiaki Kobayashi, professor of political science at Keio University, said that the Koizumi administration will likely be hurt by the fact that Sadako Ogata turned down the post. Yukio Hatoyama, president of opposition Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) said, “Kawaguchi will be tested in how far she can change things at the Foreign Ministry.”

3. US Bases in Okinawa

The Asahi Shimbun (“MAYOR IS RETURNED IN NAGO,” Nago, 02/04/02) reported that the re-election Sunday of Tateo Kishimoto as mayor of Nago will be read as an endorsement of the central government’s plan to move heliport functions to Nago from US Marine Corps Air Station Futenma. Kishimoto had argued that the city should get over the base issue and focus on improving its economy, using a package of subsidy programs being planned by the central government. The local economy is a prime concern in Okinawa where unemployment is nearly twice the national average. Kishimoto was backed by the construction industry and small business, which helped him pull away from his two opponents. Turnout at the poll, a low 77.66 percent, suggested voter frustration at the long delay in resolving the base issue, according to the article.

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:

BK21 The Education and Research Corps for East Asian Studies
Department of Political Science, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Center for American Studies,
Fudan University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

International Peace Research Institute (PRIME),
Meiji Gakuin University, Tokyo, Japan

Monash Asia Institute,
Monash University, Clayton, Australia

Brandon Yu: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States

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

Kim Young-soo: yskim328@hotmail.com
Seoul, Republic of Korea

Hibiki Yamaguchi: hibikiy@dh.mbn.or.jp
Tokyo, Japan

Saiko Iwata: saiko@akira.ne.jp
Tokyo, Japan

Hiroya Takagi: hiroya_takagi@hotmail.com
Tokyo, Japan

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

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

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

John McKay: John.McKay@adm.monash.edu.au< /a>
Clayton, Australia

 


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.