NAPSNet Daily Report 06 June, 2000

Recommended Citation

"NAPSNet Daily Report 06 June, 2000", NAPSNet Daily Report, June 06, 2000, https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-daily-report/napsnet-daily-report-06-june-2000/

 
CONTENTS

I. United States

1. Kim Jong-il’s DPRK Visit
2. ROK-DPRK Summit
3. G-8 Statement on DPRK
4. Korean War Massacre
5. PRC Missile Test
6. PRC View of Russia-EU Missile Defense Cooperation
7. Effects of US Missile Defense
8. US-Russian Summit

I. United States

1. Kim Jong-il’s DPRK Visit

Agence France Presse (“NORTH KOREAN LEADER’S COMING-OUT PARTY BOOSTS PEACE OFFENSIVE,” Tokyo, 6/6/00) reported that DPRK leader Kim Jong-il’s visit to the PRC gave analysts an unexpected glimpse into his diplomatic leadership. Experts said Kim’s trip to the PRC showed that the DPRK, preparing for a first-ever June 12-14 summit with the ROK, is departing from its narrow external focus on the US. Charles Armstrong, East Asian Institute professor at New York’s Columbia University, said, “I cannot speak for the US government, but I and probably most Western observers of North Korea were surprised by the visit. China’s public show of support for North Korea sends a signal to Japan and the United States that they must be actively engaged in a regional dialogue on the Korean issue and take North Korea seriously.” Scott Snyder, an ROK-based analyst of the US’ private Asia Foundation, said that Kim’s trip to the PRC exposed him as a “leader who has the willingness and capacity to engage in public diplomacy.” Snyder said that Kim was seeking “critical psychological and material support” from the PRC ahead of the summit. He added that this sent the message that “the North’s dependency on South Korea for economic support cannot be taken for granted.” Hajime Izumi, professor at Japan’s Shizuoka University, said, “we are surprised because we had never expected Kim to make such a reasonable move. It has become clear that his diplomacy is based on reasonable judgment.” Robert Manning, Asian studies director at the Council on Foreign Relations, argued, “the summit is the crucible in which this bargain will play out. It is tempting to view North Korea’s new diplomacy as reflecting a realization by Pyongyang that it has gotten most of what it can get from the US without paying a price.” Satoshi Morimoto, a professor at Tokyo’s Takushoku University, stated, “North Korea is pursuing a sort of all-around diplomacy as a catalyst to boost relations with the United States” which is unready to give aid.

2. ROK-DPRK Summit

The Associated Press (“KOREAS SUMMIT DETAILS NOT PUBLIC,” Seoul, 6/6/00) reported that ROK Presidential spokesman Park June-young said that the ROK government on June 5 was given the itinerary for the June 12-14 summit between ROK President Kim Dae-jung and DPRK leader Kim Jong-il. However, Park said, details will not be made public in compliance with diplomatic protocols from the DPRK. During a speech marking the ROK’s Memorial Day on Tuesday, Kim Dae-jung said, “we will continue to make sincere efforts so that South and North Korea will cooperate with each other through mutual trust and respect.”

3. G-8 Statement on DPRK

Agence France Presse (“G8 TO PRESSURE NORTH KOREA OVER MISSILE, NUCLEAR PROGRAMS: REPORT,” Tokyo, 6/5/00) reported that the Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun said on June 5 that the Group of Eight (G8) leaders including US President Bill Clinton will press the DPRK to reconsider its nuclear and missile programs next month. The decision was taken at a G8 senior officials’ meeting in Japan last week. The paper quoted an anonymous Japanese government source who said that a joint statement was released saying that the countries’ leaders “will urge North Korea to reconsider its nuclear and missile development programs at the July 21-23 summit.” The paper also said that the G8 will also issue a statement supporting increased dialogue between the DPRK and the ROK.

4. Korean War Massacre

The Associated Press (Robert Burns, “KOREAN REFUGEES MAY HAVE BEEN HIT,” Washington, 6/6/00) reported that US military investigators have found a formerly secret US Air Force document stating that US planes, responding to a request by the US Army, strafed columns of civilian refugees approaching US lines during the early days of the Korean War. Officials at the US Defense Department on Tuesday said they do not doubt the authenticity of the document but have yet to corroborate the assertion that US Air Force planes carried out US Army requests for strafing of civilians. The US Air Force memo also emphasized that US ground commanders were fearful that their lines were being infiltrated by groups of civilian refugees that might include or be controlled by DPRK soldiers. The document was written one day before the No Gun Ri incident began and coincides with earlier AP reports that the shooting of civilians at No Gun Ri began with an aerial strafing. The US Air Force document makes no mention of specific places or numbers of civilians strafed.

5. PRC Missile Test

Agence France Presse (“U.S. FORCE BEEFING UP SURVEILLANCE ON CHINA MISSILE TEST,” Tokyo, 6/6/00) reported that Japan’s Sankei Shimbun said on Tuesday that US forces in southern Japan are increasing their surveillance to monitor a possible PRC ballistic missile test. The paper quoted Japanese defense agency sources as saying that the US military had deployed a reconnaissance plane and ship in the Yellow Sea since mid-May for an imminent test-firing of a Dongfeng-31 missile. According to US intelligence information, the PRC would test-fire the missile from a military base in Shanxi province to a desert area in Xinjiang Uygur in northwest China. Japan’s Defense Agency director general Tsutomu Kawara told a news conference he was not aware of any ballistic missile test by the PRC, saying that he had only heard of the matter from the newspaper.

6. PRC View of Russia-EU Missile Defense Cooperation

Agence France Presse (“BEIJING HINTS OPPOSITION TO A RUSSIAN-EUROPEAN ANTI-MISSILE SYSTEM,” Beijing, 6/6/00) reported that the PRC on Tuesday hinted that it would object to Russia and Europe developing a joint anti- missile system to balance a similar system proposed by the US. Russian President Vladimir Putin had called on the European Union and NATO to join forces with Russia and set up a joint anti-missile shield during a visit to Italy on June 5. Putin had said at a news conference, “this will avoid creating problems linked to an imbalance in the equilibrium of forces, and ensure 100 percent the security of all European countries, with the obvious involvement of our American partners.” Zhang Qiyue, spokeswoman for the ministry of foreign affairs, said on Tuesday that the PRC had taken note of the report about Putin’s proposal, but was not clear on the details. However, she stated, “the Chinese side maintains that adherence to the ABM treaty conforms with the strategic balance and stability and conforms with the common interest of countries concerned. Any efforts to amend the ABM treaty or to withdraw from it would not only threaten the nuclear disarmament process but would also shake the basis for nuclear non-proliferation and would give rise to a new round of arms race, including an arms race in outer space. We think such efforts would create an adverse impact on the global strategic balance and stability and would end up doing good to no country.”

7. Effects of US Missile Defense

The Los Angeles Times’ Global Viewpoint Editor Nathan Gardels interviewed Robert S. McNamara, U.S. secretary of Defense under John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Baines Johnson, (“CHINA AND RUSSIA WILL BUILD UP ARMS IF WE PURSUE A MISSILE SHIELD,” 6/5/00) who said that Russia and the PRC would respond to the US plans to build a National Missile Defense (NMD) by building up their nucleararsenals. McNamara said that since no one knows the real capability of NMD, “how will the Russians or Chinese ever accurately appraise the ‘kill capability’ of our defense system? How can a leader charged with defending his own country respond? He can only do the responsible thing in the face of uncertainty: Assume a worst-case scenario. For them, the response to the deployment of a US missile defense will be the expansion of their offense. That is why this situation is so dangerous.” Asked how nuclear powers should relate to one another, McNamara pointed to the importance of transparency and the need to reduce nuclear weapons to the minimum required “to maintain an appropriate qualitative balance with one’s opponent so there is deterrent stability. Deterrent stability can only be achieved when each party believes it can absorb a first strike with enough surviving weapons to inflict unacceptable damage on the other.” [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for June 5, 2000.]

8. US-Russian Summit

The New York Times (Elaine Sciolino, “CLINTON AND PUTIN FAIL TO CLOSE GAP ON MISSILE BARRIER,” Moscow, 6/5/00) reported that US President Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir V. Putin concluded two days of talks on June 4 without narrowing the differences over the proposed US national missile defense (NMD) system. The meeting produced two agreements. One was an undertaking by the US and Russia each to destroy 34 metric tons (about 75,000 pounds) of weapons-grade plutonium, enough to make tens of thousands of nuclear weapons. The other called for a joint center in Moscow to share early warnings about missile launches, which would be the first permanent US-Russia military operation. The two sides agreed to a joint statement pledging to continue talks on further cuts in strategic nuclear weapons and termed the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty the “cornerstone” of global strategic security. The statement called on experts from both sides to prepare a joint report on how to tackle new threats to strategic stability. [Ed. note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for June 5, 2000.]

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
Monash Asia Institute,
Monash University, Clayton, Australia

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

Gee Gee Wong: 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: 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
Clayton, Australia

Leanne Payton: lbpat1@smtp.monash.edu.au
Clayton, Australia

 


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.