27 July 2006

Armistice Anniversary


July 27 is the 53rd anniversary of the signing of the Armistice Agreement, and who knows, maybe the U.S. and North Korea will meet on the sidelines of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in Malaysia and actually talk... or not. Whether they do or not, a few things to look at in the meantime follow:

Text of the Armistice Agreement
A map of the Armistice Line
Resources on the Korean War


25 July 2006

"Gum Disease" in the DPRK-PRC?

Relations between China and North Korea have been labled "as close as lips and teeth." But international media is painting a different picture. North Korea humiliated China by launching its missiles despite China's calls to refrain. Beijing agreed to a UNSC resolution to prevent North Korea from testing a nuclear device. Pyongyang and Beijing were engaged in a war of words over rail service before the missile test July 5.

I usually see such reports as attempts to portray North Korea without any allies (this perception serves Tokyo and Washington, but also at times Beijing and Pyongyang).

The latest article by Kim Myong Chol, North Korea's "unofficial spokesman," posted over at the Asia Times (The case for Pyongyang's missile tests), fits the pattern and tone of most of his writings. There is, however, something interesting in the subtext of China-North Korean troubles. Whether this reflects the thinking of the North Korean regime, Kim’s personal views, or is just me reading way too much into the article is still up for debate.

In looking at the article, the overall message is one of North Korea continuing its tried-and-true game of trying to threaten the United States into signing a peace accord, making all other options seem too painful and troubling. This is the repeated subtext of Kim MC's writings, and seems to accurately reflect Pyongyang’s negotiating style, albeit with a few expected flourishes, like warning of North Korean missiles targeting New York City or claiming North Korea can have the third largest nuclear force in the world.

It is this latter point, actually, that crosses over into what I see are the more interesting and less obvious aspects of Kim's report. Three phrases stood out quite sharply when I read Kim’s article.

"...there is no big-power ally to turn to for help in defending the sovereignty and security of North Korea..."

"Kim Jong Il, his associates and people are all proud descendents of a nation that routed the forces of Sui and Tang Dynasty China"

North Korea "will emerge as the third-most-powerful nuclear-weapon state... ahead of China"


All three of these seem to paint a picture of North Korean frustration if not anger with China. Now, I normally downplay the repeated media reports of a major rift between China and North Korea, and have said that China may have been benifited from the North Korean missile launch, rather than shocked (after all, China once again has the world turning to Beijing for a solution, and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has even said Beijing is showing signs of being a "responsible stakeholder" through its diplomatic actions with Pyongyang).

But Kim Myong Chol offers some credence to the reported decay between Northeast Asia’s "lips and teeth."

Saying there is no big power to turn to suggests North Korea no longer sees China as a reliable backer. Economic and security ties remain, but Pyongyang cannot fully rely on China to keep North Korea's interests first and foremost. This is, of course, not new, and the old "lips and teeth" metaphor had a less-than-friendly second line, "when he lips are gone the teeth get cold." In other words, Chinese support for North Korea in 1950-53 and beyond was more about Chinese self-interest than neighborly support.

The second phrase - that of defeating the Sui and Tang - is even more startling. Why not mention defeating the Japanese, both during the Imjin War and during the guerilla campaigns during Japanese occupation? Are the North Koreans afraid to praise Yi Sun Shin because he is from the south? (Unlikely, given the really nice postage stamp of Yi the North has issued.) Certainly there is the innocuous explanation that Kim MC was just showing that North Korea has beaten "big powers" before, and this is a warning to the United States, but given the historical sensitivities in the region, there is no way China wouldn’t be perturbed at the references.

The final phrase seems even more provocative than the second one. North Korea will become the third largest nuclear power, ahead of China. This seems more of a threat to China than anything else - warning Beijing that North Korea can not only fend for itself, but has the fangs to counter any Chinese designs on North Korean territory or sovereignty. Now throw in Kim MC's references to Koguryo (China has the Koreas had a spat over the ancestry of the ancient Koguryo kingdom, and Beijing used the "discussion" to subtly hint that, should another war in Korea break out, Chinese troops would rush to the 38th parallel and set up a protectorate over North Korea, maintaining the buffer and simply welcoming Koguryo back into the Chinese fold).

Now, it may be that I am simply way over-analyzing this. It may reflect nothing more than Kim MC's creative writing. But it would seem to indicate trouble, at least rhetorically, between the two neighbors.

But as I write this, there is a troubling thought in the back of my mind. Maybe I just fell for the true intention of the article, maybe I have done exactly what was expected and so deeply read into each phrase that I am seeing and spreading the idea of a rift between Pyongyang and Beijing. Maybe this all just fits into the broader North Korean strategy. Certainly Pyongyang and Beijing have their differences, perhaps less visible than those between Seoul and its ally Washington, but unless North Korea is taking its threat campaign to China (which has a copy of the North Korean playbook and wouldn't be duped), this may well be part of the North's attempts to paint itself as extremely unpredictable and on the brink, and for Beijing, all that does is make China's good offices even more important to the United Sates, Japanese, South Koreans...

23 July 2006

North Korea Deja Vu: Dangerous, Unpredictable, Unstable and Starving

Having failed to gain political and security concessions from the United States with the 2003 nuclear crisis, North Korea has decided to dust off its playbook from 1997/1998.

2003 Crisis: A Script From a Different Day

The 2003 nuclear crisis was planned in 2000 and deployed in October 2002. It was designed to scare the US into signing security agreements with North Korea, and perhaps even open the Armistice talks again to pave the way for a formal peace accord. The North Koreans chose 2003 for several reasons, but one key symbolic aspect was the 50th anniversary of the 1953 armistice. In typical North Korean fashion, the plan was to warn of a series of escalating steps (restarting nuclear program, pulling out of NPT, etc) and then begin following through with these steps until the US was so afraid of the next step that it would negotiate down the "crisis."

North Korea made one major miscalculation, however. The plan was constructed in late 2000 and early 2001, but was not altered after the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington DC. When October 2002 rolled around, North Korea failed to recognize the change in U.S. strategic attitude. Washington would no longer tolerate such North Korean games, or potential threats, in a world where the mainland U.S. was suddenly exposed as being vulnerable. Perhaps Pyongyang figured that Washington was so pre-occupied with the "GWOT" (Global War On Terrorism) that it would be so concerned about a new North Korean front opening that Washington would capitulate to Pyongyang's demands.

If that was the case, Pyongyang really failed to understand the shift in U.S. strategic thinking at the time. In fact, there are some indications that, as Washington chose to ignore rather than engage North Korea, Pyongyang's overseas "advisors" at places like the CFKAP were chastised and cut out of the loop of strategic planning for a while. The main problem with North Korea's planning, as usual, was its rigidity. Pyongyang is meticulous at planning, but not very capable of rapid shifts when things don’t match the plan perfectly. North Korea is infamous for pre-planning the times to storm out of negotiating sessions, no matter the pace of said sessions. Creative thinking and freedom of action are relatively foreign concepts.

The 2003 model has failed to give North Korea its intended benefits. It has offered secondary gains – particularly in the ever-more-obvious rifts between Washington and Seoul. But the security guarantees never materialized, the peace accord was never signed, and North Korea remained isolated in a box shaped by the United States. Over the past several months, North Korea has finally reshaped its plans, and it is looking like those are much more akin to the 1997/1998 "crisis" plans that seemed to have worked so well for Pyongyang.

1997 Strategy: Shaping Impressions, Exploiting Fear

When North Korea hauled the Taepodong-2 out of storage, propped it up on the launch pad, and ignored pleas to refrain from a new long-range missile test, it became apparent that Pyongyang was shifting back to what it sees as a tried and true negotiating strategy. In the weeks following the launch, North Korean actions and the associated media coverage (particularly from Japan) have reinforced this idea.

The 1997/1998 crisis was a combination nuclear and missile crisis, coupled with concerns for the stability and sanity of the North Korean regime, all compounded by a massive humanitarian crisis. The basic premise of North Korean strategy was simple.

First, create a security crisis. The combination of a renewed nuclear crisis with a long-range missile crisis played on the fears of North Korea’s neighbors and the United States. That guaranteed attention. Attention was necessary to issue demands.

Second, encourage the sense of unpredictability. North Korea thrived on the image of unpredictability. The North did little to weaken South Korean intelligence propaganda portraying Kim Jong Il as a crazy drunk womanizer who fell off his horse and went wacky in the head. This let people underestimate North Korea, but also fear crazy actions. If Pyongyang was not seen as a rational player, then it was clearly playing by a different set of rules. This gave Pyongyang he ability to set the agenda.

Third, present a sense of regime instability. In 1997 and 1998, Kim Jong Il was completing the process of consolidating his hold on power following the 1994 death of his father, Kim Il Sung. This wasn’t a simple process, but it wasn't nearly as hard fought as South Korean intelligence made out at the time. The impression North Korea cultivated was that the regime was split, that there were factional divides, that there were the feared "hardliner" elements who wanted to launch a new regional war. This made it imperative that foreign governments, like the United States and regional neighbors Japan, China and South Korea, try to work with the emerging regime to prevent the rise of hardliners. Any action that further destabilized the North Korean regime or gave "justification" to the hardliners' arguments was seen as counterproductive.

Fourth, compound the sense of impending doom by emphasizing a social crisis. The famine of the mid 1990s was the catalyst that would supposedly trigger social backlash, cause the regime to clamp down even harder, bring the hardliners to the top, and trigger a regional or global conflagration. While there was a food shortage, and it was not a pleasant time in North Korea, the international claims were often an exaggeration of the true state of affairs, based on extrapolating to the entire nation the impressions of a select few defectors from the worst hit northern regions, where the politically unreliable are concentrated. And Pyongyang did nothing to dissuade the observers of their views that the famine was widespread and on the verge of bringing collapse to the country.

This four-part strategy is once again being repeated.

2006/2007: 1997/1998 Redux

The July 5 missile launch has once again raised the North Korean issue to the top of many international agendas. Despite the failure of the Taepodong-2, the North Koreans have once again combined a nuclear and missile crisis, raising cries that Pyongyang may be able to nuke Los Angeles. The military threat is there once again. Reports of North Korea being on a wartime footing have spread. Pyongyang has recalled its ambassadorial staff. North Korean rhetoric is on the rise. Talk of enhancing the deterrent capability fill the North Korean press.

Step two; unpredictability. North Korea launched its missiles, despite the international community urging it not to. In particular is the impression that North Korea has gone against the wishes of its main sponsor, China. There are stories all over the place of a rift between Pyongyang and Beijing over trains and missiles. These stories contribute to the sense that North Korea is crazy, unpredictable, and not playing by the same set of rules one would expect. Add in reports of Kim Jong Il's new wife (apparently a former secretary) and we start to see the patterns of the past emerge. Step two accomplished.

Step three, create a sense of instability. North Korea's UN diplomats were quick to tell the Japanese after the missile tests that the diplomats didn't know what the military was doing. This has circulated and expanded into reports that there are massive rifts inside the North Korean regime; fights over the missile launches and North Korean policy. Kim Jong Il hasn't been seen since the test, and was conspicuously absent from ceremonies marking the anniversary of the passing of his father. Oh, and for good measure, suddenly cut off economic ties with South Korea. Who would have seen that coming? Step three complete.

Step four; social crisis. Mother Nature helped out once again, as floods in the North "killed hundreds" and quickly led to warnings that a new famine was in the offing.

So North Korea is threatening again, the regime is unpredictable again, there are internal rifts again, and a social and humanitarian crisis is brewing again.

Convenient.

Japan; Center of Disinformation?

It is interesting to note that nearly all the information concerning each of these internal problems originates in Japan. On the one hand, Japan has an interest in playing up the North Korean threat for domestic reasons. Koizumi is working hard to enhance his military, to bring the public around to joining his call for Constitutional reform of Article 9.

But there is something else at work. North Korea has a large sympathetic ethnic Korean population in Japan, and this serves as the source of much of the disinformation, rumors and innuendos that spread out as "insider" information into internal North Korean troubles. With Japan's desire to paint North Korea as evil and crazy, it soaks up these reports, some true, others exaggerations, and spreads them out to the world. Just as Washington ate up the "intelligence" from Chalabi before the start of the Iraq war, Japanese media and intelligence is eating up the North Korean information because it matches what Tokyo wants to see.

And so we have North Korea shaping the international impressions, and building toward a repeat of the 1997/1998 crisis. The resolution of that one ultimately led to the 2000 inter-Korean summit, the visit to Pyongyang of Madeleine Albright and the opening of North Korean diplomatic ties with half of Europe, Australia and Canada. From a North Korean perspective, that one worked well. Now, we will see if it can be repeated.

18 July 2006

Labor Unrest, Nationalism, and Regional Friction

The stand-off at the POSCO headquarters in Pohang continues. Construction workers, employed by subcontractors to POSCO, occupied the building a week ago after they accused POSCO of supplying replacement workers to the subcontractors and thereby undermining their bargaining position in labor disputes. Police raided the POSCO headquarters to throw the strikers out, cleaned out the first three floors, but were greeted from the upper floors with a barrage of hot water, garbage and home-made flamethrowers. A second raid on the building is likely.

Strikes in South Korea are on the rise once again, not only the seasonal summer rise, but an overall increase. And the violence is increasing as well. It is somewhat ironic that these types of strikes are occurring under the Roh Moo Hyun government, given Roh's earlier career as a labor lawyer and his role as a mediator in the 1998 Hyundai strike, where union workers barricaded themselves and their families in the Ulsan facility and surrounded themselves with natural gas canisters and a tanker truck full of petrol to dissuade the police from storming the facilities. (The image from BBC is of Roh, labor and management at Ulsan in August 1998 as they worked toward a settlement that ultimately satisfied no one.)

Where is Roh now? He is certainly not intervening, even as a major Korean firm gets beset with the troubles of its subcontractors. [UPDATE: There is some movement toward intervention. The government has offered to mediate if the strikers leave POSCO headquarters] Former President Kim Dae Jung used the 1997 Asian financial crisis to reduce the power of the Chaebol, and began to crack the back of organized labor. Roh's government continues to strike out at the Chaebol (selectively, but then Kim was selective in his approach after the initial round of hammering the conglomerates), and it has taken a strong stance against broad-scale labor movements in previous years, but this summer it seems to be taking more of a back seat – all as South Korea's economy seems to be slowing again.

From a business perspective, this is trouble, as South Korea's unions are still seen as a drag on economic growth and expansion. Companies encounter stiff resistance for plans to hire part-time or hourly labor, unions remain linked across industry, causing unexpected sympathy strikes, and the international trend of outsourcing and moving industry to cheaper labor markets meets with increasing opposition at home. On the other hand, Labor doesn't see their needs being met yet, either. The five-day work week is still far from being fully implemented, there are too many educated Koreans for the workforce to absorb, and fears of outsourcing are growing.

Given his background, one would think Roh would at some point intervene to broker a new understanding between labor and industry. Yet the tripartite talks remain stagnated, and Roh is focusing instead on the military armament of South Korea. Ironic that the labor advocate now ignores labor and builds up the military-industrial complex, all while clamping down on any voice of dissent.

Roh is seeking a legacy, but it is not one of liberal reform. His path is running parallel to that of Japan's Junichiro Koizumi, whose "lion's mane" hair and wild ideas of economic and political reform have masked his deep-seated nationalism, where his real focus has been on the military revival of Japan. Roh, too, has come under the cover of civic leadership, only to reveal his true focus – strong nationalism; working toward a military equal to the sentiment. The competition is fierce, the tensions mounting, and Northeast Asia is shaping up into a region where traditional rivalries and common verbal exchanges could one day in the not too distant future suddenly explode into much more.

17 July 2006

Kaebul: Its What's For Dinner


BBC has a quick photo spread of food writer Stefan Gates' latest trek to Asia, including South Korea, where he encounters... kaebul. Yes, I now know I am not the only waeguk to have enjoyed the delicacy...

14 July 2006

Glorious Failure

The Glorious Failure

An animated cartoon by Mark Fiore. Well worth watching. Turn the volume up, sit back, and bask in the Dear Leader's glorious discourse.

11 July 2006

Welcome to the Workers' Paradise

North Korea: Workers' Paradise, Self-Reliant "Juche" State, and Fashion Runway?

Image from a photoshoot of North Korea by RIA Novosti (A Russian news agency). Most of the other pictures look just like my trip to the DPRK, but I never remember seeing HER there...

05 July 2006

Fireworks From North Korea - Happy 4th!

North Korea tested as many as six missiles [update: ROK saying as many as 10], including possibly a Nodong missiles and a Taepodong-2, early July 5 local time (the first missile, not coincidentally, launched at the same time as the U.S. Space Shuttle Discovery in Florida). After weeks of speculation, Pyongyang gave the United States an Independence Day display unlikely to be forgotten for some time. Of course, that is largely because Pyongyang failed in the Taepodong-2 launch.

While North Korea's 1998 Taepodong-1 launch didn't manage to place its satellite in orbit, it did demonstrate effective staging technology. This time, it appears the Taepodong-2 either had catastrophic failure or was aborted between 35 and 40 seconds into the launch. For North Korea, there will be no claims of the melodious strains of the Song of General Kim Jong Il broadcast over the ethos from the Kwangmyongsong-2.

It was a risky move for North Korea to launch in the first place. Pyongyang rarely tests its ballistic missiles. Prior to this event, the Nodong was only ever tested from North Korea once, on May 29, 1993 (although there are conflicting reports of two other tests, one in May of 1990 and another failed test in June of 1992). Pyongyang's only Taepodong test was in 1998 (the failed Taepodong-1 satellite launch). By refraining from testing at home (Pyongyang takes part in tests of related systems in Pakistan, Iran and elsewhere), North Korea can leave the exact level of development a mystery. And foreign intelligence services always err on the side of caution, overestimating the range, capacity and accuracy of North Korea's missiles.

A catastrophic failure of the Taepodong-2 weakens this sense of uncertainty. Sure, Pyongyang may do better next time, but it has shown that this version was not ready to get off the ground (there were reports a while back of a failed ground test of the engine as well, so apparently they were aware of the potential risks). At least in the near term, Pyongyang has played its hand and lost. Now, the ability to carry out multiple launches of various types of missiles (Hwasongs, Nodongs, and Taepodongs) does demonstrate a level of command and control over multiple launch sites and various types of missile forces.

In a way, this was a command and control exercise, one that demonstrated the ability to coordinate various missile units. Pyongyang has repeatedly said it is ready to launch a counterstrike against the US and its allies, and its tests July 5 showed the North Korean arsenal of short, medium and long range missiles - perfect for striking South Korea, Japan and, theoretically, the United States.

But the failure of the Taepodong-2 is what will stand out. North Korea has been reticent to actually test the Taepodong-2, for fear that it would fail. Now, most major space programs (the United States, the Soviet Union) had plenty of failures before achieving fairly positive success rates. Latecomer Japan has had abysmal luck with the H2. China doesn't have a perfect track record. In fact, one must remember that this is precisely rocket science, and therefore isn't the simplest thing to do right all the time.

But North Korea took the risk, and launched on America's Independence Day (perhaps hoping to catch the U.S. off guard like the Japanese did on a December Sunday in 1941, or seeking additional attention coinciding with the Space Shuttle launch). The North's leadership obviously expected a strong reaction from the United States and Japan, and even went against the public statements of erstwhile allies China and Russia in carrying out the test. This suggests either the North Korean regime is off its collective rocker (not likely, or else they wouldn't have lasted this long), expects to gain some new sort of leverage from the multiple tests or sees an imminent threat from the United States or its regional allies and is demonstrating how painful such a move would be.

There must have been an internal regime consensus for a launch, given the number of tests carried out. What their next steps is will be a bit of a mystery, but some major shift in Korean relations with the world will likely emerge in the next three to six months. This is their game. It is how they play it. The failed launch today was a slight hiccup, but not chronic indigestion. But North Korea's display of force was tarnished, and at minimum it will take a few days to get everyone (diplomats, military, SPA) back on the same page after the secrecy leading up to the launch timing and the damage control from the failed test.

04 July 2006

Answer a Preemptive Attack With a Relentless Annihilating Strike

Western media is making a big deal out of comments in the Rodong Sinmun and KCNA in which an unnamed analyst says, "Convinced that peace is defended only by arms, the army and people of the DPRK are now in full preparedness to answer a preemptive attack with a relentless annihilating strike and a nuclear war with a mighty nuclear deterrent."

Now, North Korea is always making warnings and threats, and every time, western press picks them up like they are new and rather significant, just like at the end of the month the media picks up North Korea's monthly report on U.S. aerial incursions as if it is a new phenomenon.

This, of course, is just what the DPRK wants.

So to make them even happier (heh-heh), here are some of the numerous threats from past years (thanks to NK News for its wonderful functionality to search KCNA reports). There are many, many more, but how about one from each year for the past decade...

December 18, 1996
If the warmaniacs dare start a war, they will face an annihilating blow.


November 8, 1997
We are following with heightened vigilance the movements of the warmaniacs at home and abroad because they may unleash a real war while staging war exercises involving huge armed forces under the pretext of "defence". It is our revolutionary stamina to answer fire with fire. If the warmaniacs dare to violate the territory of our country even a little, we will deal an annihilating blow to them.


December 4, 1998
Ri Il Hwan, first secretary of the C.C., the Kim Il Sung Socialist Youth League, said: "if the U.S. imperialists invade our dear fatherland even 0.001 mm, eight million youths and schoolchildren will smash them at one stroke with a sledge hammer of revolution prepared for scores of years, and make even suicidal attack to plunge the damned U.S. territory into a sea of flame."


May 30, 1999
The u.s. Imperialist war hawks have already made a signal shot for unleashing a second Korean war. We do not want a war but will not miss the opportunity if it is imposed upon us. It is the will and disposition of our invincible people's army and people to deal an annihilating blow at the aggressors in the fighting spirit that you shall die and I will remain alive. The preemptive attack is not an exclusive option of the United States. We have our own operation plan and the way of merciless strike.


January 27, 2000
We have already solemnly declared that we will deliver decisive counterblows to those who infringe upon the sovereignty and dignity of our fatherland. If the enemies finally ignite a war against the DPRK, ignoring our warnings, they will be destroyed by mercilessly annihilating strike.


April 24, 2001
Due to the reckless provocations and aggression moves of the new U.S. administration, the Korean peninsula is beset with the danger that its situation, which was developing in favour of detente and reunification, may go back to confrontation and tension. If the imperialists force a war upon us despite our serious warnings, our army and people will deal an annihilating blow of retaliation at the enemies with all potentials they have built up for decades and the enemies will face the most miserable end.


July 30, 2002
The army and people of Korea are fully ready to answer the U.S. preemptive attack with an annihilating retaliation. If the bellicose forces of the U.S. misjudge the will and power of the Korean army and people and take a choice of military action, it will lead to the U.S. doom.


November 30, 2003
Our army and people value the peace of the country and do not want a war but will not beg for peace while having their sovereignty and dignity encroached upon. If the U.S. imperialists and their stooges ignite a new war, our army and people will deal an annihilating blow at the aggressors with the singlehearted unity and great military power consolidated for scores of years and fully demonstrate the invincible spirit and dignity of heroic Korea once again.


February 13, 2004
Now that it has become clearer that the U.S. anti-DPRK nuclear racket is to exterminate the DPRK, it is not worth arguing that the DPRK has no other option but to strengthen its nuclear deterrent. The U.S. should not run amuck but immediately cancel its reckless new operation plan against the north, mindful that the army and people of the DPRK are filled with the spirit of annihilating the enemy under the Songun policy.


May 3, 2005
It is the invariable intention of the Japanese reactionaries to realize their reinvasion scheme without difficulty with the backing of the U.S. If they opt for an adventurous preemptive attack, the army and people of the DPRK will deal an annihilating blow to them by every possible means.


March 15, 2006
The U.S. imperialists' persistent moves to start a reckless war for aggression will force the army and people of the DPRK to step up all the steps to defend sovereignty under the banner of Songun. If the aggressors dare provoke a war, the Korean army and people will deal merciless annihilating retaliatory blows at them and uproot the danger of a war in this land.