VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUEHUL #0156/01 0330814
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 020814Z FEB 09
FM AMEMBASSY SEOUL
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3086
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 8060
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHINGTON DC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC//DDI/OEA//
RHHMUNA/USCINCPAC HONOLULU HI//FPA//
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC//DB-Z//

UNCLAS SEOUL 000156 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EAP/K, EAP/PD, INR/EAP/K AND INR/IL/P 
TREASURY FOR OASIA/WINGLE 
USDOC FOR 4430/IEP/OPB/EAP/WGOLICKE 
STATE PASS USDA ELECTRONICALLY FOR FAS/ITP 
STATE PASS DOL/ILAB SUDHA HALEY 
STATE PASS USTR FOR IVES/WEISEL 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KPAO PGOV PREL MARR ECON KS US
SUBJECT: PRESS BULLETIN - February 2, 2009 
 
Opinions/Editorials 
 
¶1. The North's Provocations 
(JoongAng Ilbo, January 31, 2009, Page 26) 
¶2. Inter-Korean Relations Cannot Be Resolved with a Strategy of 
Waiting 
(Hankyoreh Shinmun, January 31, 2009, Page 23) 
¶3. N. Korea Must Stop Its Pointless Threats 
(Chosun Ilbo, January 31, 2009, Page 27) 
¶4. It Would be Difficult for North Korea to Hold Direct Talks with 
U.S. If It Continues Its Human Rights Abuses 
(Dong-a Ilbo, February 2, 2009, Page 31) 
¶5. Winning over Obama 
(JoongAng Ilbo, February 2, 2009, Page 31) 
 
 
Features 
 
¶6. Why Is North Korea So Fretful? 
(JoongAng Ilbo, February 2, 2009, Page 2) 
 
 
Top Headlines 
 
Chosun Ilbo 
"Survival of the Fittest:" ROK's Leading Industries, Including 
Semiconductors and Shipbuilding, Increasing Global Market Shares, 
with Global Rivals Faltering Amid Economic Crisis 
 
JoongAng Ilbo 
ROKG's Efforts to Front-load Budget Spending in First Half 
of This Year Moving at a Snail's Pace 
 
Dong-a Ilbo 
ROK Fast Becoming a Multicultural Society; Policies Needed 
to Support Multicultural Communities 
 
Hankook Ilbo 
No Economic Recovery Expected Until Late 2009 or 2010 
 
Hankyoreh Shinmun 
Korea University Found to Have Ranked High Schools 
for Special Admissions for 2009 
 
Segye Ilbo, Seoul Shinmun 
Number of Horrific Psychopathic Crimes on the Rise; It is Time for 
Society to Come Forward to Prevent Such Crimes 
 
 
Domestic Developments 
 
¶1. According to an ROKG source, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton 
will visit the ROK in the middle of this month. The source was 
quoted as saying: "The U.S. State Department has told Seoul that 
Secretary Clinton will visit the ROK as part of her first world 
tour. We understand that she will also visit Japan and China in 
addition to the ROK." (Chosun) 
 
¶2. The ROK Defense Ministry said yesterday that there have been no 
unusual moves by North Korea since it threatened on Jan. 30 to scrap 
all political and military accords with the ROK, including one 
related to the Northern Limit Line (NLL) in the West Sea, the de 
facto sea border between the two Koreas. (JoongAng) 
 
¶3. In a related development, Deputy State Department Spokesman 
Robert Wood said in a Jan. 30 regular briefing: "North Korea's 
belligerent rhetoric toward the ROK is distinctly unhelpful." 
(Hankyoreh, Segye) 
 
¶4. According to Radio Free Asia (RFA), the State Department has 
decided to directly aid ROK human rights groups for North Korea by 
providing two ROK groups with $1 million each. This development 
indicates that the Obama Administration places high value on 
improving North Korea's human rights situation. (JoongAng) 
 
 
International News 
¶1. According to White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs, President Barack 
Obama, in a Jan. 30 telephone conversation with Chinese President Hu 
Jintao, reaffirmed the importance of denuclearizing the Korean 
Peninsula. This is President Obama's first remark on North Korea 
since taking office. (Chosun) 
 
 
Media Analysis 
 
North Korea 
North Korea's Jan. 30 threat to scrap all political and military 
accords with the ROK, including one related to a western sea border, 
called the Northern Limit Line (NLL), received wide coverage today 
and over the weekend.  The ROK Defense Ministry was widely quoted as 
expressing deep regret over Pyongyang's threat, while vowing to 
respond resolutely to any intrusion.  Deputy State Department 
Spokesman Robert Wood was also quoted as saying in a Jan. 30 regular 
briefing: "North Korea's belligerent rhetoric toward the ROK is 
distinctly unhelpful." 
 
Most of the ROK media viewed this latest North Korean threat as 
indicating that North Korea is now heightening the level of threats 
from non-military measures, such as expelling ROK officials and 
entrepreneurs from the North, to the military sphere, and the media 
expressed concern about a possible armed conflict between the two 
Koreas.  Conservative Chosun Ilbo commented that Pyongyang might be 
aiming to consolidate its grip on power ahead of leader Kim 
Jong-il's 67th anniversary.   Right-of-center JoongAng Ilbo 
editorialized on Jan. 31: "It is easy to guess North Korea's 
intentions.  It wants to increase tension, to pressure the ROK to 
change its North Korea policy and to justify hard-line measures it 
plans to take.  The North may also attempt to cause divisions in our 
society or draw the attention of the U.S. since a new administration 
has taken office.  This is truly regretful.  No good can come from 
military clashes, whether large-scale or small.  It is high time for 
Seoul to make serious efforts to prepare conditions that are 
conducive to dialogue.  An obstinate partner will not come to the 
negotiation table just because it was urged to do so."  JoongAng's 
Senior Journalist Kim Young-hie also opined today: "North Korea 
seems to be making a miscalculation that steps like issuing a series 
of provocative statements would turn the ROK's North Korea policy 
back to the level of the 'Sunshine Policy' (of engagement with North 
Korea.)  However, the Lee Myung-bak Administration, backed by an 
absolute majority of conservative voters, will never yield to 
pressure from Pyongyang and return to a North Korea policy of ten 
years ago.  What serves the North's national interests is for the 
North to resume dialogue with the ROK and to accept the U.S.'s calls 
for nuclear verification.  Left-leaning Hankyoreh Shinmun asserted 
in an editorial: "The ROKG is trying hard to show a calm attitude, 
faced with the North Korean threat.  It is a policy of standing by 
and ignoring things, expecting that the weaker North will eventually 
submit first.  There is also a deep-seated belief that it is no big 
deal if inter-Korean relations deteriorate further as long as 
cooperation between the ROK and the U.S. remains strong.  This is 
the wrong attitude.  Neither ROK-U.S. relations nor North Korea-U.S. 
relations can substitute for inter-Korean ties.  Furthermore, as 
could be seen in the Bush Administration's early policy toward North 
Korea, a policy of standing by and ignoring (North Korea) is just 
another name for a policy of antagonism." 
 
Conservative Chosun Ilbo today gave attention to press remarks by 
White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs, in which he said that President 
Barack Obama, in a Jan. 30 telephone conversation with Chinese 
President Hu Jintao, reaffirmed the importance of denuclearizing the 
Korean Peninsula. 
 
Right-of-center JoongAng Ilbo, meanwhile, gave attention to a Jan. 
30 Radio Free Asia (RFA) report saying that the State Department has 
decided to directly aid ROK human rights groups for North Korea by 
providing two ROK groups with $1 million each. JoongAng commented 
that this indicates that the Obama Administration places high value 
on improving North Korea's human rights situation.  In a related 
development, conservative Dong-a Ilbo's editorial today noted Deputy 
State Department Spokesman Robert Wood's Jan. 29 press remarks that 
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has expressed considerable 
concern over the human rights situation in Pyongyang, and commented: 
"The Obama Administration should make it clearer to North Korea that 
there will be no improvement in relations with North Korea until the 
communist state fundamentally changes its positions on the nuclear 
and human rights issues." 
 
 
Opinions/Editorials 
 
The North's Provocations 
(JoongAng Ilbo, January 31, 2009, Page 26) 
 
Yesterday, North Korea took measures that will only increase tension 
between South and North Korea. 
 
Pyongyang announced it would nullify all existing agreements aimed 
at resolving inter-Korean political and military confrontations, and 
abrogated all clauses related to the Northern Limit Line, the two 
Koreas' border on the Yellow Sea. 
 
The North justified its decision by saying there is no reason for 
only North Korea to be bound by agreements while the South continues 
politics of confrontation. 
 
North Korea makes impossible demands. 
 
North Korea has never faithfully carried out any agreements with 
South Korea, except those that would benefit the North. 
Nevertheless, Pyongyang lays the blame with our government.  It's 
easy to guess the North's intention.  It wants to increase tension, 
pressure the South and justify hard-line measures leading to 
provocations. 
 
It may also attempt to cause divisions in our society or draw the 
attention of the United States now under control of a new 
administration. 
 
This is truly regretful.  Does North Korea truly believe that 
provocations can resolve inter-Korean issues?  Does it plan to 
undertake all conceivable measures to see if South Korea will give 
in?  Pyongyang's attitude makes inter-Korean issues look like a 
farce within the international society. 
 
We urge the North to take a more serious and sincere attitude toward 
inter-Korean issues.  Whether it occurs in quarrel or battle, 
confrontation never resolves problems.  War and confrontation are 
the very reasons for South and North division.  There is no other 
way besides dialogue to resolve issues.  Only when we engage in 
dialogue can we hope to improve inter-Korean relations. 
 
We have a few words for our own government as well.  North Korea has 
been pushed into a corner and therefore has become obstinate.  Just 
as it has done for the past year, the North will only increase its 
pressure on us.  There is no guarantee that it won't close the 
Kaesong Industrial Complex. 
 
No good can come from military clashes, whether large-scale or 
small.  A responsible administration will not neglect inter-Korean 
relations and allow them to get worse, all the while stating that it 
will teach the North a lesson not to keep asking for the impossible. 
 
 
An obstinate partner will not come to the negotiation table just 
because it was urged to do so. 
 
Because South Korea is better off, we must be careful not give the 
impression that we push through what we want using power.  It is 
important to make serious efforts towards creating an environment 
conducive to dialogue. 
 
* This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version. 
 
 
Inter-Korean Relations Cannot Be Resolved with a Strategy of Waiting 
 
(Hankyoreh Shinmun, January 31, 2009, Page 23) 
 
Inter-Korean relations have continuously deteriorated since the Lee 
Myung-bak Administration took office, and they are now facing a new 
hurdle.  The Committee for Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland 
statement released by North Korea yesterday is at a different level 
from previous measures.  They declared a complete invalidation of 
all agreements made so far to reduce the political and military 
standoff between the two Koreas and of provisions regarding the 
Northern Limit Line in the West Sea.  If this is interpreted as 
written, we are returning to a Cold War era standoff situation where 
a military conflict could erupt at any moment over the NLL.  The 
CPRF statement says that "the indiscriminate anti-North Korea 
confrontational maneuvers by the South's conservative authorities" 
have "driven inter-Korean relations to the worst possible state, one 
close to war."  But the statement itself harms inter-Korean 
relations. 
 
This aggressive action by the North is regrettable.  The agreements 
made thus far between South and North are not things that can be 
done away with through a statement of invalidation by either side, 
and as the agreements are disregarded, the damage to both sides 
inevitably becomes greater.  It's also unpleasant to see the 
statement repeatedly using such coarse expressions as "the traitor 
Lee Myung-bak." 
 
The North Korean statement had several effects in mind.  First, we 
see an intention to inform the new U.S. administration of the 
seriousness of the Korean Peninsula issue, leading to early direct 
negotiations, and achieve solidarity internally.  Of course, the 
biggest goal is to apply pressure so that Seoul changes its policy 
toward North Korea. Pyongyang has consistently demanded respect for 
and sincere adherence to the October 4 and June 15 joint statements, 
and this statement, too, is an extension of that.  Thus, the core of 
the North's claim is that "since the South is not adhering to the 
two statements, we are not going to follow other agreements 
either." 
 
The South Korean government is trying hard to show an unperturbed 
face with regard to this statement.  It's a policy of standing by 
and ignoring things, expecting the weaker North ultimately to submit 
first.  There is also a deep-seated belief that it is no big deal if 
inter-Korean relations deteriorate further as long as cooperation 
between South Korea and the United States remains strong.  This is 
the wrong attitude.  Neither South Korea-U.S. relations nor North 
Korea-U.S. relations can substitute for inter-Korean relations. 
Also, as could be seen in the George W. Bush Administration's early 
policy toward the North, a policy of standing by and ignoring 
(matters) is just another name for a policy of antagonism. 
 
The key to resolving the situation is in the government's 
determination toward the October 4 and June 15 statements.  Even if 
there were no pressure from the North, the two statements should be 
adhered to properly, and the government's policy toward North Korea 
should be changed.  The government's contradictory attitude, 
speaking of inter-Korean mutual benefits and common prosperity while 
in fact pursuing confrontation and letting the situation worsen, 
must cease.  Simply waiting without any other plan is the worst 
possible strategy. 
 
* This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version. 
 
 
¶N. Korea Must Stop Its Pointless Threats 
(Chosun Ilbo, January 31, 2009, Page 27) 
 
North Korea's Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the 
Fatherland in a statement on Friday declared "all agreements related 
to the dissolution of inter-Korean political and military 
confrontations nullified" and that "the basic inter-Korean agreement 
and the provisions concerning the maritime military demarcation line 
contained in an appendix to the agreement are all scrapped."  The 
North, the statement said, will not observe agreements concerning 
"recognition and respect of the other's system," "non-interference 
in the other's domestic affairs," "prohibition of slander and 
defamation," "prohibition of acts destroying or overthrowing the 
other party" and "prevention of military confrontations," provided 
for in the July 4, 1972 Joint Statement, the 1992 Basic Agreement 
between North and South Korea and the Oct. 4, 2007 Summit 
Declaration. This is an unacceptable attempt to bully the South into 
submission. 
 
North Korea has repeatedly raised concerns over the Northern Limit 
Line, the de facto sea border between the two Koreas.  On Jan. 17, a 
spokesman for the North Korean People's Army, appearing on 
television in uniform for the first time in 10 years, said it will 
only recognize the maritime military demarcation line the North 
unilaterally drew up.  The Committee for the Peaceful Reunification 
of the Fatherland chimed in the same day and declared the NLL 
nullified.  North Korean forces have habitually violated the NLL, 
causing two naval clashes in June 1999 and June 2002.  Between 
October and December last year, North Korean offensives were 
concentrated on inter-Korean projects like the joint Kaesong 
Industrial Complex.  But as our government has declined to concede, 
the North has shifted the direction toward the NLL. 
 
If the North violates the NLL or stages military demonstrations on 
the maritime border, we could see more military skirmishes like the 
first and second Yeonpyeong naval clashes.  A Defense Ministry 
spokesman said North Korean incursions will be dealt with "firmly." 
North Korea must realize that the NLL is an inviolable line.  The 
South must be thoroughly prepared, but preventive diplomacy is also 
needed.  We should prevent an increased security risk in this 
economic crisis. 
 
The North is keen on dialogue with the new U.S. Administration. 
Leader Kim Jong-il in a personal letter to Chinese President Hu 
Jintao on Jan. 23 said that he wants "no tension on the Korean 
Peninsula."  But a week later he is back to brinkmanship tactics. 
The U.S. and China must tell Pyongyang clearly that it cannot hope 
to profit from military provocations or threats against the South. 
And Seoul should map out better and more diverse ways of persuading 
the North to accept our offer of dialogue. 
 
* This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version. 
 
 
It Would be Difficult for North Korea to Hold Direct Talks with U.S. 
If It Continues Its Human Rights Abuses 
(Dong-a Ilbo, February 2, 2009, Page 31) 
 
Acting State Department Spokesperson Robert Wood said on January 29 
that U.S Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is deeply concerned 
about North Korean human rights abuses.  He emphasized that the 
North Korean human rights issue is evidently part of an overall 
review process for steering the ties between the U.S. and Pyongyang. 
 For now, North Korea may be exhilarated by the end of the Bush 
Administration and the emergence of President Barack Obama.  But 
through this short remark about North Korean human rights abuses, 
the Obama administration clearly hints that the N.K is misguided. 
 
With President Obama taking office, North Korea seems to hope to 
improve the nuclear negotiations and the U.S and North Korean 
relations through direct talks with the U.S.  On January 30, the 
North's Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea announced 
North Korea's unilateral renouncement on the agreement, saying that 
North Korea will invalidate all agreements regarding resolution of 
political and military confrontations.  This announcement apparently 
is related to such expectation from North Korea.  However, this is a 
threat to the Lee Myung-Bak government and an outdated ploy aimed at 
holding direct talks with the U.S while bypassing the ROK. 
 
The North Korean human rights record is the worst even among 
socialist countries of the world.  A great number of North Koreans 
are escaping from their country at the risk of their lives due to 
the tyranny of the Kim Jung-Il regime and starvation.  Political 
detention camps for anti-government activists in North Korea are a 
living hell where famine, terror, violence, torture and deaths are 
common.  Even if the U.S. and South Korean governments engage in a 
dialogue with North Korea, both governments should clarify that they 
would not tolerate North Korea's human rights violations. This would 
prevent the ROK and U.S from being stigmatized as a sinner in 
history. 
 
North Korea has been unleashing a barrage of threats against the ROK 
around the inauguration period of the Obama Administration.  But the 
ROK and U.S governments should not be swayed by this North Korean 
gambit.  It is ridiculous to expect North Korea to make changes 
while tolerating absurdity and its arbitrary denunciation of the 
agreement.  The Obama Administration should enlighten North Korea 
more clearly that Pyongyang would not see any improvement in 
relations with the U.S until it makes radical changes in the nuclear 
and human rights issues. 
 
 
Winning over Obama 
(JoongAng Ilbo, February 2, 2009, Page 31) 
 
By Son Ki-sup, a professor of diplomacy at the Pusan University of 
Foreign Studies 
 
The Obama Administration sees Japan as an ally in the same class as 
NATO members.  But it only sees Korea as a "partner." 
 
The election of an African-American to the presidency of the United 
States surprised the world to the extent that it is not just 
considered a change of administration, but a change in the course of 
history.  Since his inauguration, President Obama has been 
displaying dedication to unity and understanding to a degree that 
far exceeds our expectations, embracing his foes and his friends at 
the same time. 
 
The same may be said of the new administration's foreign policy. 
Unlike his predecessor, Obama values international cooperation above 
all else, one that is based on the foundation of responsible 
sovereignty and smart power.  In this regard, there is a high 
possibility that the United States will seek more cooperation from 
its allies, such as Korea and Japan. 
 
The Japanese government has long been afraid of diplomatic shock 
waves passing through Washington.  What Tokyo fears most is a sudden 
dramatic improvement in Sino-American relations. 
 
The "Nixon shock" in 1972 and the "Clinton shock" in 1998, with 
American presidents suddenly announcing visits to China, are prime 
examples. 
 
As such, the Japanese government seems to now be fidgeting, fearing 
that the new American administration may bring an "Obama shock." 
 
But such a shock seems to be less of a possibility if we take a 
closer look at the main characteristics of Obama's choices of 
diplomatic personnel, as well as his administration's foreign policy 
towards Japan. 
 
Influential figures with a deep knowledge of Japan have been called 
on to fill the top East Asia foreign policy positions on Obama's 
diplomatic team. 
 
Joseph Nye, a Harvard professor and former assistant defense 
secretary, was designated as the next ambassador to Japan, and Kurt 
Campbell, a policy expert and distinguished authority on Japan, was 
appointed U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and 
Pacific Affairs.  Nye played a pivotal role in redefining and 
strengthening the U.S.-Japan alliance by releasing the Nye Report in 
the '90s and the Armitage Report in the 2000s.  He is also an 
advocate of smart power, insisting that the U.S.-Japan alliance 
should not depend on military strength, but should use economics and 
culture for diplomatic means.  U.S.-Japan relations are united in a 
willingness to draw on smart power. 
 
America has clarified its position that it will place a high value 
on its alliance with Japan.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said 
at her confirmation hearing at the Senate Foreign Relations 
Committee that the U.S.-Japan alliance will provide a foundation 
that can contribute to peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific 
region. 
 
The tasks facing America are enormous: economic recovery, an end to 
the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, prevention of terrorism and 
weapons proliferation, and putting a stop to global warming.  The 
global economic behemoth that is Japan is an indispensable ally in 
achieving these goals. 
 
However, as the supremacy of the United States is rapidly weakening, 
there may be perpetual friction between the two nations.  The Obama 
Administration will call on Japan to strengthen its role in official 
development assistance and peacekeeping operations.  In particular, 
Washington is looking for an increased Japanese contribution to the 
war in Afghanistan. 
 
If Japan takes a passive stance toward America's demands, it will 
naturally lead to a regression in the relationship between the two 
countries. 
 
Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party holds the key.  Following 
the short-lived Abe and Fukuda Administrations, the current Aso 
cabinet is also on the verge of collapse. 
 
The Liberal Democratic Party faces a growing likelihood that it will 
lose the coming election, and the opposition Democratic Party led by 
Ichiro Ozawa will most likely win. 
 
However, regardless of a switchover of political regimes, the 
U.S.-Japan alliance will remain unchanged in Japanese diplomacy.  We 
need to pay attention to the fact that an Ozawa Democratic Party 
alliance would also fall within the field of Obama's vision for 
implementing smart power diplomacy in East Asia. 
 
The Obama Administration has clearly declared that Japan is an ally 
in the same class as members of the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization. 
 
Meanwhile, it only sees Korea as a "partner." 
 
Under the Obama Administration which sets a higher value on Japan 
and China, U.S.-Korea relations may be demoted to a lower rank. 
 
To prevent this, we should strive to foster closer ties with the 
United States to ensure that our strategic alliance with the United 
States will be elevated to a security and value-oriented alliance 
that guarantees peace and prosperity in East Asia.  To this end, we 
can first propose providing assistance to the U.S. efforts in 
Afghanistan. 
 
* We have compared the English version on the website with the 
Korean version and added the last sentence to make them identical. 
 
 
Features 
 
Why Is North Korea So Fretful? 
(JoongAng Ilbo, February 2, 2009, Page 2) 
 
By Senior Journalist Kim Young-hie 
 
News Analysis 
 
When it seems that you are blocked in every direction and things do 
not go as planned, you feel a sense of being under siege.  In this 
case, you usually vent your feelings toward the people closest you. 
It could be your family or friends.  When you make someone a 
scapegoat for your misfortunes, you can breathe a sigh of relief. 
If you are lucky, the weak-minded could even appease you with 
material compensation.  The North Korean leadership appears to have 
a collective sense of being under siege. 
 
Neither surprising nor unexpected was a January 30 statement from 
the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea that all the 
agreed-upon points concerning the issue of putting an end to the 
political and military confrontation between the North and the South 
will be nullified.  On January 17, the North Korean military already 
declared an all-out confrontational posture against the ROK.  While 
we were wondering what step North Korea would take next, the 
statement came.  This means that North Korea will no longer abide by 
the agreements reached in the 1990s and 2000s, under which the two 
Koreas stopped denouncing each other and recognized the Northern 
Limit Line (NLL) as the western sea border, but will continue to 
provoke the ROK at will.  This is manifestation of its anxiety. 
 
There must be reasons for North Korea's irritation and frustration. 
First, North Korea was infuriated with the sending of anti-Pyongyang 
propaganda leaflets across the border by civic groups, the ROKG's 
co-sponsoring of a UN resolution on North Korean human rights, 
President Lee Myung-bak's statement on November 16 that the ultimate 
goal of the South is reunification under a free democratic system, 
and the National Intelligence Service's leakage of its intelligence 
on the health of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.  Second, Pyongyang 
was disappointed at the prospect that the Obama Administration may 
not give priority to the issues pertaining to North Korea.  North 
Korea had been encouraged by President Obama's indication of 
high-level talks, including a summit, between Washington and 
Pyongyang, on his campaign trail.  However, North Korea's 
expectations were not realized when the North Korean nuclear issue 
was pushed to the back burner due to the financial crisis and 
Israel's invasion of Gaza. Adding to this was the speculation about 
the decline of North Korean leader Kim's health. 
 
North Korea needs to hold the U.S.'s attention.  When the 
denuclearization talks continue, North Korea expects that heavy fuel 
oil and food will flow into the country, and Pyongyang anticipates 
normalization of ties with the U.S. and the ensuing political and 
economic benefits.  The North Koreans are accustomed to an absolute 
decision by its head of state.  Therefore, they believe that every 
foreign policy is determined and implemented only by the White 
House.  They do not understand the sense of autonomy which will be 
exercised by the Clinton-led Department of State.  When confirmation 
hearings for officials down to the level of Assistant Secretary are 
completed by mid-March, the Clinton-led foreign policy team will 
clarify the position of the new USG toward the North Korean nuclear 
standoff, an issue that President Obama cannot afford to pay 
attention to.  North Korea's disappointment and anxiousness is too 
hasty. 
 
North Korea seems to be making a miscalculation that steps like 
issuing a series of provocative statements and suspending the 
tourism project at Kaesong and train services between Seoul and 
Shinuiju would revert the ROK's North Korea policy back to the level 
of the Sunshine Policy.  The North does not seem to grasp the ROK's 
political situation at all.   The Lee Myung-bak Administration was 
born out of complaints about the liberal and conservative 
inclinations of the Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun Administrations. 
Although North Korea may miss the days of the two previous 
administrations, the Lee Myung-bak Administration, backed by an 
absolute majority of conservative voters, will never yield to 
pressure from Pyongyang and return to the North Korea policy of ten 
years ago.  If North Korea is to bypass the South to reach the U.S., 
it must be because the North does not know that the ROK and the U.S. 
share values in their alliance.  What serves the North's national 
interests are the following two points: resuming dialogue with the 
ROK and accepting the U.S.'s calls for nuclear verification. 
 
 
Stephens 
1