[Cankor] Report #267

[cankor at cankor.ca]

Dear friends,

We thank readers who have sent donations to CanKor this week. Those who 
have not yet had the time to contribute but wish to do so, please go to 
the bottom of this issue of the CanKor Report for instructions.

With best wishes,
The CanKor team.
*************************************************
CANADA-KOREA ELECTRONIC INFORMATION SERVICE

CanKor # 267

Monday, 20 November 2006
*************************************************

Canadian Ambassador to both ROK and DPRK Marius Grinius is visiting 
Pyongyang to deliver a "frank message" from the Canadian government, 
asking his hosts to abandon their nuclear weapons programme, return to 
six-party talks, and refrain from trying to sell weapons materials to 
terrorists. At the same time, Prime Minister Stephen Harper says there 
is no plan for Canada to join the USA in intercepting and searching DPRK 
cargo ships.

Although South Korea supports the principles and the purpose of the 
Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), it also declines taking part in 
intercepting North Korean vessels, in order to avert armed clashes that 
could escalate into war. Seoul believes its decision to halt subsidies 
for trips to Mt. Kumgang, and suspend private sector and 
government-level inter-Korean economic cooperation "are stronger 
sanctions against the North than those taken by any other nation in the 
world."

France intercepts a DPRK vessel on the island of Mayotte, the first such 
interception under Security Council Resolution 1718. After a "thorough 
and complete inspection", no weapons, drugs or other prohibited material 
is found.

21 leaders of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum express 
"strong concern" over Pyongyang's nuclear test and endorse the raft of 
UN sanctions it triggered, but fail to agree on a written statement. A 
United Nations General Assembly committee passes a resolution calling on 
DPRK human rights, and for the first time the ROK votes in favour, 
eliciting a strong verbal reaction from the DPRK. A DPR Korean Foreign 
Affairs spokesperson blames US and EU collusion and takes solace in the 
fact that "almost all developing countries" opposed or abstained from 
voting on the resolution.

An unidentified source close to the DPRK says that the northern DPRK 
Ryanggang region is experiencing an outbreak of scarlet fever that 
threatens to escalate into an epidemic.

This week's CanKor OPINION section features an article by former US 
State Department official Joel Witt warning that the six-party talks 
framework should be abandoned. Unless all countries demonstrate a new 
willingness to engage in serious give-and-take, one cannot rule out the 
specter either of a North Korean collapse (with all its political, 
security, economic and humanitarian consequences), or the possibility 
that Pyongyang could initiate military action. Leon Sigal, author of 
"Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea" examines the 
successful actions taken by the USA during the Cuban missile crisis of 
1963, in order to glean lessons that may lead the way forward in the 
current confrontation with the DPRK.
*************************************************

Contents:

1.   CANADA SENDS TOUGH MESSAGE TO DPRK
     
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061118.wkorea1118/BNStory/International/

2.   CANADA RULES OUT NAVY SHIPS TO HELP USA OVER DPRK
     
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20061120.NKOREA20/TPStory/

3.   SEOUL DECLINES TO JOIN PSI FOR FEAR OF 'ARMED CLASHES'
     http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200611/200611140012.html

4.   FRANCE SEARCHES NORTH KOREAN VESSEL
     http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6154986.stm

5.   APEC CONDEMNS NORTH KOREA NUCLEAR TEST
     
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/242374/1/.html

6.   ROK SUPPORTS UN RESOLUTION ON DPRK HUMAN RIGHTS
     http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200611/200611180003.html

7.   ANTI-DPRK "HUMAN RIGHTS RESOLUTION" AT UN ASSAILED
     http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2006/200611/news11/21.htm#1

8.   ROK VOTE FOR US RESOLUTION AGAINST DPRK ASSAILED
     http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2006/200611/news11/20.htm#1

9.   EPIDEMIC SPREADS IN DPRK DESPITE QUARANTINE EFFORTS
     
http://english.yna.co.kr/Engnews/20061115/430100000020061115140019E2.html

OPINION
10.  DPRK COULD COLLAPSE UNDER INTERNATIONAL ISOLATION
     
http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/data/html_dir/2006/10/31/200610310043.asp

11.  CUBA 1963 AND NORTH KOREA NOW
     http://www.nautilus.org/fora/security/0696Sigal.html
*************************************************

1.   CANADA SENDS TOUGH MESSAGE TO DPRK
     by Brian Laghi, Globe and Mail, Hanoi, 18 November 2006

Canada has joined the international effort to strip Kim Jong Il of his 
nuclear weapons program by dispatching a diplomat to Pyongyang to 
pressure the rogue regime. The announcement of the Canadian actions, 
which was independent of other efforts here to kick-start multi-national 
talks on the issue, came originally from the South Koreans after their 
prime minister, Roh Moo-hyun met with Prime Minister Stephen Harper. 
Canada's South Korean ambassador, Marius Grinius, arrived in North Korea 
on Nov. 16th to meet with counterparts in North Korea's foreign 
ministry. Canada later confirmed the news.

"Since the North Korean nuclear test, Canada has worked with like-minded 
countries to respond to what we feel is a dangerous and unacceptable 
situation on the Korean peninsula," said David Mulroney, who is Mr. 
Harper's adviser on foreign affairs. "We've dispatched our ambassador to 
Pyongyang to deliver a frank message to the North Koreans to ask them to 
cease and to give up their nuclear weapons program and to return to the 
six-party talks."

The announcement came at a time when nearby nations as well as the 
United States were attempting to kick-start talks to get the country to 
stop pursuing the program. Discussions among the nations involved took 
place throughout the day, before and during the meetings of the 
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, where talk of North Korea has 
dominated.

Mr. Grinius is expected to stay in North Korea for at least a week to 
meet mostly with foreign affairs officials. Although Mr. Grinius is 
Canada's ambassador to South Korea, he is also Canada's envoy to the 
North, with whom Canada has a suspended diplomatic relationship. The 
crisis was escalated significantly on Oct. 9th, when North Korea tested 
its first nuclear device. The United Nations imposed sanctions a week later.

Federal officials conceded yesterday that Canada's effort is essentially 
an individual one, although the country also supports efforts to 
kick-start the so-called Six Party talks between North Korea and the 
USA, Russia, China, Japan and South Korea. North Korea has agreed to 
come back to the talks after a yearlong boycott, but several nations 
remain skeptical over whether the nation really wants a disarmament deal.

A federal official conceded that not all of the big players on the file 
knew that Canada was going to act. For example, a Japanese spokesman 
said today he wasn't aware of the move, although Mr. Harper did tell 
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of the action during a tête-à-tête 
today.

"I'm sorry I didn't know that, " said Mitsuo Sakaba, press secretary for 
Japan's ministry of foreign affairs. "But it's good news for us anyway."

Still, the federal official said Canada's move is reflective of the 
views of the larger nations involved in the talks. "I think we're 
confident that all of our allies would find this a helpful contribution 
to international efforts."

The way the measure was announced was unusual because it was first made 
public by the South Koreans. According to the South Korean government 
Web site, Canada also wants to provide aid to North Korea, an assertion 
that Canadian diplomats could not explain.

The Canadian pledge also came as US President George W. Bush was 
unsuccessful in winning South Korean backing for a plan to intercept 
ships suspected of ferrying supplies for North Korea's nuclear program. 
The USA has made a pitch for Canada to take part in such an interdiction 
program. Officials would not respond, saying a formal request has not 
been made.

Mr. Roh said his country is not taking part in the full scope of the 
project, but that it would support the goals of the Proliferation 
Security Initiative, the program aimed at stopping ships that are 
suspected of carrying goods to build weapons of mass destruction. So 
far, South Korea has been only an observer of the initiative out of 
concern that it could spark a clash with the North.
*************************************************

2.   CANADA RULES OUT NAVY SHIPS TO HELP USA OVER DPRK
     by Jeff Sallot, The Globe & Mail, 20 November 2006

The Canadian government has no plans to join the United States in naval 
operations to search ships suspected of transporting nuclear weapons 
material to or from North Korea. However, Canada has sent a diplomat to 
North Korea to complain about the regime's nuclear weapons program and 
to warn against trying to sell weapons material to Middle Eastern 
terrorists.

Conservative government officials talked tough about Pyongyang's nuclear 
ambition on the weekend, but backed away from any suggestion that Canada 
would use its navy to help enforce a United Nations ban on North Korean 
nuclear and ballistic missile trade. A recent nuclear test by North 
Korea is a "dangerous and irresponsible" development, Prime Minister 
Stephen Harper said in Hanoi, where he was attending a Pacific Rim 
summit meeting. The test was "a serious act of provocation that could 
destabilize the entire region and lead to a regional nuclear race," 
Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay told CTV News.

When asked by reporters whether Canada might join the USA in 
intercepting and searching North Korean cargo vessels, both said there 
are no plans to do so.

"We have no plans to pursue that," Mr. Harper said.

"There has been no 'ask' from the United States or any of the allies" 
for Canadian navy ships, Mr. MacKay said.

However, a senior US official, on a visit to Ottawa last week, discussed 
with Canadian counterparts how the two countries might co-operate to 
keep North Korea out of the black market nuclear and missile trade. Such 
discussions are the usual prelude to a formal request. After her 
meetings, Kristen Silverberg, the US assistant secretary of state with 
special responsibilities for non-proliferation measures related to North 
Korea and Iran, said Washington would like the co-operation of Canada 
and other countries with the "sea assets" to interdict North Korean 
shipments.

"We had a good talk about [UN Security Council resolution number] 1718 
implementation," she said in an interview, referring to the United 
Nation's call last month to take co-operative action, including cargo 
inspections, to choke off North Korean weapons trade. "I think it was 
received well. Canada and the US both share a concern on proliferation 
issues," Ms. Silverberg said, noting that Canada was a strong supporter 
of the UN resolution.

The fact that the Harper government is now throwing cold water on the 
idea of helping the US police the UN resolution is a bit of a puzzle, 
said Alex Morrison, president of the Canadian Institute of Strategic 
Studies. Now that Canada has sent a senior diplomat to North Korea to 
express Canadian dismay at its weapons test, "the onus is on us to back 
it up with some concrete measures," Mr. Morrison said. Sending a warship 
or two would be a clear way to back up the political message, he added. 
Instead, Mr. Harper and Mr. MacKay seem to be saying "we really aren't 
anxious to take on a task like this," Mr. Morrison said. "One reason 
might be they think we would stretching our forces too thin."

Michael Byers, an international law expert at the University of British 
Columbia, said searching North Korean flag vessels on the high seas is a 
dodgy proposition. At Chinese insistence, the UN resolution contains a 
caveat saying searches would have to be "consistent with international law."

Most countries with merchant ships flying their flags -- including 
Liberia and Panama, the major flags of convenience states -- have agreed 
to let their ships be searched. North Korea has not. Mr. Byers suggested 
that the way around this legal hurdle is for the UN Security Council to 
adopt a new resolution that in effect gives the anti-proliferation 
program the status of a peacekeeping operation.

Countries such as Canada, Brazil and South Africa could send ships to 
such an operation without directly involving the US navy, and thus 
addressing Chinese concerns about American military involvement close to 
China's shores, Mr. Byers said.
*************************************************

3.   SEOUL DECLINES TO JOIN PSI FOR FEAR OF 'ARMED CLASHES'
     Chosun Ilbo, 14 November 2006

South Korea on Monday begged out of the Proliferation Security 
Initiative meant to intercept suspicious North Korean shipments and 
confirmed it will take no fresh steps under a UN resolution sanctioning 
the North. "We support the principles and the purpose of the PSI but 
will not officially take part in the initiative considering the special 
circumstances on the Korean Peninsula," Deputy Foreign Minister Park 
In-kook said. He said the decision came to avert "armed clashes around 
the Korean Peninsula."

As for Security Council Resolution 1718's aim to prevent the flow of 
money and goods into the North that could be used in the development of 
mass-destructive weapons, officials said, "We are observing related 
international agreements and there are no additional step for us to 
take." However, once a UNSC sanctions committee designates specific 
organizations and individuals that are to be put under restrictions, 
Seoul will follow its recommendations. The USA has repeatedly urged the 
South to fall in line with the PSI.

But the ruling Uri Party, and for that matter Pyongyang, have warned of 
military conflict if Seoul does. Uri lawmakers Chang Young-dal and Im 
Jong-seok have opposed Seoul's full participation in the PSI, saying it 
would lead to armed clashes after North Korea warned it would consider 
searches of its vessels a declaration of a war. But critics have slammed 
the logic. "Countries participating in the PSI are carrying out their 
obligations under the initiative to the exclusion of any activities that 
could lead to military confrontation," said Kim Chan-gyu, a professor 
emeritus at Kyunghee University. "There has been no single case where 
activities under the PSI have led to an armed clash so far."

The USA has clearly been frustrated at Seoul's reluctance. US Ambassador 
Alexander Vershbow on Oct. 30 blasted the "absurd" belief among senior 
Korean politicians that joining the PSI would cause immediate military 
conflict. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also told reporters when 
she came here last month, "As to the PSI, again there is a lot of 
misunderstanding about what it is." Washington is reportedly 
disappointed that Seoul, besides refusing to join the PSI, appears to 
consider it illegal.Meanwhile, Seoul has decided to halt subsidies for 
field trips for teachers and students to the North's Mt. Kumgang. But 
that only makes a dent of a few hundred million won per year in the 
lucrative flow of visitors to the resort. The government suspended rice 
and fertilizer aid and held back materials for North Korea's light 
industry after Pyongyang's missile tests in July.

The government says it is doing plenty. "After North Korea's missile 
tests, we suspended private sector inter-Korean economic cooperation 
worth US$94 million, plus 80 percent of the government-level economic 
cooperation worth $360 million," Unification Ministry Director Lee 
Kwan-se said. "These are stronger sanctions against the North than those 
taken by any other nation in the world."
*************************************************

4.   FRANCE SEARCHES NORTH KOREAN VESSEL
     BBC News, 16 November 2006

French officials in the Indian Ocean have inspected a North Korean ship 
under the terms of UN Security Council sanctions adopted against 
Pyongyang. The ship was examined on the island of Mayotte, but there 
were no reports it was carrying any illegal cargo.

It is believed to be the first time a North Korean vessel has been 
inspected under Security Council Resolution 1718. The resolution imposed 
sanctions on North Korea after it carried out a nuclear test in October. 
The measures are aimed at preventing North Korea from acquiring or 
spreading nuclear technology.

Customs officials carried out a "thorough and complete inspection" of 
the ship, its crew and its contents, a spokesman for France's foreign 
ministry said. "We are exercising particular vigilance regarding cargo 
transported by North Korean ships, and all ships starting from or 
heading to North Korea," he said.

The Associated Press news agency quoted a customs official as saying 
that no weapons, drugs or other prohibited material had been found on 
the ship or the 45-strong crew after a search "from bow to stern and top 
to bottom". (...)
*************************************************

5.   APEC CONDEMNS NORTH KOREA NUCLEAR TEST
     Agence France Presse, Hanoi, 20 November 2006

Asia-Pacific leaders called on Sunday for an early resumption of 
six-nation talks on dismantling North Korea's nuclear programme and 
pledged fresh efforts to revive negotiations to free up global trade. 
Wrapping up a two-day summit in communist Vietnam, the 21 leaders of the 
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum expressed "strong 
concern" over Pyongyang's nuclear test and endorsed the raft of UN 
sanctions it triggered.

Officials had debated for days about how the group should address the 
international standoff with the Stalinist state, and ultimately, Pacific 
Rim heads of state and government heard an oral statement behind closed 
doors.

The North's shock October 9 atom bomb test posed "a clear threat to our 
shared interest of peace and security," said Vietnamese President Nguyen 
Minh Triet, who first read the statement to APEC leaders and later to 
reporters. "We did not avoid this issue, but it is not the major item or 
major issue of the leaders' meeting," he told a press conference, amid 
suggestions the lack of a written statement had weakened the message.

After the summit, New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark told AFP: "When 
any country steps outside the non-proliferation regime, it's a huge 
concern."

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper chimed in: "The unanimous feeling 
was that pressure must be put on North Korea to pursue 
denuclearization." (...)

APEC's criticism of North Korea capped several days of hectic diplomacy 
by the leaders of the United States, China, Japan, Russia and South 
Korea -- the five parties involved in the drawn-out negotiations with 
Pyongyang. US President George W. Bush met with Chinese President Hu 
Jintao and Russian President Vladimir Putin to try to persuade Beijing 
and Moscow to ramp up the pressure on Pyongyang. Bush and Hu said the 
regime of Kim Jong-Il "should get the message" that the world community 
will not tolerate it possessing nuclear weapons, a Chinese foreign 
ministry spokesman told reporters.

"China is a very important nation, and the United States believes 
strongly that, by working together, we can help solve problems such as 
North Korea and Iran," Bush said.

But Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier warned the 
international community not to push the North "into a corner".

North Korea agreed last month to return to the negotiating table, but a 
date has yet to be set for the resumption of six-nation talks. 
Washington's point man on North Korea, Christopher Hill, was due in 
Beijing on Monday for further consultations, US officials said. (...)
*************************************************

6.   ROK SUPPORTS UN RESOLUTION ON DPRK HUMAN RIGHTS
     Chosun Ilbo, 18 November 2006

A United Nations General Assembly committee on Friday passed a 
resolution calling on North Korea to respect human rights, a day later 
than originally expected. That leaves the way clear for ratification in 
the General Assembly next month, but a UN official said it is customary 
to accept resolutions passed in committee. North Korean Deputy UN 
Ambassador Kim Chang Guk was at the committee meeting on Thursday.

Meanwhile, Nobel Peace Prize winner and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, 
former Czech president Vaclav Havel and former Norwegian prime minister 
Kjell Magne Bondevik held a press conference at UN headquarters urging 
the Security Council to intervene in the North Korean human rights 
situation. They recently released a report on the issue.

Stressing the need for forceful measures against the communist country, 
Bondevik said that the North must let human rights organizations inspect 
the situation in all parts of the country and release all political 
prisoners. He urged the Security Council intervene, if necessary to the 
point of invoking Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, which permits economic 
and military steps to maintain or restore international peace and 
security. He drew attention to South Korea's change of heart on the 
matter in deciding to vote for the UN resolution.

Havel stressed the nuclear crisis must not be allowed to overshadow 
human rights, saying it was a key responsibility of the UN to resolve 
the serious abuses in North Korea. Wiesel said North Korean leader Kim 
Jong-il lives in seclusion because he is ashamed at subjecting North 
Korean children to their suffering.

Kim Myong Gil, the deputy chief of North Korea's UN mission, condemned 
South Korea for supporting the resolution, warning the move "would not 
have a positive influence on inter-Korean relations." He slammed the 
resolution as interference in his country's internal affairs.
*************************************************

7.   ANTI-DPRK "HUMAN RIGHTS RESOLUTION" AT UN ASSAILED
     Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), Pyongyang, 20 November 2006

A spokesman for the DPRK Foreign Ministry gave the following answer to a 
question put by KCNA Monday as regards the adoption of a "human rights 
resolution" against the DPRK at the third committee of the UN General 
Assembly:

The anti-DPRK "human rights resolution," a product of the collusion and 
tie-up among hostile forces including the USA and the EU was railroaded 
through a meeting of the third committee of the 61st UN General Assembly 
on Nov. 17. The resolution fabricated by hostile forces, toeing the US 
line, is full of sheer lies that can convince no one as was the case 
with the similar one adopted last year.

For this reason the majority of UN member nations including almost all 
developing countries clarified their principled stands either by voting 
against it, abstaining from voting or boycotting the meeting. This 
proves that the resolution, in fact, has no legal validity.

The USA and other hostile forces are sadly mistaken if they think they 
can frighten us by debasing and slandering the inviolable dignity and 
sovereignty of the DPRK over its "human rights issue". The USA and other 
western countries are deliberately sidestepping serious human rights 
abuses such as extreme racial discrimination and keeping the world's 
biggest number of prisoners and horrendous human rights violations such 
as massacre of civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Lebanon and 
other countries, while bringing absurd charges of "violation of human 
rights" to some countries. This eloquently proves that the 
politicization of the human rights issue, selectivity and double 
standards concerning it have gone beyond a tolerance limit in the 
international arena.

The USA and the EU had better put an end to their own human rights 
abuses before finding fault with the human rights performance in other 
countries. We categorically reject the recent "human rights resolution" 
as a product of their anti-DPRK political plot.
*************************************************

8.   ROK VOTE FOR US RESOLUTION AGAINST DPRK ASSAILED
     Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), Pyongyang, 20 November 2006

The south Korean authorities shamelessly showed their hand in favor of a 
UN resolution on human rights in north Korea at the instigation of the 
USA. A spokesman for the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the 
Fatherland in a statement on Nov. 18 dismissed the south Korean 
authorities' approval of the resolution as a treacherous provocative act 
of joining in the US criminal act to internationalize the "human rights 
issue" together with the nuclear issue and escalate international 
sanctions and pressure against the DPRK and an intolerable 
anti-reunification act of destroying the groundwork of the June 15 joint 
declaration and hamstringing the development of the north-south relations.

The statement continued:
The "human rights abuses" in the north much touted by the USA are 
nothing but a sheer fabrication aimed to undermine and bring down the 
DPRK and a poor pretext that can be made only by those who are afraid of 
the advantage and invincibility of man-centred Korean-style socialism.

The south Korean authorities have already sacrificed the humanitarian 
undertakings between the fellow countrymen to serve outsiders, chiming 
in with US moves to apply sanctions and pressure upon the DPRK. They 
also laid another stumbling block in the way of improving the 
inter-Korean relations by joining in the collective sanctions against 
the north. The south Korean authorities' act of joining in the US 
anti-DPRK human rights racket adds another crime to their treacherous 
crimes. With no clumsy excuses can the south Korean authorities justify 
their act of slandering the advantageous social system in the north and 
pushing the north-south relations back to those in the era of confrontation.

Those maintaining their power by reading the face of outsiders rather 
than defending the dignity and interests of the nation would have no 
face to sit with the north. The south Korean authorities will be fully 
accountable for all the serious consequences to be entailed by their 
criminal act of laying another stumbling block in the way of improving 
the north-south relations.
*************************************************

9.   EPIDEMIC SPREADS IN DPRK DESPITE QUARANTINE EFFORTS
     Yonhap News Agency, 15 November 2006

Scarlet fever has been spreading fast in North Korea for nearly a month 
and is showing signs of becoming a full-blown pandemic despite efforts 
by North Korean authorities to contain the disease, a source close to 
the North said Wednesday. The disease first broke out in the communist 
state's northern Ryanggang Province last month, but is quickly spreading 
to other parts of the country, the source told Yonhap News Agency on 
condition of anonymity.

"According to people who recently travelled to North Korea, the spread 
of scarlet fever, which first broke out around 20 October near the 
Hyesan and Paekam areas in Ryanggang Province, is showing no signs of 
slowing down and has spread as far as Pyongan and Kangwon Provinces 
after affecting nearby Hamgyong and Jagang Provinces," the source said.

The North Korean government is taking strong measures to stop its 
spread, such as placing travel bans to or from infected areas, according 
to the source, but there are few signs of a slowdown. Scarlet fever is 
categorized a third-class communicable disease in South Korea, but 
health and quarantine officials here say it can be just as deadly as any 
first-class disease, such as cholera and typhoid, if the infected are 
not properly treated.

"It appears the disease is spreading (despite efforts by North Korean 
officials) because the immune system of most North Koreans has been 
significantly weakened and due to the lack of medicine, such as 
antibiotics," the source said.

As one of the most impoverished nations in the world, North Korea 
depends heavily on international handouts to feed a large number of its 
population of 23 million. South Korea regularly provides large amounts 
of economic and other humanitarian assistance, including food and 
medicine, to the North, but its government aid has been suspended since 
July, when the communist state test-fired seven ballistic missiles in 
defiance of Seoul's warnings. Seoul says it will not resume shipments of 
humanitarian aid until Pyongyang makes significant progress towards 
dismantling its nuclear weapons programme. North Korea conducted its 
first known nuclear weapon test on Oct. 9.

International negotiations over the North Korean nuclear arms issue are 
set to resume before the end of the year after a one-year hiatus, but 
many believe a significant breakthrough is unlikely due to wide 
discrepancies among nations on how to disarm the North. The talks 
involve both North and South Korea, Japan, China, Russia and the United 
States.
*************************************************

OPINION

*************************************************

10.  DPRK COULD COLLAPSE UNDER INTERNATIONAL ISOLATION
     by Joel Wit, The Korea Herald, 31 October 2006

[Joel Wit is a senior fellow with the International Security Program at 
the Center for Strategic and International Studies in the United States. 
He served for 15 years in the Department of State in positions related 
to Northeast Asia, nuclear arms control, and weapons proliferation.]

North Korea's nuclear test and the international community's sanctions 
against Pyongyang have created a dangerous new situation in Northeast 
Asia. While the North may be moving towards renewing negotiations on the 
nuclear issue, renewed tensions in the future are almost guaranteed 
unless the six-party talks are abandoned and all countries demonstrate a 
new willingness to engage in serious give-and-take.

 From 1993 until 2001, I was an official in the US Department of State 
working on American policy towards Pyongyang trying to end its nuclear 
weapons program. During that time, I worked closely with North Korean 
diplomats, bureaucrats, nuclear scientists, intelligence officials and 
military officers. I traveled to North Korea many times, visited 
government offices, nuclear facilities and military bases. Based on my 
experience, I can say without a doubt that North Korea's nuclear test 
was not inevitable.

Everyone knows that North Korea is a difficult country to deal with, 
sometimes confrontational and often stubborn. But the fact is 
Pyongyang's nuclear test represents a failure for all of the countries 
at the six-party talks. First and foremost, it represents the failure of 
a highly ideological American approach, not based on problem solving but 
on an unwillingness to seriously engage Pyongyang. China should also 
share the blame since it engaged in wishful thinking that somehow 
indulging the North Koreans would build up Beijing's leverage in 
Pyongyang. South Korea is responsible because, in spite of the good 
intentions behind the "sunshine policy" which I support, it failed to 
set boundaries for the North's bad behavior, losing respect in Pyongyang 
and in Washington. Finally Japanese policy failed. Over the past few 
years, Japan had little interest in either North Korea's nuclear weapons 
or missile programs. It was fixated on the fate of Japanese citizens 
abducted by Pyongyang.

While there is enough blame to go around for all, the issue facing us 
today is where do we go from here? Sanctions against North Korea are 
certainly the appropriate response to its nuclear test. They demonstrate 
the international community's determination not to stand still while the 
North goes nuclear, visibly defying the global norm against the spread 
of nuclear weapons that has been in place for over three decades. But we 
should not fool ourselves. Sanctions are unlikely to force the North 
Koreans to change course. Pyongyang has certainly anticipated the harsh 
international reaction and decided on a strategy that can weather the storm.

How the North will move forward from this point is unclear. It could 
rush headlong ahead with more nuclear and missile tests as well as other 
steps to build a deterrent force. Or Pyongyang can mix into its strategy 
a diplomatic offensive designed to diffuse increasing international 
pressures. That seems to be the approach that is emerging given recent 
news reports that the North has expressed a willingness to resume the 
Beijing six-party talks as long as Washington drops financial sanctions. 
But we should also recognize that pledge is nothing new and that 
Pyongyang understands there is little if no hope that the Bush 
Administration will meet this precondition. Moreover, sometime soon, the 
North Koreans are unlikely to unload fuel rods from there operating 
reactor and to extract more plutonium to build more bombs.

All of our governments must reevaluate our policies and put in place a 
plan to deal with both the short-term dangers and long-term challenges 
posed by this strategy. In the short term, we must be prepared for two 
difficult contingencies. First, while the North Koreans have probably 
calculated that they could survive sanctions, they may be wrong. We 
should not rule out the possibility that North Korea will collapse under 
the weight of international isolation. Are we prepared for that 
possibility? The answer is no. While Washington and all countries in the 
region are deeply concerned about the political, security, economic and 
humanitarian consequences of collapse little or nothing has been done by 
anyone to prepare for such a dangerous development.

But while there has been much talk about the possible use of military 
force by the United States to destroy North Korea's nuclear program, 
there has not been enough attention focused on the possibility that 
Pyongyang could initiate military action. During the last nuclear crisis 
in 1994, over a six-month period the United States took a series of 
steps to bolster its forces on the peninsula and in the region. By the 
time the crisis reached its height in June 1994 just before President 
Jimmy Carter traveled to Pyongyang, American forces were ready to 
effectively thwart any North Korean military moves. It is unclear 
whether American forces or those of its allies are prepared for such a 
possibility today.

Beyond these two contingencies, while sanctions may be the proper 
immediate response to North Korea's test, they are unlikely to convince 
Pyongyang to turn back from building a nuclear deterrent. To have any 
chance of doing that, we will need to provide North Korea with an escape 
route through reinvigorating diplomacy and that will require moving away 
from the Beijing six-party talks. While the Bush administration asserts 
those talks have helped build a united front in opposing Pyongyang's 
nuclear program-and that assertion remains open to question - they have 
proved to be a failure in actually negotiating a solution to the current 
crisis.

A new diplomatic strategy must combine multilateral coalition building 
with serious, sustained and direct bilateral negotiations between the 
United States and North Korea. Such a process would demonstrate 
Washington's -- and North Korea's -- seriousness in reaching a 
diplomatic solution. For example, the first order of business for a 
reconvened six-party session could be for all countries present to ask 
the United States and North Korea to conduct separate talks while 
pledging to keep them regularly informed.

There will also have to be real diplomatic give-and-take on both sides. 
Pyongyang will have to agree to freeze, roll-back and eventually 
dismantle its nuclear program. Washington, supported by China, South 
Korea, Japan and Russia, will have to take "irreversible and 
"simultaneous" steps in return such as normalizing diplomatic relations 
and providing North Korea with ironclad security guarantees.

That is easier said than done. Overcoming the bad blood built up over 
the past six years between Washington and Pyongyang will be difficult if 
not impossible in the near future. As a result, no matter what process 
is established, until the leaders in both capitols are willing to 
conduct serious discussions, there may be more dangerous episodes in the 
days ahead.
*************************************************

11.  CUBA 1963 AND NORTH KOREA NOW
     by Leon V. Sigal, The Nautilus Institute, 14 November 2006

[Leon V. Sigal, is Director of the Northeast Cooperative Security 
Project at the Social Science Research Council in New York and author of 
"Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea". This is the 
introduction of the report, available at 
http://www.nautilus.org/fora/security/0696Sigal.html]

In response to North Korea's nuclear test, the Bush administration is 
now pursuing a two-track approach. On one track, it did what it needed 
to do to resume six-party talks. At an October 31 meeting hosted by 
China in Beijing, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill 
negotiated directly with his North Korean counterpart, Kim Gye Gwan. 
"They made very clear that these were not conditions, but they wanted to 
hear that we would address the issue of the financial measures in the 
context of the talks," Hill told reporters afterward. "And I said we 
would be prepared to create a mechanism, or working group and to address 
these financial issues."

President Bush that same day put the emphasis on the second track -- 
lining up a coalition of the willing to enforce UN sanctions by imposing 
a blockade on the North starting with nuclear, biological, chemical 
arms, and missiles, or what it calls the Proliferation Security 
Initiative: "We'll be sending teams to the region to work with our 
partners to make sure that the current United Nations Security Council 
resolution is enforced but also to make sure the talks are effective."

PSI has had no success in impeding weapons shipments so far, though one 
freighter carrying missiles for Yemen was boarded by Spain at US 
instigation in 2002. When the Yemenis correctly claimed it was a lawful 
transfer, however, the ship and its cargo were released.

Has there ever been a successful US interdiction of missile shipments? 
Yes, in the Cuban missile crisis of 1963. That showed how risky a 
blockade can be. It also showed that coercion alone did not succeed. It 
took diplomatic give-and-take to get the Soviet missiles withdrawn.

Similarly, sanctions alone are unlikely to bring about policy change or 
regime change in Pyongyang. Pyongyang is not about to collapse. Nor will 
it stop arming without quid pro quos from Washington.

Instead, given Pyongyang's penchant for playing tit-for-tat, retaliation 
is more likely. The North can shut down its Yongbyon reactor, unload the 
spent fuel and reprocess it to extract another bomb's worth of plutonium 
or more. In reaction to the comprehensive sanctions imposed by Japan, it 
could also test more missiles, possibly its new IRBM. A nuclear test is 
less likely for now because the North has to fix what went wrong with 
the first test.

If sanctions won't yield much benefit, they do carry serious risks. The 
risks are not so much in the sanctions themselves, but in the blockade 
to enforce them, as the Cuban missile crisis demonstrated.

Since even a blockade on military equipment and petroleum without UN 
authorization is an act of war, the United States called it a 
quarantine. Now the administration interprets UN resolution 1718 as 
authorizing interdiction of ships on the high seas. Extending the 
blockade of North Korea to luxury goods, as the administration wants to 
do, will only complicate that.

Concerned that the blockade pressure the Soviet Union to reconsider its 
missile deployments to Cuba without triggering a firefight or war, 
Defense Secretary Robert McNamara wanted to make sure how the Navy 
intended to stop and board Soviet ships. He went to the Navy flag plot, 
the inner sanctum in the Pentagon where only admirals are allowed, to 
confront CNO, Admiral George Anderson, on the rules of engagement. In 
response Anderson waved the navy manual in McNamara's face and said, 
"It's all in there." McNamara shot back, "I don't give a damn what John 
Paul Jones would have done. I want to know what you are going to do 
now." Anderson told the Secretary to go back where he belonged and let 
the Navy run the blockade.

McNamara stormed back to his office and called President Kennedy. They 
decided to establish, for the first time in US history, a direct line of 
communication from the White House Situation Room to the command ship in 
the blockade. That took time, and meanwhile a Soviet missile-carrying 
freighter was allowed to pass through the blockade to Cuba. Even worse, 
as McNamara learned only after the crisis, US submarines around the 
globe were forcing Soviet submarines to surface.

Nor did McNamara find out until many years later what US intelligence 
failed to ascertain -- that Soviet nuclear weapons were already in Cuba.

Given this unhappy history, it is essential that the United States share 
intelligence with Congress and its allies before interdicting any 
vessel, including what it is suspected of carrying and how it is armed, 
and set clear rules of engagement in advance. Under what circumstances 
can boarding parties use their weapons? Can ships or submarines fire 
across the bow of a North Korean vessel? Disable its rudder? Sink it? 
Attack Korean submarines patrolling in the vicinity?

The Cuban blockade was designed to pressure the Soviets to reverse 
course and stop shipping missiles to Cuba. To deal with the missiles 
already there President Kennedy threatened escalation, but he knew 
coercion alone would not work without giving Khrushchev a face-saving 
way out. So he had his brother Robert make a secret deal with the 
Soviets, pledging not to invade Cuba and telling them that US missiles 
based in Turkey would be removed.

Will President Bush give Kim Jong Il -- and himself -- a similar 
face-saving way out? He could start by urging banks that have frozen 
North Korea's hard currency accounts to release the proceeds of its 
legitimate trade and then engage in sustained diplomatic give-and take 
for a change.
*************************************************

End CanKor # 267

*************************************************

PLEASE NOTE: Until we are able to update the www.CanKor.ca website, 
readers are advised that this and previous issues of the CanKor Report 
may be found at http://www.nautilus.org/pipermail/cankor/.

To subscribe or unsubscribe, please go to the following web address: 
http://www.nautilus.org/mailman/listinfo/cankor.

CanKor is a reader-supported e-publication and website. We issue a 
receipt for all donations received. Contributions may be made in the 
following ways:

BY CREDIT CARD: Visit our website www.CanKor.ca, and click on the "Make 
a Donation" button. That will connect you to PayPal, a site with 
"military-strength encryption", where you will be able to pay in 
Canadian, US or Australian Dollars, as well as Euros, Pound Sterling and 
Yen.

BY CHEQUE: Please make cheques payable to "Weingartner Consulting" 
(NOT/not "CanKor", please) and mail to: Weingartner Consulting, 13 
Westview Dr., Callander, ON, Canada, P0H 1H0.

FOR INSTITUTIONAL SUBSCRIBERS: Please let us know if you wish to receive 
an invoice prior to sending us money.

CanKor is an electronic information service for readers interested in 
the issues of peace and security on the Korean peninsula, published by 
Weingartner Consulting. Views expressed on the CanKor website or weekly 
digest are those of the respective authors, and do not necessarily 
reflect the official policies or positions of CanKor or Weingartner 
Consulting. CanKor accepts no liability for inaccuracies, errors or 
omissions.  Copyright of all items listed or reprinted rests with the 
original publishers.  CanKor provides links to originals when available.
Editor: Erich Weingartner; Managing Editor: Miranda Weingartner; 
Research: Marion Current, Ilene Solomon, Danielle Goldfinger; Web 
developer: David Seguin. Our website (www.CanKor.ca) is hosted free of 
charge courtesy of Kaizen Denki Incorporated (http://www.kaizendenki.com).