CONTENTS
1. Inter-Korean Talks Fail
2. US and Russia Reduces Nuclear Weapons
3. Japanese Contribution to War on Terror
II. Republic of Korea 1. Inter-Korean Talks
2. Trans-Korean Railway Talks
3. DPRK-PRC Relations
III. Japan 1. Japanese Logistical Support for US
2. Opinion on Japanese Support for US
3. Revision of Peacekeeping Operations Law
4. Japan-EU Treaty on Nuclear Energy
IV. Russian Federation 1. RF-DPRK Municipal-Level Relations
2. RF Media on DPRK
I. United States
1. Inter-Korean Talks
The Associated Press (Paul Shin, “KOREAS FAIL TO RENEW RECONCILIATION,” Seoul, 11/14/01) and Reuters (Paul Eckert, “KOREAN TALKS BREAK UP AS AGREEMENT UNRAVELS,” Seoul, 11/14/01) reported that inter-Korean talks aimed at reviving reconciliation broke off without a deal on Wednesday. An unnamed ROK official said that both sides initially agreed on the reunion of separated families, but discussions were scuttled over economic matters and the DPRK’s anger over ROK participation in the US-led anti-terror campaign. In a statement carried by its state-run radio, the DPRK blamed the ROK’s “stubborn and unreasonable attitude” and accused the ROK of seeking confrontation with it in alliance with foreign forces. The DPRK also criticized the ROK for allowing the US to beef up US Air Force facilities in the country as a backup measure to the bombing in Afghanistan. Unification Minister Hong Soon-young said that he explained that the precautions had nothing to do with DPRK, but could not convince his DPRK counterpart, Kim Ryong Song. Hong said the two sides differ so widely that it could be a long time before they resume dialogue.
2. US and Russia Nuclear Reduction
The New York Times (David E. Sanger, “BUSH AND PUTIN AGREE TO REDUCE STOCKPILE OF NUCLEAR WARHEADS,” Washington, 11/14/01) reported that US President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir V. Putin pledged on November 13 to cut their nuclear stockpiles by roughly two-thirds over the next decade, leaving each side with fewer than 2,200 warheads. However, the two countries still seemed far apart on missile defense. Bush told Putin that the US would unilaterally reduce its nuclear arsenal to 1,700 to 2,200 warheads. In response, Putin said, “Russia declares and reiterates its readiness to make considerable reductions in strategic arms. We propose a radical program of further reductions of strategic offensive arms by at least three times, to a minimal level necessary for maintaining strategic balance in the world. We no longer have to intimidate each other to reach agreements.” Putin also insisted on written agreements. But US Secretary of State Colin L. Powell acknowledged that the talks on amending the ABM Treaty would take longer than he hoped, and perhaps had hit serious obstacles. Putin suggested that the joint consultation and action of the last two months was a model for a new military relationship, not only with the US but also with NATO. Bush agreed that “NATO members and Russia are increasingly allied against terrorism, regional instability and other threats of our age, and NATO must reflect this alliance.” But neither leader publicly mentioned the possibility of eventual Russian membership in NATO. [Ed. note: This article appeared in the US Department of Defense’s Early Bird news service for November 14, 2001.]
3. Japanese War Contribution
Reuters (Kazunori Takada, “JAPAN READIES PAKISTAN AID, U.S. SUPPORT PLAN,” Tokyo, 11/14/01) and Associated Press (“JAPANESE, U.S. OFFICIALS TO REVIEW PLAN FOR JAPAN’S MILITARY CONTRIBUTION TO WAR ON TERROR,” Tokyo, 11/14/01) reported that Japanese and US defense officials were slated to meet Wednesday in Tokyo to review plans for Japan’s military commitment to the war against terrorism. Japan’s cabinet is expected to approve on November 16 a plan mapping out the military’s non-combat support, the first overseas deployment of Japan’s forces in a war situation since World War II. Japanese newspaper The Yomiuri reported that the SDF fleet may also include the Aegis destroyer. Exactly what role Japan is to play is uncertain, as an unnamed foreign analyst expressed, “It [the legislation] is a great step for Japan and done very quickly…but it is now looking a little bit behind the game.” The Kyodo news agency said that Japan could announce, as early as November 16, a decision to give US$300 million to Pakistan over the next two years to ease the burden of incoming refugees.
II. Republic of Korea
1. Inter-Korean Talks
Joongang Ilbo (“MT. KUMGANG TALKS END WITHOUT AGREEMENT, 11/14/01) reported that the Sixth ROK-DPRK Ministerial Level Talks ended Wednesday in an unprecedented failure of agreement and joint press statement. An unnamed ROK official at the meeting said that the main obstacle for the failure was over the location of the second round of cross border economic meetings. The ROK demanded that Seoul be the venue for the talks while the DPRK, still citing security reasons insisted that Mount Kumgang serve as the location. Earlier, both sides had agreed that family reunions would be held in two parts on December 10 at the Mount Kumgang resort, but now this is not likely to happen.
2. Trans-Korean Railway Talks
Joongang Ilbo (“TWO KOREAS AND RUSSIA TO DISCUSS SINGLE-TRACK RAILWAY,” Seoul, 11/14/01) reported that Voice of Russia said on November 13 that the ROK, the DPRK, and Russia are to hold trilateral meetings regarding the linking of the Trans -Korean Railway with the Trans-Siberian Railway.
3. DPRK-PRC Relations
Joongang Ilbo (“CHINESE DEFENSE MINISTER UNDERLINES STRONG TIES WITH N.K.,” Seoul, 11/14/01) reported that PRC Minister of Defense Chi Haotian said Tuesday that friendly relations between the PRC and the DPRK will never cease regardless of what lies ahead. Quoted by the state-run Pyongyang Radio, Chi said in his meeting with a DPRK army delegation headed by lieutenant general Kim Son-un on November 11, “Just like back in the 50s when our two armies managed to drive away American forces, we should continue to solidify our cooperative ties under the direction of Chinese President Jiang Zemin and North Korean Chairman Kim Jong- il.” He also went on to stress that such ties not only matches with the interest of the two nations, but were also beneficial to establishing peace and stability around the Asia region.
III. Japan
1. Japanese Logistical Support
The Asahi Shimbun (“INTEL NOT FORMALLY PART OF SDF TRIP,” Tokyo, 11/14/01) reported that Japanese government officials said Tuesday that intelligence gathering may not be a formal part of the mission of the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Forces warships during their dispatch to the Indian Ocean as a working member of the US-led alliance against terrorism. Information collection was originally considered one of three pillars of Japanese support for US, along with provision and transport of fuel and supplies. However, without Diet imprimatur, the government is finding that including intelligence activities in the basic SDF deployment plan is a tough sell.
The Japan Times (“SDF DOCTORS MAY BE SENT TO PAKISTAN,” Tokyo, 11/14/01) reported that director-general of Japanese Defense Agency Gen Nakatani said Tuesday that Japan may dispatch SDF doctors to aid Afghan refugees in Pakistan. A decision is expected based on a report on the local situation compiled by a government investigation team, which is scheduled to return from the country Wednesday. Japan has been mulling the dispatch of the medical team to major medical institutions in northern Pakistan as part of Japan’s cooperation with the US-led war on terrorism.
2. Opinion on Japanese Support for US
The Asahi Shimbun (“NO LONGER SAFE UNDER U.S. NUCLEAR UMBRELLA,” Tokyo, 11/14/01) held an interview with Democratic Party of Japan leader Yukio Hatoyama. In the context of September 11th, Hatoyama said, “In Japan, we used to believe we were safe so long as we depended on America and stayed under the American nuclear umbrella. But our faith crumbled overnight.” Speaking of the new anti-terrorism law, he said, “This law is going in the wrong direction. It does not help resolve what really needs to be resolved. My impression is that it was written with thoughts like, ‘Our ally (America) has been attacked. We can’t just look the other way, can we? So how far should we help?’ I believe this was something like a knee-jerk reaction to the ‘trauma’ Japan suffered during the Persian Gulf War for not contributing enough to the Allied war effort. In any case, I definitely do not believe armed action can eliminate terrorism. On the contrary, the use of arms will only inflame the terrorists and put the world in greater jeopardy.” However, Hatoyama added, “To be truthful, opinions were split within our party on how to counter terrorism. While some members insisted on pacifism, others argued whether we could be morally justified to refuse to provide any military support. My stand was that we had to contribute to the global community by supporting the US in ways that would not require Japan to use force and violate Constitution. One possibility was for the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to aid the US military by transporting fuel and food to Diego Garcia. But I ruled out the deployment of SDF troops in Pakistan because not only would they be sitting ducks for the terrorists, their presence would do more harm that good to Afghan refugees. Therefore, I said ‘no’ to any SDF activity on land. To prevent any misunderstandings, I had to insist on Diet approval prior to deployment.”
3. Peacekeeping Operations Law
The Japan Times (“RULING BLOC SET TO BOOST SDF PROTECTION POWERS,” Tokyo, 11/13/01) reported that the three Japanese ruling parties agreed on November 12 to revise the 1992 Peacekeeping Operations Law during the current Diet session to enable the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) to use weapons to protect foreign troops during operations. In addition to protecting refugees and wounded soldiers as stipulated in the anti-terrorism law, the proposed legislation would also include foreign peacekeepers and international organization staff members working nearby. SDF personnel would also be allowed to use force to protect weapons and ammunition stockpiles. Asked why they needed to make a hasty revision, Secretary General of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) Taku Yamazaki said that the UN may ask Japan to remove mines in the course of Afghanistan’s reconstruction because of its high expertise. He also said that the SDF would be able to use weapons to protect VIPs, since they will be considered among “those under the care” of its troops. The ruling parties also agreed to lift a self-imposed freeze on the SDF’s participation in core UN peacekeeping missions, such as monitoring disarmament and collecting abandoned weapons. Revisions of other conditions, such as gaining approval from the government involved and seeking cease-fire between warring sides, was postponed until the next Diet session.
4. Japan-EU Treaty on Nuclear Energy
The Japan Times (Masaki Hisane, “JAPAN, EU IN SYNC ON NUCLEAR ENERGY, Tokyo, 11/14/01) reported that after years of tough negotiations, Japan and the 15-nation European Union (EU) have reached a basic agreement on a landmark treaty aimed at promoting bilateral cooperation in using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and banning the conversion of fissionable materials for military use or the transferring of such materials to third-party countries. Japanese government sources said Tuesday that the basic agreement would be reaffirmed and welcomed at a regular meeting of top Japanese and EU leaders planned for mid-December in Brussels. However, it was not immediately known if and how the treaty might affect two exiting treaties Japan has separately signed with Britain and France.
IV. Russian Federation
1. RF-DPRK Municipal-Level Relations
Moskovskaya Pravda (“EXPERIENCE EXCHANGE”, Moscow, 10/11/01) reported that a DPRK delegation of specialists in the field of municipal services and urban construction visited Moscow. It was led by DPRK Deputy Minister for Control over State Construction Kim Chor-jae. The purpose was to study the experiences of the RF capital city in those spheres. Kim said, “We want to make a contribution to the strengthening of relations between DPRK and Russia in development of Moscow agreements between the leaders of our states Kim Jong-il and Vladimir Putin.” During the meeting with First Deputy Mayor in the Moscow Government, Head of Moscow Building Sector V. Resin, an exchange of opinions took place about a possible cooperation between the DPRK and Russia in the construction sector.
2. RF Media on DPRK
Zavtra (Aleksandr Brezhnev, “KOREA THE RED. A CITY OF YOUTH”, Pyongyang, November 2001, #46) published a one-page article “about the life and the people of Pyongyang”. The article contained much information about DPRK geographic and demographic situation, general Korean traditions of culture, literacy and cuisine, black and gray color semi-military dress preferences in DPRK, although “each Korean woman has got a bright national dress kept at home to wear on holidays.” The article said Mercedes, Toyota, Nissan, Jeep and Opel cars predominate in Pyongyang streets, while Soviet-made Volga and Zhiguli cars are few. The author himself was driven around the city in “a red-brown Mercedes car.” Much was said about the Korean War, and “generally speaking the war against America is not over”, as ” USA does not let Korea to unite.” The functionaries of Korea’s Working Party “are drastically different” from the functionaries of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union of the era of decay”. As for the army, “the DPRK society is rather militarized”, with the military managing the whole construction sites and industries.” As for DPRK people’s attitude toward visiting foreigners, the article said “the best attitude is toward the Chinese and the Russians.” However, due to RF unilateral decrease of relations, “Russians have become an exotic thing here, while the Chinese influence is obviously on the rise… The Europeans are coming to take the place of Russia.”
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
Brandon Yu: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States
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
Yunxia Cao: yunxiac@yahoo.com
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