From kirc@igc.apc.org
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 09:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Korea Information & Resource Center/Korea Report 
To: moogoonghwa@UCSD.EDU, wharms@soback.kornet.nm.kr
Subject: Re: Reactions

... The five or six North Korean fugitives on the run establishes a 
command post in the remote Taeback Mountains and they are reinforced by 
North Korean special forces trained in guerilla warfare who are 
transferred to the South via underground tunnels that have yet avoided 
detection by SK forces. When SK forces are tooo overwhelming near the 
command post or near detection, NKis ready to unleash water held at the 
Kumgang Dam which is located right above the DMZ. Following calls for a 
revolution in the South, Hanchongryun students and student-draftees in 
the ROK military rises in revolt and engage in guerilla warfare with 
ROK forces....

Far-fetched? The way that SK media and KYS government is treating the 
recent submarine incident with various conjectures and theories of NK 
motivation, this may be a plausible scenario to SK media.

I bring this up because I think the KYS government and media are 
over-reacting to the incident. 90 % of news is devoted to the incident. 
Is there a war on Korean peninsula? There are also contradictory 
messages and interpretations on the same night of coverage. The tv news 
went in length to conclude that this was probabl an espionage mission 
that went bad after the submarine got stuck near the shore, and then 
another report says that NK now is engaged in guerilla warfare in the 
South. Can 4-5 "sabateur" start a guerilla warfare?  Fidel Castro used 
more men than this! Now KYS says that this incident is an indication 
that NK is attempting to "Sovieticize the South through military 
means." Isn't the Soviet Union dead and gone? Why use the archaic Cold 
War rhetoric? Or perhaps this is the same kind of rhetoric that 
S.Koreans hear as presidential elections are near. Now there are 
hardline talks of beefing up national security, hardening National 
Security Law and giving the security forces and intelligence agencie 
more power to go after domestic opposition. A bill is going to be 
introduced to create a joint operation of military, police, reserve 
forces in response to guerilla warfare. Perhaps the SK civilians will 
be sked to be on alert for strangers or those SK soldiers who act 
irregularly since NK agents supposedly are wearing ROK army uniforms.
Why all these over-reactions when SK forces probably know that these 
are regular espionage activites, committed by both sides of the border 
to gather military intelligence? 
Watch how this incident and the Hanchongryun incident plays a role in 
the upcoming presidential election next year. There is already a rumour 
in SK of a possibility that KYS will try a constitutional amendment to 
allow him to run for a second term, in light of these "pressing 
situation of utmost national emergency." 

The reaction of Washington is more calm and cautious:

US State Department Spokesman Nicholas Burns ("STATE DEPARTMENT NOON
BRIEFING, SEPTEMBER 18," USIA Transcript, 9/19/96) stated that the US
had no "independent knowledge" regarding the infiltration of the ROK by
a DPRK submarine reportedly carrying 20 individuals.  "We have seen the
extraordinary photos on television about this incident," Burns said. 
"Frankly, we do not know what the mission of this particular submarine
was."  Burns said that without such information about the submarine's
mission, the incident does not immediately heighten tensions nor hinder
the long-term objectives of the US and ROK to negotiate a peace
settlement between the two Koreas. 

At least, Washington is not over-reacting by sending in the 7th Fleet, 
as it did few times in the past, or sending the latest high-tech 
sub-chasers to Korea. Or, perhaps Washington is letting this "to play 
out itself in Korea."

Hyuk-Kyo Suh
Washington, DC

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > From list-relay@UCSD.EDU  Sat Sep 21 09:47:11 1996
 > X-Sender: wharms@soback.kornet.nm.kr
 > Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 01:20:02 -0900
 > To: moogoonghwa@UCSD.EDU
 > From: Bill Harms 
 > Subject: Reactions
 >
 > Is there any interest in the submarine infiltration incident and the fallout?
 >
 > If there is, I would like to hear other's views and what reaction the US and
 > the South should take in light of Pyongyang's alleged provocations.
 > Specifically, what about food aid, the heavy oil shipments under the agreed
 > framework, and the four-way talks proposal? 
 >
 > In this list, I have seen many people's views about what should have been
 > done in past incidents, especially the events surrounding the 1980 Kwangju
 > Incident. Well, now's your chance to discuss what the US and South should do
 > regarding ongoing current events. Is anyone game?
 >
 > Looking forward to any comments.
 >
 > Bill Harms
----------------------------------------------------------------------------





moogoonghwa@ucsd.edu
Back to: Moogoonghwa