평화/화해

NAPSNet Daily Report - Feb 28

작성자
기사연
작성일
2000-03-03 23:59
조회
1847
NORTHEAST ASIA PEACE AND SECURITY NETWORK DAILY REPORT
For Monday, February 28, 2000, from Berkeley, California, USA

The Daily Report is distributed by e-mail to network members.
A hypertext (world wide web) version of the most recent
Daily Report may be found at:
http://www.nautilus.org/napsnet/dr/index.html

Please visit these other Nautilus information services:
The South Asian Nuclear Dialogue (SAND):
http://www.nautilus.org/sand/index.html
The Nuclear Policy Project (NPP):
http://www.nautilus.org/nukepolicy/index.html

The NAPSNet Week in Review is available online at:
http://www.nautilus.org/napsnet/index.html

This week on the Nautilus homepage:
* East Timor Crisis Shows Shortcomings of Regional Security Arrangements,
Nautilus Article Says
* Megan Keever Joins Staff

http://www.nautilus.org

In today's Report:
I. United States
1. DPRK High-Level Visit to US
2. DPRK Missile Tests
3. ROK-DPRK Fishing Accord
4. US-PRC Military Talks
5. US Response to PRC White Paper
6. PRC View of US Intervention in Taiwan
7. Military Balance in Taiwan Straits
8. PRC Military Alert
9. PRC White Paper on Taiwan
10. Taiwan Election
11. US Missile Defense
II. Republic of Korea
1. DPRK-US Relations
2. US-ROK Policy Consultations
3. DPRK-Italy Relations
4. DPRK-UK Relations
5. DPRK-ROK Fishing Agreement

I. United States

1. DPRK High-Level Visit to US

Agence France Presse ("HIGH-LEVEL NORTH KOREAN VISIT TO US TO BE DELAYED:
SEOUL," Seoul, 2/28/00) reported that a top ROK government official said
Monday that the first scheduled visit by a high-ranking DPRK official to
the US will likely be delayed. The anonymous official said, "it's
unlikely the visit will go ahead in March given the delays in preparatory
talks, maybe it will now happen in April." The official said that the
DPRK has so far failed to respond to the invitation by US special envoy
to the Korean peace talks Charles Kartman to meet DPRK Vice Foreign
Minister Kim Gye-gwan in New York to discuss details on the planned
visit.

2. DPRK Missile Tests

Agence France Presse ("NORTH KOREA THREATENS TO RESUME MISSILE TESTS,"
Seoul, 2/28/00) reported that the DPRK's Korean Central News Agency
(KCNA) on Monday renewed its threat that the DPRK will resume its
suspended long-range missile tests to counter US development of missile
defense systems. KCNA said, "the US moves to establish the 'missile
defense' system compel the DPRK to reconsider the moratorium on missile
testfires. Its military experts stubbornly insist on this. The US
attitude only hardens the DPRK's will to develop, test and deploy
missiles." KCNA said that the DPRK needed to cope with "the missile
threat" from the US. KCNA had said last week that "it is an inviolable
right pertaining to the DPRK's sovereignty for it to have a corresponding
option against the US which is blatantly challenging it under the pretext
of 'threat from it.' An option does not reside with the US only."

3. ROK-DPRK Fishing Accord

Agence France Presse ("SOUTH-NORTH KOREAN FISHERMEN'S ACCORD IN TROUBLED
WATERS," Seoul, 2/28/00) reported that a landmark fisheries accord
between ROK and DPRK fishermen signed in Beijing on February 26 which
would allow ROK vessels to fish in waters off the DPRK's east coast for
the first time in 50 years starting next month, ran into a problem on
Monday. Kim Yun-ho, an official at the ROK ministry of maritime affairs,
said, "the (ROK) fisheries negotiators were not permitted to do (this
agreement)." Kim said the ROK ministry of maritime affairs had yet to
approve the "unauthorized" pact, adding that the practical aspects and
ramifications of the agreement had not been explored. Kim said, "the
review on the technical feasibility of the South and the North Korean
fisheries cooperation project is possible only after analyzing the
agreement." Kim also said that the ROK ministries of maritime affairs,
unification and defense would discuss the issue soon. The ROK
unification ministry refrained from taking a clear stance on the pact,
saying, "no final decision has been made yet as we have not received any
formal request for approval from the negotiators." Under the accord, the
DPRK would open a rich fishing ground 300 kilometers (188 miles) off its
eastern port of Wonsan and profits from fishing operations in the area
would be shared equally with between DPRK and ROK fishermen. Park Dae-
won of the Korean Movement Federation for Fisheries Associations, said,
"over the next five years, the North will be given 50 percent of the
profits from South Korean vessels fishing there." However, the maritime
ministry admitted that there was a feasibility "problem" in fishing in
areas off the DPRK coast.

4. US-PRC Military Talks

The Associated Press ("U.S. PACIFIC COMMANDER EXPRESSES CONCERN OVER
THREATS TO TAIWAN," Beijing, 2/28/00) reported that Admiral Dennis Blair,
the commander of US forces in the Pacific, met senior Chinese military
leaders Monday for a five-day visit. The official PRC Xinhua News Agency
said that Blair and Lieutenant General Xiong Guangkai, a deputy chief of
the general staff of the People's Liberation Army, "had a wide exchange
of views on international and regional security." Xinhua said that Blair
also met Shi Yunsheng, commander in chief of the PRC naval forces. An
anonymous US official said that the PRC appeared keen to reopen military
ties with the US. The official said, "it was a chance for everyone to
get to know each other. The atmosphere was very cordial. I think the
Chinese want to succeed in re-establishing a military-to-military
relationship." The official said that Taiwan was discussed along other
Asian security concerns and "the U.S. expressed its concern about the
white paper." Blair is due to hold more talks in the PRC on February 29,
and then to head to the eastern city of Nanjing.

5. US Response to PRC White Paper

The New York Times (Jane Perlez, "WARNING BY CHINA TO TAIWAN POSES
CHALLENGE TO US," Washington, 2/27/00, P.1) reported that US
Congressional and administration officials said that the PRC's shift to a
more aggressive stance on Taiwan took the Clinton administration by
surprise. Administration officials said that PRC officials gave them no
hint of the shift during US Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott's
delegation to Beijing on February 17 and 18. The PRC's release of the
white paper has bolstered support in the US Senate for legislation on
arms sales to Taiwan and threatens to unravel the administration's effort
in help the PRC join the World Trade Organization. A senior US Defense
Department official said on February 26 that the PRC statement was
"unfortunate and very, very unhelpful," particularly from the "point of
view of arms sales" to Taiwan. Another administration official said that
there is now "incalculable pressure to sell more [and] do more," for
Taiwan. Officials said that the way the policy shift was announced by
the PRC was taken as a slap against the administration. A US Defense
Department official said that the administration had to consider two
factors when deciding what to sell Taiwan: the "objective" conditions
called for under the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 and the "broader,
overall" context of the state of relations among and within the PRC,
Taiwan and the US. [Ed. note: This article was included in the US
Department of Defense's Early Bird news service for February 28, 2000.]

6. PRC View of US Intervention in Taiwan

Agence France Presse ("CHINA WARNS US AGAINST ANY MILITARY ATTACK OVER
TAIWAN," Beijing, 2/28/00) reported that the PRC army newspaper, People's
Liberation Army (PLA) Daily, warned the US on Monday that it would pay a
high price for any military intervention over Taiwan and that the PRC had
the weapons to launch a long-range counter-attack. Professor Zhu
Chenghu, deputy director of the army university's institute of strategic
studies, said in the PLA Daily that the US should steer clear of the
conflict over Taiwan. Zhu said, "if they get involved, the American
policy makers will have to consider the great pressure they will shoulder
and the high costs they will pay. China is not Iraq, nor Yugoslavia ...
she is a country with certain strategic attack capabilities and far
distance attacking capabilities. So it would not be wise to fight
against a country like China." Zhu also warned that US intervention over
Taiwan would "seriously damage its economic interests. And if the United
States got involved in the conflict, the war could not be ended according
to the timetable set by the US. US security interests in East Asia will
be seriously damaged, and American forces may be forced to withdraw, like
they did from Vietnam."

7. Military Balance in Taiwan Straits

The International Herald Tribune (Thomas Crampton, "HIGH-TECH CHINA
UPSETS POWER BALANCE," Taipei, 2/26-27/00, P.1) reported that military
analysts said that high-tech weaponry is rapidly shifting the balance of
power between Taiwan and the PRC and is forcing a re-evaluation of
strategies. Andrew Yang, secretary-general of the Chinese Council of
Advanced Policy Studies, a private think tank based in Taipei, said,
"missiles have brought the biggest fundamental change to the cross-strait
military situation. Beijing studied very closely the use of 'smart'
weapons during the Gulf War." Cheung Tai-ming, a senior director at
Kroll Associates Limited, a risk analysis company based in Hong Kong,
said that PRC analysis of the Gulf War inspired a new strategy for
military planners that focused on employing high technology to fight
small-scale, geographically confined conflicts with limited political and
military objectives. Many military analysts now predict that an invasion
of Taiwan would start with a preemptive missile strike followed by an
airborne landing, in a central part of the island, of rapid-reaction
troops armed with state-of-the art weapons. After disabling major
airfields, PRC troops ferried in by aircraft could help secure a harbor
and open the way for rapid delivery of logistical support by sea.
Photographs of a mock beach invasion by PRC armed forces late last year
revealed new equipment made in the PRC, including small hovercraft for
high-speed delivery of up to 25 soldiers and large helicopters capable of
carrying 36 soldiers. Despite the new missiles and technology, most
analysts believe that the PRC's limited logistical ability will make it
impossible for its army to mount a successful invasion of Taiwan for at
least the next five years. Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the
Brookings Institution in Washington, said, "the missiles don't make
Taiwan easier to conquer. But they do make it easier for China to punish
and intimidate." O'Hanlon and other analysts said that short of an
invasion, new technologies can be used for intimidation in many forms,
including missile tests to disrupt commercial shipping, aggressive
computer hacking, and destruction of communications equipment. Yang and
other analysts said that Taiwan's current military configuration would
have trouble confronting the newly high-tech PRC Army. Tactics on the
Taiwan side have been changing, with the size of the military cut by 10
percent from the current 400,000 in the next five years and a new
concentration on developing ways to disrupt invading forces'
communications. [Ed. note: This article was included in the US
Department of Defense's Early Bird news service for February 28, 2000.]

8. PRC Military Alert

Agence France Presse ("CHINA ORDERS MILITARY ALERT AHEAD OF TAIWAN
ELECTIONS," Hong Kong, 2/28/00) reported that a PRC daily, The Sun,
citing unnamed "insiders" in Beijing who said that PRC President Jiang
Zemin signed decrees ordering the military regions of Nanjing, Jinan,
Beijing and other units, including the East China Fleet, to go on alert
from February 23. The report said the orders follow Jiang's visit to
various military sites in Anhui, Zhejiang, Jiangxi and Guangdong
provinces that began on February 17. The paper said Jiang told the
forces to be prepared mentally, economically and militarily in the war
against Taiwan's moves toward independence even though "we want peace,
and not war, but we are not afraid of war."

9. PRC White Paper on Taiwan

Agence France Presse ("BEIJING TIMED NEW THREAT AHEAD OF TAIWAN
PRESIDENTIAL POLLS," Taipei, 2/28/00) reported that Zhang Mingqing, the
information bureau director of the PRC's Taiwan Affairs Office, told the
United Daily News on February 27 that the PRC's White Paper on Taiwan was
a clear signal aimed at safeguarding its official "one China policy."
The United Daily said, "Zhang did not deny the move was an attempt to
influence the elections." Zhang said, "[The PRC] did try to avoid
expressing any comment towards the Taiwan elections," but felt it had to
publish the White Paper before the polls "in order to display its
determination against Taiwan independence." Zhang warned, "cross-strait
links might be influenced" if a candidate calling for independence was
elected to the presidency, but he declined to specify what actions the
PRC might take.

The New York Times published an analytical article by Erik Eckholm
("CHINA'S OWN WITCH HUNT," Beijing, 2/27/00) which said that that the
PRC's White Paper was intended to influence Taiwan's March 18
presidential elections and that despite its belligerence, the report
contained generous terms for talks between the PRC and Taiwan. Steven M.
Goldstein, a political scientist at Smith College, said, "there is a
growing sense of urgency in Beijing that Taiwan independence will not be
the result of a dramatic declaration, but of a gradual drift towards that
goal as the island plays for time. Thus, in a collective leadership it
has become imperative not only not to be the leader who lost Taiwan, but
not to be the leader who allows this slow drift to continue." Eckholm
said he did not know if the PRC leaders are willing to risk a war, but
"they certainly don't want to be forced into a conflict that could
destroy all they have built on the mainland." The article noted that
that neither PRC President Jiang Zimen nor the white paper set an actual
deadline and "the day that China feels compelled to box itself in with a
concrete deadline may be the day for really serious worry." It added,
"the new report does not even mention Taiwan's elections or the
prospective new presidents. Rather, it demonizes the outgoing Lee [Teng-
hui]. By presenting him as the chief culprit, the Chinese are making
room for a fresh start -- but also putting the would-be successors on
notice that they would repeat Lee's performance at Taiwan's peril."
Eckholm predicted, "any negotiations will be plagued by agonizing
wordplay and status issues, but Taiwan needs to find creative ways to
keep the Chinese talking, it seems clear from last week's report. So long
as they are talking, they will not be shooting." [Ed. note: This opinion
article was included in the US Department of Defense's Early Bird news
service for February 28, 2000.]

10. Taiwan Election

Agence France Presse ("TAIWANESE VOTERS URGED TO BACK BEST NEGOTIATOR ON
CROSS-STRAIT TIES," Taipei, 2/28/00) reported that Chen Li-an, a former
defense minister who ran against incumbent President Lee Teng-hui in
1996, urged voters on Monday to choose a leader capable of securing
peaceful cross-straits ties with the PRC. Chen said, "dialogue with
Communist China is inevitable given the heightened tensions following the
release of the White Paper last week. We should do careful thinking and
elect a person who can bring us peace and stability and ensure our
interest in future talks with Beijing with sufficient support from a
political party." Social psychology professor Huang Kuang-kuo of
National Taiwan University agreed with Chen, saying, "although the
general public also are concerned about various domestic issues, seeking
peaceful ties with Beijing indeed should be the priority wish as our
lives and property are at immediate stake."

11. US Missile Defense

The Washington Post ("TOP ADMIRAL DIFFERS ON MISSILE-SHIELD PLANS,"
Washington, 2/28/00) reported that in a confidential memo to US Defense
Secretary William S. Cohen, Admiral Jay Johnson challenged the US Defense
Department plans to rely solely on land-based interceptors to shield the
US against a missile attack. Johnson argued that ship-launched
interceptors would make the proposed antimissile system more effective.
The appeal marked the first time a Navy leader formally pushed for a role
in missile defense.

II. Republic of Korea

1. DPRK-US Relations

The Korea Herald (Kim Ji-ho, "UNIFICATION MINISTER PREDICTS U.S., N.K.
SETTING UP LIAISON OFFICES THIS YEAR," Seoul, 02/28/00) and The Korea
Times ("NK, US LIKELY TO OPEN LIAISON OFFICES THIS YEAR: MIN. PARK,"
Seoul, 02/27/00) reported that ROK Unification Minister Park Jae-kyu said
on February 27 that the US and the DPRK may be able to open liaison
offices in each other's capitals this year. Park said there is also a
chance that the DPRK and Japan will advance their relationship enough to
exchange representative offices. Park noted that these improvements in
the relationship between the DPRK and the ROK's two major allies are
expected to positively influence the inter-Korean relationship. Park
also expressed his optimism on the resumption of inter-Korean
governmental talks, which have been suspended since last July, and about
chances for a summit between top leaders of the two Koreas.

2. US-ROK Policy Consultations

The Korea Times (Son Key-young, "US TO OFFER ABOUT 500,000 TONS OF GRAIN
TO NK THIS YEAR," Seoul, 02/27/00) reported that ROK officials said on
February 26 that the US will likely offer 500,000-600,000 tons of grain
to the DPRK this year via international bodies. The ROK and the US held
two-way strategy talks in Hawaii to discuss this and other issues with
the aim of attracting the DPRK to the negotiating table. An anonymous
official said, "with bilateral dialogue underway, the United States is
unlikely to downgrade the level of assistance to North Korea. Therefore,
the size of this year's aid would reach that of last year." Another
official said that the two countries exchanged views on how to phase out
US economic embargoes against the DPRK, but added that it is not
desirable to reveal joint ROK-US strategies prior to the forthcoming
talks with the DPRK. Even though the DPRK has strongly called for the
lifting of sanctions imposed under terrorism-related US laws, ROK
officials believe it is unlikely that the US would drop the DPRK from a
list of countries sponsoring terrorism, to be announced in April.

3. DPRK-Italy Relations

The Korea Herald ("ITALY'S PRO-P'YANG PARLIAMENTARY DELEGATION TO VISIT
N. KOREA," Seoul, 02/27/00) reported that an Italian parliamentary
delegation will visit the DPRK for five-days from February 28 to March 3.
The National Intelligence Service (NIS) announced on its website on
February 27 that the friendly visit is the first of its kinds since the
two countries established diplomatic ties on January 4. The NIS,
however, failed to say anything about the composition of the delegation
or give background on the visit to the DPRK.

4. DPRK-UK Relations

The Korea Herald ("LONDON TO SEND WORKING-LEVEL MISSION TO PYONGYANG IN
APRIL," Seoul, 02/27/00) reported that an ROK diplomatic source said that
the British government will send a working-level mission of four to five
foreign service officials to the DPRK in April to seek improved relations
between the two countries. The official said that Britain has decided to
dispatch its first mission to the DPRK in three years, and the two
governments are discussing details of the mission's itinerary. In the
DPRK, the British officials will meet with Kim Chun-guk, chief of the
Foreign Ministry's European Affairs Department, and other government
officials to discuss strengthening the DPRK's representative office at
the International Maritime Organization in London, an invitation to the
DPRK to subscribe to the international nuclear non-proliferation regime,
and Britain's provision of humanitarian aid. They will also discuss
sending two British English instructors to the DPRK within the year in a
bid to further improve relations between the two countries.

5. DPRK-ROK Fishing Agreement

Chosun Ilbo (Jee Hae-bom, "NK SIGNS FISHING AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH KOREAN
GROUP," Seoul, 02/27/00) reported that representatives of the Whole
Nation's Fishermen's Federation (WNFF) of the ROK met with DPRK officials
from the National Economic Cooperation Association (NECA) and announced a
fisheries agreement on February 27. According to the agreement, the DPRK
will provide fishing grounds off Wonsan, and ROK fishermen using it will
pay the DPRK 50 percent of net profits after deducting operating costs.
The area under consideration is inside the DPRK's economic exclusion zone
(EEZ) and will be for a five-year renewable period. It is unclear,
however, whether the agreement will be endorsed by the ROK government,
because the government did not sanction the visit and the agreement
stipulates payment in US dollars. An official said that the
administration would study the agreement. Kim Dae-kwon of the WNFF said
that he hoped to start fishing in March after consultation with the
government and that he represented 40 percent of ROK fishermen. NECA's
Hoh Hyok-pil said that the agreement was made as Kim Jong-il accepted
requests from ROK fishermen who lost their jobs due to the ROK-Japan
fisheries agreement.

-----------
The NAPSNet Daily Report aims to serve as a forum for dialogue
and exchange among peace and security specialists.
We invite you to reply to today's report, and we welcome
commentary or papers for distribution to the network.
Send news items, discussion contributions, or other comments to:
napsnet@nautilus.org

NOTE: The Nautilus Institute has recently upgraded its web site.
The following are the new links to continuing NAPSNet resources.

To unsubscribe from the Daily Report, please send a message to the list
manager at napsnet_mgr@nautilus.org with no subject and the command in
the body: leave napsnetlist

To join the network and receive the Daily Report by email, visit:
http://www.nautilus.org/kiosk/signup.html
A text version of the most recent Daily Report may be obtained
by sending an email message in any form to: daily@nautilus.org
Other recent hypertext-version Daily Reports may be found at:
http://www.nautilus.org/napsnet/dr/calendar.html
Text versions of all previous Daily Reports may be accessed
(using either web browsers or ftp software) at:
ftp://ftp.nautilus.org/napsnet/daily_reports
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 NAPSNet resources list:
http://www.nautilus.org/napsnet/kiosk/weblinks.html
Conventions for readers and a list of acronyms and
abbreviations are available to all recipients upon request.

Produced by the Nautilus Institute in partnership with:

The International Policy Studies Institute
Seoul, Republic of Korea
http://www.IPSI.org/

The Center for Global Communications, Tokyo Japan
http://aska.glocom.ac.jp/default.html

Center for American Studies
Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China
http://www.fudan.edu.cn/English/nsindex.html

Asia Institute
Monash University, Clayton, Australia
http://www.arts.monash.edu.au/mai/

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: dlshen@fudan.ac.cn
Shanghai, People's Republic of China

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

Leanne Paton: anjlcake@webtime.com.au
Clayton, Australia