CONTENTS
1. NE Asian Countries Respond to US Attack
2. US Military Reaction to Attacks
3. Missile Defense and Terrorism
4. DPRK Food Aid
II. Republic of Korea 1. DPRK Protests Against Japan
2. Return of Land from US Military Bases
I. United States
1. NE Asian Countries Respond to US Attack
Reuters (Paul Eckert, “S.KOREA CONSOLES AMERICA, GUARDS U.S. MISSIONS,” 9/12/01) reported that the ROK stepped up security around US diplomatic and military buildings on Wednesday and sent condolences and offers of help to the US after the aircraft attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The ROK defense ministry had ordered “heightened vigilance” shortly after the attacks on US targets and police had stepped up security outside US missions. US military forces and installations in the ROK were put on the highest state of alert.
Reuters (Jeremy Page, “SHOCKED CHINA BOOSTS SECURITY AT U.S. EMBASSY,” Beijing, 9/12/01) reported that the PRC heightened security around US diplomatic buildings on Wednesday. The PRC Foreign Trade Ministry said that the PRC had fourteen companies with offices in the World Trade Center and at least one PRC national was injured in the attacks and the fate of roughly 30 others was unknown. PRC President Jiang Zemin expressed his sympathy and support while PRC Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan was quoted as telling US Secretary of State Colin Powell by telephone, “In the struggle against terrorist violence, the Chinese people stand with the American people.” Analysts said that the attacks might encourage the PRC to step up cooperation with the West in combating international terrorism. However, some said that the PRC might use the attacks to argue against US intervention overseas and US plans to build a missile defense shield, which critics say will not stop terror attacks. Zhu Feng, director of the international security program at Peking University, said that the attacks should also serve as a warning to the PRC. He stated, “If we don’t stand up to fight against such terrorism, maybe one day we’ll also get such stuff. We could come together with the States and other Western countries to fight against such mass terrorism. It’s a little bit early to say, but I think, personally, the events really increase the Chinese understanding and the Chinese sympathy for the United States.” He said the PRC would support retaliation against Saudi exile Osama bin Laden if it were proven he was responsible.
Reuters (“JAPAN TIGHTENS SECURITY AT U.S. MILITARY BASES,” Tokyo, 9/12/01) reported that Japan ordered its military to tighten security for the huge US bases scattered across the country and US Marines went on maximum alert after Tuesday’s aircraft attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said in a statement, “We can never forgive such a dastardly and outrageous act. On behalf of the people of Japan, I express my condolences to the American people from my bottom of my heart. This sort of terrorism will never be forgiven and we feel strong anger.” Koizumi had instructed the Japanese Defense Agency and the National Police Agency to tighten security at US facilities in Japan.
2. US Military Reaction to Attacks
The Associated Press (Susanne Schafer, “U.S. MILITARY ON HIGHEST ALERT,” Washington, 9/12/01) reported that aircraft carriers and guided missile destroyers moved into the waters near New York and Washington after US President George W. Bush placed the US military on its highest alert status in response to the deadly terrorist attacks. The ships sent to stand off the East Coast included the carriers USS John F. Kennedy and USS George Washington, which were headed to New York. Each has a crew of 2,500 to 3,000 sailors, and the JFK’s airwing has about 1,500 sailors. The USNS Comfort, a hospital ship in Baltimore harbor, also was made available. Also deployed were amphibious ships, guided missile cruisers and guided missile destroyers that are capable of responding to threats from the air and sea. The amphibious ships were carrying Marines and sailors to provide security, surgical teams and limited hospital bed capacity. A US Navy official at Pearl Harbor said the US Pacific Fleet had a number of ships underway in the Pacific Ocean. The North American Aerospace Defense Command also was on its highest alert status. NORAD said in a statement, “We have all of our air sovereignty aircraft – fighters, surveillance and other support aircraft – ready to respond.”
3. Missile Defense and Terrorism
The Associated Press (“MISSILE DEFENSE WON’T STOP TERROR,” Moscow, 9/12/01) reported that US Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith said on September 11 in Moscow, where he was conducting negotiations on missile defense, that the proposed US missile defense plan could not have protected against Tuesday’s terrorist attacks, but that nonetheless the tragedy does not undermine the rationale for such a system. J.D. Crouch the Second, US assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, who was also in Moscow for the negotiations, said that the US was trying to deal with a range of threats and that a missile attack could be far deadlier than Tuesday’s plane hijackings. Russian General Staff Colonel General Yuri Baluyevsky said the meetings were held in a friendly atmosphere, but said that the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty could not be simply thrown away without first laying a new groundwork for US-Russia relations.
4. DPRK Food Aid
Reuters (“NORTH KOREA REFUSES ENTRY TO JAPAN AID DELEGATION,” Tokyo, 9/12/01) reported that the Japanese Foreign Ministry said Wednesday that the DPRK has refused entry to a Japanese delegation scheduled to inspect the distribution and use of Japan’s rice aid to the country on September 11. Delegation officials were notified of the last-minute decision in Beijing, a ministry official said. No reason was given for the decision. An official said, “We had been told by the WFP, which has been coordinating this program, that North Korea would allow entry of the delegation. But North Korea notified the delegation yesterday that they were not ready to accept them and also said the same today.” The official said the mission would return to Japan and would work to reschedule the visit.
II. Republic of Korea
1. DPRK Protests Against Japan
The Korea Herald (“N.K. THREATENS TO END MISSILE MORATORIUM,” Seoul, 09/12/01) reported that the DPRK has threatened to end a moratorium on missile test launches, saying Japan’s test of a satellite launcher was a threat to peace. A DPRK foreign ministry spokesman said that Japan’s rocket test last week was “a bid to incite military confrontation.” In a statement issued late on September 11, the spokesman added, “This serious development compels the DPRK to reconsider its moratorium on the satellite launch.” A DPRK official was quoted by the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) as saying, “The DPRK’s missile program is of a peaceful nature but it will deal a merciless blow to those who dare infringe upon its dignity and sovereignty.”
2. Return of Land from US Military Bases
The Korea Herald (“NEGOTIATIONS UNDER WAY FOR RETURN OF MORE U.S. BASES IN S. KOREA,” 09/12/01) reported that Representative Jang Sung-min of the ruling Millennium Democratic Party (MDP) said Tuesday that the ROK and US militaries are negotiating a handover of more US military bases and training facilities in 10 cities. Jang stated, “The Defense Ministry has demanded the return of more land in addition to the some 40 million pyong (132 million square meters) which U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) has offered to return to the Seoul government.” The facilities being discussed include Camp Kim in Seoul, Camp Haileah in Pusan, Camp Market in Incheon, Camp Walker in Taegu, Camp Page in Chuncheon and Camp Jackson in Euijeongbu. The other areas under consideration for additional return or relocation are unused plots of land near Camp Humphrey in Pyeongtaek and land near U.S. air force bases in Kunsan and Osan, as well as the H-220 heliport in Dongducheon, Kyonggi Province. Jang stated, “I know that the U.S. military is positively considering our proposal, but the problem is with the local governments concerned, whose view differs from that of the United States on relocation matters.” [Ed. Note: This article was included in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for September 12.]
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
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
Gee Gee Wong: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States
Timothy L. Savage: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States
Kim Hee-sun: khs688@hotmail.com
Seoul, Republic of Korea
Hibiki Yamaguchi: hibikiy@dh.mbn.or.jp
Tokyo, Japan
Rumiko Seya: rumiko-seya@geocities.co.jp
Tokyo, Japan
Hiroya Takagi: hiroya_takagi@hotmail.com
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