VZCZCXRO8559
OO RUEHGH
DE RUEHUL #0941/01 1660704
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 150704Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY SEOUL
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 4682
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC 8713
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//
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW 9866
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 6075
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 6165
RUEHGH/AMCONSUL SHANGHAI 0851
RUEHSH/AMCONSUL SHENYANG 4562
RUEHIN/AIT TAIPEI 3542
RUEHGP/AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 6728
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 1100
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 2436
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 1510
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 2119

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 13 SEOUL 000941 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL PGOV MARR ECON KPAO KS US
SUBJECT: SEOUL - PRESS BULLETIN; June 15, 2009 
 
TOP HEADLINES 
------------- 
 
Chosun Ilbo, Dong-a Ilbo, Hankook Ilbo, Segye Ilbo, All TVs 
North Korea Admits to Running Uranium Enrichment Program after 
Denying It for Past Seven Years 
 
JoongAng Ilbo 
ROK and U.S. Intelligence Officials Beef up Surveillance 
of 11 Sites for Possible North Korean Nuke Test 
 
Hankyoreh Shinmun 
Ssangyong Motor's "Partial" Layoff 
Incites Conflict among Laborers 
 
Seoul Shinmun 
U.S. to Strongly Enforce UN Sanctions against North Korea 
 
 
 
DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS 
--------------------- 
 
 
President Lee Myung-bak called for five-way talks on North Korea's 
nuclear program, saying in a June 13 interview with The Wall Street 
Journal, "I think it is right now very important for the remaining 
five countries-excluding North Korea-to come to an agreement on the 
way forward." (All) However, the Hankyoreh noted that the 
possibility of five-way talks taking place is slim and President 
Lee's proposal for the talks could give Pyongyang the impression 
that the ROK is taking the lead in imposing a blockade on the North. 
(Hankyoreh) 
 
President Lee will leave for Washington today to discuss the North 
Korean nuclear issue and the FTA with U.S. President Obama at the 
June 16 summit. (All) A Blue House official said, "During the 
summit, the two leaders will reaffirm 'watertight' cooperation on 
the North Korean nuclear issue." (JoongAng) 
 
ROK and U.S. intelligence officials have ratcheted up their 
monitoring of 11 underground facilities in North Korea after reports 
of a third possible North Korean nuclear test. (JoogngAng, Hankook, 
Segye) According to an ROKG source, the new nuclear test could be 
carried out in a northern part of North Korea, such as Geumchang-ri 
in North Pyeongan and Yeongdeok in South Pyeongan.  (JoongAng) 
 
Song Min-soon, an opposition Democratic Party lawmaker who served as 
Foreign Minister during the Roh Moo-hyun administration, expressed 
concern about a move to create a trilateral consultative body 
between the U.S., China and Japan and said that President Lee should 
clearly object to it during the upcoming summit with the U.S. 
(Seoul) 
 
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said Saturday that an ROK 
woman and eight other foreigners appear to have been abducted by a 
group of insurgents in Yemen. (All) 
 
 
INTERNATIONAL NEWS 
------------------ 
 
In response to the UNSC's latest resolution against its nuclear 
test, North Korea declared in its Foreign Ministry statement 
Saturday, "(We) will start the process of uranium enrichment. 
Pursuant to the decision to build a light-water reactor, enough 
success has been made in developing uranium enrichment technology to 
provide nuclear fuel to allow for the experimental procedures." 
(All) 
 
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in response, "The North 
Koreans' continued provocative actions are deeply regrettable."(All, 
KBS) 
 
SEOUL 00000941  002 OF 013 
 
 
 
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said Saturday on NBC, "We are going to 
enforce UN resolutions," calling North Korea a "destabilizing 
element in East Asia." (Seoul, KBS) 
 
In the Foreign Ministry statement, North Korea made no mention of a 
third nuclear test or an intercontinental ballistic missile, which 
leaves room for dialogue with the U.S. (Hankyoreh) 
 
 
MEDIA ANALYSIS 
-------------- 
 
-N. Korea 
--------- 
All ROK media gave top play to the North Korean Foreign Ministry 
statement Saturday, in which the North declared, "(We) will start 
the process of uranium enrichment," adding, "Pursuant to the 
decision to build a light-water reactor, enough success has been 
made in developing uranium enrichment technology to provide nuclear 
fuel to allow for the experimental procedures."  The statement was 
made in response to the UN Security Council's latest resolution 
against the North's recent testing of a nuclear device 
 
Right-of-center JoongAng Ilbo headlined its story: "Six-year-old 
Six-Party Talks in Danger of Going up in Smoke," and moderate 
Hankook Ilbo headlined its story: "North Korea Crossed Red Line in 
Nuclear Proliferation." 
 
Hankook Ilbo also reported that North Korea's Foreign Ministry 
statement came 15 hours after the UNSC adopted Resolution 1874, 
adding that it was a "prepared offensive."  In a related story, some 
observers speculate that, unlike in the past, the U.S. will no 
longer give in to or make concessions to the North." 
 
Meanwhile, left-leaning Hankyoreh Shinmun reported that in the 
Foreign Ministry statement, North Korea made no mention of a third 
nuclear test or an intercontinental ballistic missile, which leaves 
room for dialogue with the U.S. 
 
JoongAng Ilbo, Hankook Ilbo and conservative Segye Ilbo said that 
after reports of a third possible North Korean nuclear test, ROK and 
U.S. intelligence officials have ratcheted up their monitoring of 11 
underground facilities in North Korea by using spy satellites to 
monitor vehicle movements and relying on human intelligence to 
gather information.   JoongAng Ilbo added that according to an ROKG 
source, the new nuclear test could be carried out in the northern 
part of North Korea, such as Geumchang-ri in North Pyeongan and 
Yeongdeok in South Pyeongan. 
 
Conservative Chosun Ilbo editorialized: "During the June 16 ROK-U.S. 
summit in Washington, President Lee Myung-bak will reportedly 
propose five-way talks that will exclude North Korea.  However, 
unless China abandons its policy of putting North Korea's regime 
survival before its denuclearization, any kind of UN resolution or 
five-party agreement will be useless." 
 
Hankook Ilbo editorialized: "Some observers believe that North Korea 
announced its uranium enrichment plan to the world instead of 
covertly pursuing it because of its intention to negotiate with the 
U.S.  ... If history is any guide, sanctions, pressure and further 
isolation are not enough to resolve a problem.  The international 
community, while imposing sanctions against North Korea, should 
provide a way-out through which the North can move closer toward the 
international community." 
 
Conservative Dong-a Ilbo editorialized: "The announcement by the 
North Korean Foreign Ministry is a grave provocation that goes 
beyond 'another red line.'  Through this announcement, North Korea 
is admitting or claiming that suspicion over its uranium enrichment 
by the U.S. in October 2002 is true.  ... Therefore, this seems to 
constitute another reason why the international community should 
impose stronger sanctions against North Korea in order to curb the 
country's development and proliferation of its nuclear program. 
 
SEOUL 00000941  003 OF 013 
 
 
... To block North Korea's reckless provocations, the international 
community should thoroughly deliver on the UN Security Council 
Resolution and punish North Korea for its transgressions." 
 
Hankyoreh Shinmun editorialized: "By escalating nuclear tensions, 
North Korea seems to intend to bring the U.S. to the bilateral 
bargaining table. ... The fact that even China and Russia approved 
the UNSC resolution against North Korea suggests that North Korea's 
strategy of making provocations is not receiving international 
support.  If the North really wants to talk with the U.S., it should 
look at the situation with a cool head." 
 
-U.S.-ROK Summit 
---------------- 
All newspapers reported that President Lee will leave for Washington 
today to discuss the North Korean nuclear issue and the FTA with 
U.S. President Obama at the June 16 summit. 
 
The ROK media also noted that President Lee Myung-bak called for 
five-way talks on North Korea's nuclear program, saying in a June 13 
interview with The Wall Street Journal, "I think it is right now 
very important for the remaining five countries - excluding North 
Korea - to come to an agreement on the way forward." 
 
Hankyoreh Shinmun reported, however, that the possibility of holding 
five-way talks is slim, noting that they could give Pyongyang the 
impression that the ROK is taking the lead in imposing a blockade on 
the North. 
 
Hankook Ilbo reported that, during the summit, the two nations are 
expected to discuss a response (to the production and distribution) 
of "supernotes" in order to block the flow of money to North Korea 
as well as making sure that  attention is drawn to whether the 
"five-way talks" proposed by President Lee will be held. 
 
JoongAng Ilbo editorialized: "The two leaders have to reaffirm the 
principle of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula while at the 
same time dispelling anxiety on the Korean peninsula and its 
neighboring countries ... President Lee should draw full-fledged 
support from the U.S. president and represent the big picture of a 
peaceful Korean peninsula firmly rooted in democracy and a market 
economy that offers no security threat to its neighbors." 
 
Hankyoreh Shinmun editorialized: "The summit should serve as a 
turning point to change the current stalemate on the North Korean 
nuclear talks.  To this end, it is essential to create a solid 
negotiation framework for the peaceful resolution of the nuclear 
issue.  (The ROK and the U.S.) should give shape to the grand 
bargain with the North that the Obama Administration publicly 
advocated in its initial days, so that Pyongyang can withdraw its 
offensive attitude." 
 
-Iran 
------ 
Under the headline, "Does Obama's 'New Beginning' Hit a Snag in 
Iran?" JoongAng Ilbo said that U.S. President Obama's engagement 
policy toward the Middle East has hit a wall as President Mahmoud 
Ahmadinejad, an anti-West conservative hardliner, defeated former 
Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi, a reformist, by a large margin 
in Iran's presidential elections. 
 
Dong-a Ilbo reported that the U.S., which has had high hopes of an 
"Obama effect" in Iran, did not hide its disappointment with the 
election results.  The newspaper quoted U.S. Vice President Joe 
Biden as saying on NBC that there is "an awful lot of doubt" about 
the outcome of the Iranian elections and the U.S. would analyze 
them. 
 
Chosun Ilbo headlined its story: "Ahmadinejad's Landslide Victory 
Casts 'Dark Cloud' over Iranian Nuclear Issue and Relations with 
Israel." 
 
Hankook Ilbo reported that since the Iranian public have been found 
to want economic reform and democracy, President Ahmadinejad could 
 
SEOUL 00000941  004 OF 013 
 
 
likely change his anti-U.S. policy and his stance on nuclear 
sovereignty to some degree. 
 
Under the headline, "Obama's 'Engagement Policy' Expected to Suffer 
a Blow," Hankyoreh Shinmun reported that the key factor in improving 
the U.S.-Iran relations is whether the Obama Administration will 
take "substantial" measures, such as holding nuclear talks, easing 
economic sanctions, expanding exchanges and establishing a U.S. 
diplomatic mission. 
 
 
OPINIONS/EDITORIALS 
------------------- 
 
NORTH KOREA'S 3RD NUCLEAR CRISIS CAN BE AVERTED 
(Hankoyreh Shinmun, June 15, 2009, Page 22) 
 
By Moon Cheong-in, Professor at Department of Political Science and 
International Studies of Yonsei University 
 
The North Korean nuclear issue is racing to the peak of a third 
crisis.  In response to the nation's second nuclear test, the United 
Nations Security Council (UNSC) has unanimously adopted Resolution 
1874, which includes an indefinite embargo and export controls, 
cargo inspections and financial and economic sanctions.  It is a 
strong resolution based on Chapter VII of the Charter of the United 
Nations.  The U.S. and Japan are also mulling over additional 
sanctions of their own. 
 
North Korea's objections to this omnidirectional pressure of 
isolation and containment have been fierce.  In a statement issued 
by its Foreign Ministry on Saturday, North Korea called the 
resolution an "illegal and heinous act of authority" and an 
"anti-republic scheme to crush North Korea" and is responding 
forcefully by commencing uranium enrichment, weaponizing all of the 
newly extracted plutonium and pursuing a military response to 
containment actions.  As this reckless "chicken game" with no way to 
escape unfolds, one thinks of the ominous prophecies of Cassandra. 
 
If North Korea would accede to the UNSC's demands, return to the 
Six-Party Talks and carry out denuclearization according to the in 
September 19, 2005 Joint Statement and in the February 13, 2007 
Agreement, there would be nothing more to ask.  However, it is rare 
to find a case of a nation asserting its intention to possess 
nuclear weapons and then bowing to outside pressure and abandoning 
its nuclear capabilities.  Moreover, the possibility looks 
particularly slight in light of the domestic political conditions in 
North Korea, with its plan to build a strong and prosperous nation 
by 2012, adherence to a military-first songun keynote in its 
politics, and intent to establish a stable system of succession. 
 
For this reason, it is impossible now to rule out the possibility of 
the present acute confrontation dragging out into the long term, and 
of military clashes occurring as a result.  The government and 
ruling party are suggesting two alternatives.  One of them is to 
deliver an offensive strike in response to North Korean military 
provocations.  General Kim Tae-young, chairman of the ROK's Joint 
Chiefs of Staff, is saying that the s-e-c-r-e-t lies in 
three-dimensional warfare, delivering "strikes by land, air and sea 
simultaneously."  National Defense Minister Lee Sang-hee gave the 
directive of "Don't report that there was a fight, report that you 
won" to officials below him.  These are expressions of intent to 
escalate beyond a passive response and go all out for a victory. 
 
The other alternative being offered is to secure a deterrent to 
North Korea's nuclear threat.  The government announced that it 
would be stipulating the concept of "extended deterrence" in a joint 
statement at the ROK-U.S. summit that is take place tomorrow, in 
order to make protection under a U.S. nuclear umbrella an 
established fact.  Concurrently, Grand National Party lawmaker Choi 
Ku-sik has come out saying that the ROK now needs to possess nuclear 
sovereignty, and that to this end, the ROK-U.S. Atomic Energy 
Agreement, which is scheduled for revision in 2014, needs to include 
an item allowing a downstream nuclear fuel cycle to enable 
 
SEOUL 00000941  005 OF 013 
 
 
reprocessing of nuclear fuel. 
 
Both of these alternatives are disturbing.  While it is all well and 
good to offer reassurances to the public and to promote military 
morale, one gets the sense that these officials are taking a 
military clash with North Korea lightly.  North Korea is not going 
to lose heart simply because the ROK carries out an offensive 
strike.  Compared to North Korea's military, our open and wealthy 
society must appear terribly weak.  Suppose that North Korea 
responds to the ROK's offensive strike by launching two or three 
short-range missiles at an Incheon International Airport runway on 
the island of Yeongjongdo, which would present a slight possibility 
of loss of life or injuries.  They could simultaneously weaken our 
justification for a large-scale counterattack while paralyzing the 
ROK economy. 
 
If the stipulation of protection under a U.S. nuclear umbrella is 
secured in writing, the ROK could wind up caught in North Korea's 
strategy of presenting the elimination of the nuclear umbrella as a 
precondition for denuclearization.  Moreover, restoring the ROK's 
nuclear sovereignty for the sake of deterrence would do nothing more 
than justify North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons and trigger 
a nuclear arms race on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia. 
 
Today, as we mark the ninth anniversary of the June 15 Joint 
Statement, the national security situation on the Korean Peninsula 
is in a state of zero visibility, where it is impossible to see even 
an inch in front of us.  The government must avert war and value 
peace as much as possible, and it must bear in mind that it is 
possible to ensure the safety of the people by placing emphasis on 
the prevention of war rather than victory in war. 
 
(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version.) 
 
 
CHINA'S COOPERATION ON THE NORTH 
(JoongAng Ilbo, June 15, 2009, Page 43) 
 
We face the most daunting security challenge since the Korean 
Peninsula was on the brink of war as a result of the first nuclear 
crisis in 1994.  At that time, then U.S. President Bill Clinton and 
his aides considered an attack on the Yongbyon nuclear facilities. 
 
Fortunately, the mediation effort by former U.S.  President Jimmy 
Carter contributed to defusing the crisis, the seriousness of which 
was never realized by the Korean people. 
 
The current situation seems more serious than ever.  During the past 
several months, North Korea has  taken such strong measures as 
nuclear experiments and missile launches.  These were fundamentally 
different to its normal behavior.  It should be understood that 
North Korea will never give up developing its nuclear weapons, no 
matter what economic carrots are offered. 
 
The statement released by North Korea's foreign ministry responding 
to UN Security Council Resolution 1874 demonstrates Pyongyang's 
determination to develop nuclear arms. 
 
However, the U.S. cannot accept North Korea as a nuclear-armed 
state. 
 
U.S. President Barack Obama has declared, as one of his core 
policies, the promotion of universal acceptance for nuclear arms 
reduction.  If he accepts a nuclear-armed North Korea, he will fail 
to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and "a nuclear 
domino effect" in Northeast Asia. 
 
In conclusion, the situation indicates a deepening gulf between 
Pyongyang and Washington, with little possibility of finding a point 
of compromise. 
 
Another reason why we take a serious view of the current situation 
is that North Korea's hard-line stance is related to its effort to 
 
SEOUL 00000941  006 OF 013 
 
 
engineer a hereditary succession of power. 
 
There is nothing more important than the hereditary succession of 
power and the stability of the regime to North Korea's leader Kim 
Jong-il.  He is urging his country to realize the possible scenarios 
of power succession due to his health problems.  He has decided to 
take the road to becoming a nuclear state to guarantee the support 
of the military authorities and the regime's security. 
 
Given that Pyongyang considers the nuclear issue to be its most 
sensitive, the concerned parties have found it more difficult to 
resolve. . 
 
Against this backdrop, the international community, including the 
ROK and the U.S., should implement the strongest negative pressure 
on developing nuclear programs.  Such action, in addition to 
offering the North the strongest positive incentive to give up its 
nuclear programs, could thus lead North Korea to take a positive 
inducement measurement. 
 
The United Nations Security Council resolution adopted last week has 
been one of the strongest measures to encourage Pyongyang to return 
to the negotiating table. 
 
However, cooperation with China is of great importance in helping 
such pressure to take effect. 
 
China accounts for two-thirds of North Korea's foreign trade, and 
the North's dependence on China will be further increased as 
inter-Korean relations worsen. 
 
However, it is not easy to seek closer cooperation with China. 
 
It is clear that China cannot accept North Korea as a nuclear-armed 
state.  Such a response would provoke nuclear proliferation in 
Japan, the ROK and even Taiwan. 
 
However, as China has placed a higher priority on the stability of 
the North Korean regime than denuclearization, it is reluctant to 
intensify its pressure on North Korea. 
 
China has some understandable reasons. 
 
First, the North Korean economy is at death's door, relying on 
foreign assistance for survival.  If China ceases to offer economic 
assistance to the North, the North Korean regime might collapse.  In 
this scenario, China fears that millions of refugees will cross over 
its border. 
 
Second, if the insecurity of the North Korean regime leads to an 
ROK-led reunification, China does not want the North to disappear as 
a buffer zone.  In addition, it also does not want the influence of 
the ROK as an ally of the U.S. to move northward near the border 
along the Yalu River. 
 
Of course, China might feel that if the ROK and the U.S. actually 
reduce worries of an exodus of refugees from the North into Korea, 
there is no need to establish a political buffer zone. 
 
But it will still remain important to maintain a military buffer 
zone in such a case. 
 
Any trust between the U.S. and China and between the ROK and China 
is not yet strong enough to reach such an agreement on the future of 
the Korean Peninsula.  Therefore, it is difficult to take a 
concerted stance toward North Korea, and hence North Korea acts as 
it wishes. 
 
Of course, the relationship between China and North Korea is 
deteriorating, and many people in China are seeing North Korea as 
another burden to cope with rather than a close ally.  However, 
there is still no sign that China's core policymakers have 
overhauled its North Korea strategies. 
 
 
SEOUL 00000941  007 OF 013 
 
 
As such, the North Korean nuclear issue concerns Pyongyang's regime, 
reunification, and geopolitical problems requiring the participation 
of our neighboring countries. 
 
In such turbulent times, a national consensus is a prerequisite to 
setting a diplomatic goal based on compromise and encouraging a 
coordinated response from neighboring countries and the 
international community. 
 
Nevertheless, when we have faced difficulties in the past, our 
political circles have failed to exercise national leadership. 
 
Such a state of affairs is truly pitiful. Those in the ROK's 
political circles still fail to recognize that these are 
extraordinary circumstances. 
 
(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version.) 
 
 
UNITY IS NEEDED TO DEAL WITH N. KOREAN NUCLEAR THREAT 
(Chosun Ilbo, June 15, 2009, Page 35) 
 
North Korea on Saturday announced it would begin enriching uranium, 
turn all the plutonium it has extracted so far into nuclear weapons, 
and take military action should it face a blockade.  The 
announcement came just 15 hours after the UN Security Council 
unanimously passed Resolution 1874, which contains tougher and very 
specific sanctions against the North as a punishment for its second 
nuclear test.  Resolution 1874 encompasses an export ban on weapons, 
financial restrictions and the right to search North Korean 
vessels. 
 
Among the points made in North Korea's latest announcement, the most 
interesting is its vow to begin enriching uranium.  Nuclear weapons 
can be produced with highly enriched uranium or processed plutonium. 
 If North Korea is able to produce nuclear bombs with uranium, then 
it has all available means of making nuclear weapons. Moreover, 
uranium enrichment is much harder to detect than extracting 
plutonium.  It could become more difficult to find a solution to the 
North Korean nuclear impasse. 
 
In the statement, North Korea said its development of uranium 
enrichment technology had been successful and was ready for trials. 
 
North Korea has actually been developing uranium enrichment 
technology for the last 20 years.  Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan, "the 
father of Pakistan's nuclear program" who was arrested in 2004 on 
charges of leaking such technology, said he had handed over related 
equipment, blueprints and technology to North Korea since 1991 and 
had trained North Korean scientists.  Former Pakistani President 
Pervez Musharraf wrote in his autobiography that Khan gave North 
Korea around 20 centrifuges for uranium enrichment, including the 
P-1 model and the improved P-2 model.  Former U.S. President Bill 
Clinton in his memoirs said he learned after his term ended that 
North Korea had violated the Geneva Conventions by producing enough 
highly enriched uranium for two nuclear warheads in 1998. 
 
Despite the gravity of the situation, some officials in the Roh 
Moo-hyun Administration claimed that suspicions of North Korea's 
uranium enrichment program were false claims being made by the U.S. 
government.  They labeled them "distortions and fabrications."  They 
also claimed that North Korea would give up its nuclear ambitions if 
offered proper rewards, since the North had no desire to possess 
nuclear weapons.  Such misreadings of North Korea are among the main 
reasons that the nuclear problem came to this pass. Who knows how 
they will try to justify them? 
 
During the June 16 ROK-U.S. summit in Washington, President Lee 
Myung-bak will reportedly propose five-way talks that will exclude 
North Korea.  However, unless China abandons its policy of putting 
North Korea's regime survival before its denuclearization, any kind 
of UN resolution or five-party agreement will be useless.  The ROK 
faces a tough diplomatic task. 
 
SEOUL 00000941  008 OF 013 
 
 
 
It is becoming clearer that North Korea has no intention of giving 
up its nuclear program, while the chances are rising that it may 
resort to military action.  Such frightening prospects dwarf any 
domestic matter for the ROK.  The ruling and opposition parties must 
put aside their differences and come together to face this 
challenge. 
 
(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version.) 
 
 
SOLIDIFYING U.S. ALLIANCE 
(JoongAng Ilbo, June 15, 2009, Page 42) 
 
President Lee Myung-bak today boards a plane for a summit meeting 
with U.S. President Barack Obama.  The meeting, scheduled for 
Tuesday at the White House, comes at a time of heightened tension on 
the Korean Peninsula. 
 
The United Nations Security Council unanimously voted on the 
toughest sanctions yet against the recalcitrant state following its 
May 25 second nuclear test.  North Korea further defied the 
international community by declaring its decision to embark on a 
program to enrich uranium and reprocess the existing plutonium 
stockpiles to produce atomic warheads. 
 
By denouncing the UN resolution as a war-provoking action, the 
isolated state is playing a high-risk game of chicken with the 
international community, a movement that now has the support of the 
North's former allies: China and Russia.  The two leaders have to 
reaffirm the principle of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula 
while at the same time dispelling anxiety on the Korean peninsula 
and its neighboring countries. 
 
In a symbolic gesture, the ROK and the U.S. have already agreed to 
include the U.S. offer of "extended deterrence"-a broader defense 
mechanism including a nuclear umbrella-in their joint statement 
after the summit meeting. 
 
Without clarifying the nuclear umbrella issue, there's no knowing 
where talk in Korea and Japan on nuclear self-protection will lead. 
 
 
The Korean Peninsula does not solely involve the ROK, but at the 
same time no discussion about the region can progress without 
involving the ROK. 
 
President Lee must obtain a U.S. pledge that the ROK won't be 
excluded in any further U.S.-North Korean talks.  There has been 
speculation that the U.S., China and Japan will hold senior talks in 
Washington next month.  President Lee, as he mentioned in an 
interview with the U.S. media, might propose talks that exclude 
North Korea. 
 
We hope the two leaders will produce serious discussions in mapping 
out a broader vision for the Korean Peninsula.  President Lee should 
draw full-fledged support from the U.S. president and put forth the 
big picture of a peaceful Korean peninsula firmly rooted in 
democracy and a market economy which presents no security threat to 
its neighbors. 
 
The two allies should concoct a clever strategy to entice North 
Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions and veer toward reform and 
transparency. 
 
The two could also discuss the problem of sending senior envoys to 
North Korea. President Obama should place the North Korean problem 
as his top priority in foreign affairs.  Making him do so is 
entirely up to President Lee. 
 
(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version.) 
 
 
SEOUL 00000941  009 OF 013 
 
 
 
THE KIM JONG-IL REGIME TURNS ITS BACK ON THE WORLD AND OPTS FOR 
BRINKMANSHIP TACTICS 
(Dong-a Ilbo, June 15, 2009, Page 31) 
 
In protest against UN Security Council Resolution 1874, which was 
unanimously adopted, the North Korean Foreign Ministry announced 
that North Korea will start the process of uranium enrichment, 
weaponize all newly extracted plutonium, and regard an attempted 
blockade of any kind by the U.S. and its allies as an act of war and 
take decisive military action. 
 
When North Korea launched a rocket on April 5 in defiance of UN 
Resolution 1718, the UN Security Council reacted with a moderate 
presidential statement.  The UN Security Council held back on 
(severely punishing) North Korea in order to give it another chance. 
 In spite of this, North Korea went ahead with a nuclear test on May 
25, which led to UN Resolution 1874.  (As a result,) even China and 
Russia agreed to much stronger sanctions against North Korea. 
 
The announcement by the North Korean Foreign Ministry is a grave 
provocation that goes beyond "another red line."  Through this 
announcement, North Korea is admitting or claiming that suspicion 
over its uranium enrichment raised by the U.S. in October 2002 is 
true.  North Korea's vow to start uranium enrichment is like 
declaring that it will manufacture uranium nuclear weapons as well 
as plutonium nuclear weapons.  Therefore, this seems to constitute 
another reason why the international community should impose 
stronger sanctions against North Korea in order to curb the 
country's development and proliferation of its nuclear program. 
 
The world has continued to provide humanitarian assistance to 
relieve the sufferings of 23 million North Korean residents despite 
the regime's destabilizing act.  However, North Korea's blatant 
nuclearization may jeopardize even humanitarian assistance from the 
world.  The World Food Programme (WFP) said that since April 2009, 
no countries have provided food assistance to North Korea.  The WFP 
cut its food assistance by 85%.  North Korea's rash move to fight 
against the world is self-destructive and will only lead to the 
starvation of its own people. 
 
 To block North Korea's reckless provocations, the international 
community should thoroughly deliver on the UN Security Council 
Resolution and punish North Korea for its transgressions.  U.S. 
Secretary Hillary Clinton showed her strong will, saying that (the 
U.S.) will "do all we can to prevent continued proliferation by the 
North Koreans."  UN Security Council Resolution 1874, which calls 
for banning exports of arms-related materials except for small 
weapons, fully banning financial transactions involving 
weapons-related activities and inspecting all cargo containing 
banned items, cannot be fulfilled only with efforts by 15 Security 
Council members.  All UN members should join in this effort to steer 
North Korea in a normal direction. 
 
 
ROK-U.S. SUMMIT SHOULD CREATE A FRAMEWORK FOR PEACEFUL RESOLUTION OF 
NUCLEAR ISSUE 
(Hankoyreh Shinmun, June 15, 2009, Page 23) 
 
President Lee Myung-bak headed to Washington on Sunday for a summit 
with U.S. President Barack Obama.  These talks carry great 
significance as the North Korean nuclear issue grows worse by the 
day and inter-Korean relations race towards a worst-case scenario. 
It also marks the first formal meeting between the two heads of 
state since President Obama took office. 
 
The major item on the agenda is North Korea policy, including the 
response to the nuclear issue.  At the time of Obama's inauguration 
earlier this year, the predominant perspective on solving the 
nuclear issue was an optimistic one.  The expectation was that a 
great compromise would take shape that would resolve the problem 
once and for all.  Instead, the U.S. has led the way in pressuring 
North Korea, and North Korea in turn, has declared a full-on 
confrontation against the U.S.  The responsibility lies with both 
 
SEOUL 00000941  010 OF 013 
 
 
North Korea and the U.S. for allowing the situation to get to this 
state. North Korea has kept up with its provocations in a way that 
is difficult to view simply as either an attempt to probe the U.S. 
response or strengthen its bargaining power, while the U.S. has 
tended towards a solipsistic hard-line response without any 
strategic consideration.  The situation differs little from the 
first term of George W. Bush's Administration. 
 
The summit should serve as a turning point to change the current 
stalemate on the North Korean nuclear talks.  To this end, it is 
essential to create a solid negotiation framework for the peaceful 
resolution of the nuclear issue.  (The ROK and the U.S.) should give 
shape to the grand bargain with the North that the Obama 
administration publicly advocated in its initial days, so that 
Pyongyang can withdraw its offensive attitude.  If, as some are 
predicting, the talks conclude only with a discussion of 
strengthening sanctions and pressure against North Korea, it would 
have been better to not have held the summit.  If the two parties 
are to get North Korea to the table for discussions, more than vague 
references are needed to move the situation towards dialogue. 
 
The ROK's intentions towards building a new framework matter as much 
as those of the U.S. President.  Lee should work to turn around the 
current abnormal situation, while actively facilitating support for 
the U.S. to pursue discussions with North Korea.  What President Lee 
needs most of all is a sense of ownership of the issue, and a will 
to lead the way in peacefully resolving issues related to the Korean 
Peninsula.  The proper course does not lie in stipulating in writing 
the "extended deterrence" that would strengthen the U.S. nuclear 
umbrella, which could make North Korea's possession of nuclear 
capabilities a fait accompli and lead to a Northeast Asian nuclear 
arms race.  This latter could easily result in the five-party talks 
plan President Lee mentioned in his interview with the Wall Street 
Journal, or an argument for the uselessness of the Six-Party Talks. 
 
This summit must focus on the real issues that face the ROK. 
Placing importance on an abstract "declaration of a future vision 
for the ROK-U.S. alliance," while neglecting to provide solutions 
for pending issues such as North Korea's nuclear program is 
undesirable for the sake of the future of the alliance.  A possible 
postponement of the transfer of wartime operational command and the 
redeployment of troops to Afghanistan represent an inappropriate 
ideological offensive, and are inappropriate as main agenda items 
for this summit. 
 
Along with efforts to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, 
President Lee is faced with the task of fundamentally improving 
inter-Korean relations.  In and of themselves, good relations are an 
important element of peace on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast 
Asia, and they also play a positive role in resolving the nuclear 
issue.  While inter-Korean relations is not necessarily an area 
where the ROK needs to gauge the reaction of another nation, 
President Lee, however, could attempt to generate cooperation from 
North Korea by making it clear during his talks with the U.S. that 
he intends to improve inter-Korean relations. 
 
(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version.) 
 
 
MIXING CARROTS WITH STICKS 
(JoongAng Ilbo, June 13, 2009, Page 34) 
 
The United Nations Security Council is expected to adopt a 
resolution to impose sanctions on North Korea today or tomorrow, 
three weeks since North Korea conducted a nuclear test.  The 
resolution is stern. It includes a ban on imports and exports of 
weapons, inspections of North Korean cargo vessels and financial 
sanctions.  The resolution can put heavy pressure on North Korea if 
it is implemented properly as the 192 UN member states are expected 
to abide by the resolution. 
 
We believe it is appropriate for the UN Security Council to adopt 
the resolution because it reveals international society's determined 
 
SEOUL 00000941  011 OF 013 
 
 
will to deter North Korea from its nuclear ambitions.  We expect all 
UN member states to participate in carrying out the resolution. 
Particularly, the participation of China, a country that has strong 
influence over North Korea politically and economically, is 
absolutely necessary. The South Korean government must try to 
persuade China. 
 
The Security Council's resolution to impose sanctions on North Korea 
will not resolve the nuclear issue in one fell swoop.  But North 
Korea must be asked to pay the price for having posed a direct 
threat to peace on the Korean Peninsula, Northeast Asia and the rest 
of the world.  This is potentially one of the most fruitful ways of 
preventing further provocative acts from North Korea and a means of 
drawing the country back to the negotiation table.  This is the 
lesson that the past 20 years has taught us, ever since North 
Korea's nuclear issue emerged as an international issue.  We believe 
that international society's response to North Korea has failed so 
far to produce tangible results.  We have not seen a good 
combination of carrots and sticks; we've only seen carrots and then 
sticks.  The new resolution by the U.S. Security Council must not be 
pretense, again.  What we need to see is action. 
 
We believe that incentives are still necessary.  But if we only come 
up with arbitrary measures targeting whatever situation North Korea 
finds itself in, such as a food crisis, just as we have done so far, 
North Korea will inevitably take advantage of the situation. 
Instead, we have to show North Korea what benefits it can enjoy if 
it joins the rest of the world. And we need to establish an 
international aid system to help North Korea land softly in addition 
to implementing discipline.  We advise our government to try to 
bring together the other five members of the six-party talks, even 
if North Korea remains determined to stay away. 
 
(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version.) 
 
 
NORTH KOREA'S URANIUM ENRICHMENT WILL NEVER BE ALLOWED (Hankook 
Ilbo, June 15, 2009, Page 35) 
 
North Korea expectedly lodged a strong protest against the UN 
Security Council's resolution sanctioning North Korea over its 
second nuclear test.  In a Foreign Ministry statement, North Korea 
announced it will start the process of uranium enrichment, weaponize 
all newly extracted plutonium, and regard an attempted blockade of 
any kind by the U.S. and its allies as an act of war and take 
decisive military action.  North Korea repeatedly declared itself to 
be a nuclear state, saying that it will never give up its nuclear 
program.  We are worried that things are escalating into a 
tug-of-war on the Korean Peninsula while no party is making 
concessions. 
 
The most serious of North Korea's responses is that North Korea will 
start enriching uranium.  A second nuclear crisis occurred when 
North Korea was apparently seen as admitting its highly-enriched 
uranium plan in October 2002.  However, this is the first time that 
North Korea officially vowed to start the process of enriching 
uranium.  North Korea claims that its enriched uranium will be used 
as nuclear materials for light water reactors.  However, it is only 
a matter of time before North Korea obtains weapons-grade 
highly-enriched uranium once it secures the enrichment technology. 
The process of uranium enrichment requires much smaller-scale 
facilities and can be easily concealed, thus posing difficulty to 
inspection and control.  This will make the aim of denuclearizing 
the Korean Peninsula become even more remote. 
 
Chances are high that North Korea is not in a position to build 
massive enrichment facilities considering its claim that its uranium 
enrichment technology is in a test phase.  Some analysts believe 
that it will not be easy for North Korea to obtain effective 
enrichment technology due to (a lack in) technical capabilities.  It 
will take North Korea time to fully operate uranium enrichment 
facilities and accordingly the international community will have 
some time to come up with countermeasures.  Some observers believe 
 
SEOUL 00000941  012 OF 013 
 
 
that North Korea announced its uranium enrichment plan to the world 
instead of covertly pursuing it because of its intention to 
negotiate with the U.S. 
 
North Korea's reckless provocations (i.e. its second nuclear test) 
against the international community should be met with sanctions and 
punishment.  However, if history is any guide, sanctions, pressure 
and further isolation are not enough to resolve a problem.  The 
international community, while imposing sanctions against North 
Korea, should provide a way-out through which the North can move 
closer toward the international community.  The June 16 ROK-U.S. 
summit should be a place for both countries to discuss and seek 
appropriate ways to do this. 
 
 
WE URGE NORTH KOREA TO EXERCISE RESTRAINT 
(Hankyoreh Shinmun, June 15, 2009, Page 23) 
 
North Korea immediately issued a protest against UN Security Council 
Resolution 1874.  The North Korean Foreign Ministry announced in a 
statement that North Korea will start the process of uranium 
enrichment, weaponize all newly extracted plutonium, and regard an 
attempted blockade of any kind by the U.S. and its allies as an act 
of war and take decisive military action.  North Korea's reaction is 
seen as an extension of the positions it has clarified through 
various channels.  However, this announcement is a flagrant defiance 
of the international community, thus potentially further isolating 
the North and escalating political and military tensions on the 
Korean Peninsula. 
 
North Korea's intention seems to be to make the U.S. negotiate with 
the North by ramping up nuclear tensions.  Such intention is evident 
since, as reflected in the statement, North Korea views the 
(current) situation as a U.S.-North Korea standoff.  It is also 
noteworthy that North Korea did not mention in the statement what 
would be regarded as more direct provocations, such as an additional 
nuclear test or an intercontinental ballistic missile launch.  It is 
questionable whether North Korea's equipment and technological level 
are advanced enough to produce highly enriched uranium immediately. 
However, the USG strongly condemned North Korea and urged the 
communist state to halt its provocations and return to the Six-Party 
Talks.  This means that, for the U.S., bilateral dialogue with the 
North is not a priority. 
 
If confrontations between the two Koreas, between the North and the 
U.S., and between the North and the international community become 
prolonged, threats to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula 
will grow.  This is why we should be in a hurry to find out the 
solution.  More than anything else, North Korea needs to refrain 
from additional provocations.  The fact that even China and Russia 
approved the UNSC resolution against North Korea suggests that North 
Korea's strategy of making provocations is not receiving 
international support.  If the North really wants to talk with the 
U.S., it should look at the situation with a cool head. 
 
 
ON THE ISSUE OF THE KAESONG INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 
(Hankyoreh Shinmun, June 13, 2009, Page 23) 
 
Representatives from North Korea and South Korea made official 
contact on the Kaesong Industrial Complex issue, but the two sides 
only expressed their positions to each other and concluded the 
meeting (without much progress).  They have agreed to meet again on 
June 19, but with a wide gulf between them in their thinking, it 
appears negotiations will not be easy. 
 
North Korea's demand that South Korean companies quadruple wages for 
Kaesong complex workers to 300 U.S. dollars a month from their 
current 75 U.S. dollars a month is excessive.  Nor is it reasonable 
for the North to say it would raise the land rent for the complex 
some 31-fold, from the current 16 million U.S. dollars to 500 
million U.S. dollars.  This is an unreasonable request that is no 
different from telling companies to pack their bags and leave.  If 
wages were to increase beyond those found in China or Southeast 
 
SEOUL 00000941  013 OF 013 
 
 
Asia, combined with insecure passage to Kaesong, customs and 
communication that are necessary for running a business, it would be 
hard to continue the project regardless of how much one considers 
the extraordinariness of inter-Korean relations.  However, if North 
Korea has not adopted the attitude to close the Kaesong complex, it 
should attempt to find a rational compromise through negotiations. 
 
South Korea has designated the issue of the Hyundai Asan employee 
held in North Korea for the last two and a half months as a matter 
that needs to be resolved first, but North Korea has not changed its 
stance that the Hyundai Asan worker issue is not part of the current 
agenda.  The time has come for a new approach to this matter.  One 
plan is to create a separate avenue for finding a solution for the 
detained worker issue and to concentrate on the Kaesong operation 
issue in the next round of contact. It is highly possible that if 
one tries to resolve these two issues of a different character at 
the same time, neither of them will be properly discussed. 
 
North Korea has argued that it cannot extend the benefits of the 
June 15 Joint Declaration to those that reject the June 15 Joint 
Declaration at this time.  One must not take North Korea's attitude 
as a mere attack.  This is because, whether it is the Kaesong 
operation issue or the detained Hyundai Asan employee issue, these 
problems are within the frame of general inter-Korean relations. 
All say that in order to resolve these two issues amicably and to 
prevent similar situations from occurring, one must predicate things 
on stable inter-Korean relations.  To do this, more than anything, 
it is important to demonstrate the intention of certainty to execute 
the June 15 and October 4 declarations at a level the North Koreans 
can trust. 
 
The current situation with the Kaesong Industrial Complex can be 
likened to two doctors playing drop-the-handkerchief to avoid 
responsibility over the death of a patient admitted to the emergency 
room.  It is time for special efforts to fundamentally change the 
situation. 
 
(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is 
identical to the Korean version.) 
 
 
STANTON