| Submit your comments on this article |
| China-Japan-Koreas |
| New Korean crisis: Neither DC nor Tokyo can trust Seoul with intelligence |
| 2005-06-02 |
| From East Asia Intel, subscription req'd/ SEOUL — A senior Japanese official's comments about Washington's loss of confidence in the South Korean government has signaled a major shift in the traditional U.S. "trilateral cooperation" with Tokyo and Seoul on combined policy toward North Korea. South Korean officials responded with fury to remarks by Japan's Vice Foreign Minister Shotaro Yachi, that the United States no longer trusts South Korea. For that reason, Yachi told visiting members of South Korea's National Assembly, Japan is reluctant to provide South Korea with intelligence information on North Korea. Cause, meet effect. The SKors want to appease the Norks, Japan cuts off the teletype. Yachi poured oil on the flames with what was viewed here as a patronizing rejoinder when he said it was "regrettable if the remarks have invited a misunderstanding by causing an argument of various forms in South Korea." Yachi blamed publicity-hungry South Korean politicos for publicizing his comments out of context, saying he was "embarrassed by the fact that the comments, which were made in an informal exchange of views, have been made known externally." Finally, a Japanese foreign ministry official added to the controversy when Asahi Shimbun quoted him as saying, "If things like this happen, we will no longer be able to hold unofficial talks." South Korea's foreign ministry issued a flat rejection of Yachi's half-hearted "regret," stating: "Our government will not view the remarks as an individual issue, and will study the future direction of Korea-Japan relations by considering them comprehensively together with other remarks distorting the history." The problem was exacerbated when Seoul reportedly suggested postponing trilateral consultative talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons for an indefinite period. Nihon Keizai Shimbun, Japan's financial newspaper, said Japan is eager for the talks, scheduled to resume in June. Seoul, however, is cold-shouldering Japan while smoldering over Yachi's remarks. The talks were last held in Seoul on Feb. 26. Sources in South Korea have long said the United States is holding back on critical intelligence material for fear leftists in South Korea's government would share it with radical politicians and professors having ties to North Korea. A justifiable fear, after the way Pres. Roh has been acting. Although U.S. officials have steadfastly denied any lack of cooperation, the sense of unwillingness to let South Korean officials in on some of Washington's best-kept secrets about North Korea has been growing ever since Kim Dae-Jung flew to Pyongyang for the first and only inter-Korean summit on June 15, 2000. The South Korean government, cooperating with North Korea on a huge fifth anniversary celebration next month, reportedly wants to wait until the flurry of visits is over before participating in trilateral talks, the brainchild of U.S. diplomacy. Roh has sh*t in his messkit, already. So deep is the impasse that South Korea's Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min-Soon, chief negotiator for South Korea in talks with the North, has let it be known he has no intention of meeting Kenichiro Sasae, Japan's chief negotiator on North Korea, even though they will both be in Washington this week. Not much to say after the trust is lost. So Christopher Hill, assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific and chief U.S. negotiator on North Korea, has to hold hands separately with each of them to try to get the trilateral process going again. Trilateral is dead. Bilateral is alive. Yet another factor delaying a trilateral meeting is the upcoming summit between President Roh Moo-Hyun and President Bush. Roh flies to Washington on June 9 and meets Bush at the White House the next day for the specific purpose, according to sources here, of trying to get Washington and Seoul on the same wavelength when it comes to dealing with North Korea. To get on the same wavelength, someone will have to get 180 deg out of phase. I do not see President Bush doing an about face, especially after the failure of Clinton's carrot deal. Roh has set his agenda, so he is not going to change. Nothing will happen. The Love is gone. Diplomatic sources believe the U.S. and South Korea have actually begun to engineer a grand compromise — the U.S. is no longer so hard-line vis-à-vis North Korea, and South Korea pays at least lip service to U.S. demands for North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program. IMHO this is BS speculation based on hope. But Bush and Roh are expected to be far apart when it comes to deciding what to do if North Korea continues to stonewall on the next round of talks. South Korea opposes taking the issue to the United Nations Security Council for debate on sanctions. China and Russia — permanent members of the Security Council along with France, Britain and the U.S. — are expected to oppose the idea as well. The UNSC, whatever.....nothing will happen there anyway. Under these circumstances, diplomatic sources say, neither the U.S. nor Japan is going to provide South Korea with the most sensitive intelligence material on North Korea. THAT is the bottom line. [*snip*] |
| Posted by:Alaska Paul |
| #15 but bok choy prises mite go up. :( |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2005-06-02 23:40 |
| #14 ZF: Europeans made their bed and complained when they had to lie in it. Just as the South Koreans will when we abandon them. I can take the heat. Better that Korea be unified than a single additional GI die for ROK. Now that would be a insult to the memories of the GI's who died during the Korean War, that we made the mistake of sending additional troops to die for what had become an enemy country. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-06-02 23:06 |
| #13 SH: It is tempting to write-off whole continents like Africa and South America, but that type of thinking left the American democracy very lonely in 1940. Actually, it's *always* very lonely and usually, the only way you can get other countries to join in is if they are already under attack. Do you sincerely think that if the US had attacked Japan and Germany by its lonesome, that anyone would have joined us? The only major Allied combatants in WWII not in danger of being overrun were the US and Canada. Everyone else fought because they had to. Germany was bogged down big time in the Soviet Union at the time of Pearl Harbor. We should have let them knock the stuffing out of each other instead of putting our thumb on the scale in the Soviet Union's favor. Germany declares war on Uncle Sam and we promptly devote 3/4 of our war effort against a country that never attacked us? Who cares about a declaration of war? Bin Laden declared war on us way before 9/11. Did we invade the country that granted him sanctuary? No - we refused to let them extradite him on grounds that we had nothing to charge him with. We could have smacked the Japanese big-time for Pearl Harbor and then just backed off. The Philippines was scheduled to be given its independence, anyway, so that was no big loss. All this stuff about WWII being due to American indifference is crap. Europeans made their bed and complained when they had to lie in it. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2005-06-02 23:03 |
| #12 Anyone with a sense of history knows that bilateral talks is a non-starter. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2005-06-02 22:59 |
#11
Yes, the Japanese were horrible in the past, but if the South Koreans want to use that as an excuse to pretend the Japanese are horrible now and the North Korean government OK because at least they're the same ethnicity as the people they're forcibly starving, then they are extremely blind. They're also likely to wind up with precisely the sort of Japanese government they're pretending exists now. | |
| Posted by: Phil Fraering 2005-06-02 21:54 |
| #10 I see opportunities to put the "poofie!" back in Kim Jong Il's hair. When you know your info's being fed to the enemy, you don't stop sending, you adjust accordingly. Let KJI know taht his closest competent advisors are planning a coup...watch the fun!....pass the popcorn! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-06-02 21:50 |
| #9 TT, I agree with your sunk cost statement, but I wouldn't ever write-off a free people until the point at which that people no longer value freedom above the inconveneince and risk of protecting that freedom. It is tempting to write-off whole continents like Africa and South America, but that type of thinking left the American democracy very lonely in 1940. AP, I think that we should share intelligence with SK, carefully. My Commerce Dept scenario was a vague illustration that our own government can't be painted with a broad brush any more than the SK can. I agree with what the Japanese gentleman told the Roh staffer in confidence who, predictably, went for the Stephanopolous option. The historical aspect of Sino-Japanese-Russo-Korean relations ought to make the odds of sucess for these six-party talks a pretty steeply against. I don't know what better option is available, though. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2005-06-02 21:46 |
| #8 Super Hose, I understand your POV and mostly share it. But we also need to realize that sunk costs are sunk .... if we can still gain benefit from the sacrifice of so many brave American troops, we should do so. But if not, we do them no honor by remaining in a situation that is fruitless ... if fruitless it should prove to be. I agree WRT the Japanese treatment of Koreans in WWII. Had a team of programmers once that included a female Korean engineer, a Japanese guy and a Taiwanese guy. All native born in those countries. It was an eye opener .... |
| Posted by: too true 2005-06-02 20:50 |
| #7 Super Hose has good points. However, it is prudent to withold sensitive intelligence at this time. We may have great relationships with the Korean military people, but SKor government people have their agenda. I do hope that SKor comes around. Their actions are contributing to propping up Kimmies regime, and that is not right. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2005-06-02 20:50 |
| #6 They don't know, which is exactly the problem. The Norks are obviously insane and pretty close to foaming at the mouth, but the Japanese treated the Koreans like animals, at best, in WWII. That's not forgotten, by a long shot. Devil, or deep blue sea? Lady or Tiger?... |
| Posted by: mojo 2005-06-02 20:44 |
| #5 Although Roh is not an ally, the U.S. has friends in South Korea. Our nation has paid a blood price to keep a portion of the Korean people off a subsistence diet of bark and grass. It is abhorrent to think of righting off the value of that sacrifice within hours of celebrating Memorial Day, just because there resides in South Korean universities and in one of its political parties the same collection of boneheads that resides in our own universities and one of our political parties. Not sharing sensitive intelligence with the Koreans is an excellent idea. Assume that Roh will place any military technological secrets shared under the purveiw of his Commerce Department to facilitate transfer to the PRC. Hopefully the majority of South Koreans will collectively retain the memory that they paid a several million bodybag downpayment on this whole freedom idea, themselves. If a half century is enough for their majority have forgotten what it is like to be ruled by someone like Kim, then it looks like they will be sampling ranch dressing on Bermuda. Nothing we say or do will help, It would be better if Kim didn't receive Aegis technology along with his additional loyal minions. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2005-06-02 20:39 |
| #4 Did it ever occur to the SKors that they will someday have to choose between the japs and the Nkors? What do they want,exactly? |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2005-06-02 20:28 |
| #3 It's not an anti-US generation in power, it's an anti-US (or, rather, pro-Communist) faction. The opposition is rather less appeasement-oriented. Unfortunately, the next generation is significantly more anti-US. |
| Posted by: someone 2005-06-02 20:18 |
| #2 OK, denizens of the Burg. I'm not the diplomatic type, so clue me in .... how MUCH do we want or need to stay in SORK in the short run? Geopolitical need? Need to have allies feel we won't just bolt? Military need? And what will signal our readiness to get the hell out and let the Koreans and Chinese deal with the collapsing mess? Or am I missing the nuances here? (quite likely) Is there any hope that the anti-US generation in power will be followed by a more pro-US faction? |
| Posted by: too true 2005-06-02 19:27 |
| #1 dissed |
| Posted by: 2b 2005-06-02 19:16 |