From kirc@igc.apc.org
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 12:16:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Korea Information & Resource Center/Korea Report 
To: moogoonghwa@UCSD.EDU, wharms@soback.kornet.nm.kr
Subject: RE: Another Set back to N-S relations

Bill Harms suggests a plausble cause of the submarin"infiltration" and 
"armed provocation," for which no SK media dare to suggest in current 
frenzy against NK. We only have Lee Kwangsoo's words to go by and they 
are filtered out by SK interrogators, who admit that Lee changes story 
many times. Just as NK defectors say what SK debriefers want to hear, 
Lee may be saying what SK authorities want to hear and convey to the 
media and public. There is even a media directive from the ROK military 
as to how to call these NK soldiers-- moojang gongbi (armed communist 
bandits) instead of kanchup (spies).  
I see a political reason why SKG is escalating this incident. The 
timing is important. If this incident occureed at other time, reaction 
of SKG might have been different.
These incidents probably happen occasionaly. (SK probably don't wnat to 
admit this since it would show that its coastal defense is in disarray.)
The SKG is in a position to downplay or escalate the incident to send a 
message to NK as well as SK populace.  
If a comparable incident can be found, the U.S. helicopter strayed into 
NK airspace and we had the pilot's story and NK's story to go by. This 
incident came at a sensitive moment when the nuclear accord was being 
negotiated. If NK wanted, it could have made the incident bigger than 
what it was, but it did not and returned the pilot rather promptly 
(compare this incident to Pueblo incident), presumably because NK 
wanted the nuclear accord to go through.

I also cannot figure out why Lee Kwangsoo is the sole survivor other 
than those fugitives. There was no shootout with ROK forces when 11 NK 
soldiers were found dead near the shore. Now SK military is saying that 
those 11 might have been"executed" by those who went to the mountains. 
(COuldn't journalists who were on the scene figure this out? Why are 
vital information coming our of ROK military only?) Then did Lee escape 
this "execution"? Was Lee supposed to have been among those "executed"? 
If Lee was "executed," then we would not have these theories pursued by 
SK media and SKG, would we?
SKG says that the fugitives are highly trained in guerilla warfare and 
political indoctrination and very dangerous to SK populace, then why 
did one of the fugitive tell a SK woman that he came from NK when he is 
supposedly doing clandestine behind-the-enemy operation? WHy would he 
leave a trail behind?  
ALl these things don't add up. There are too many loose holes.

Hyuk-Kyo Suh

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 > From list-relay@UCSD.EDU  Mon Sep 23 11:30:27 1996
 > X-Sender: wharms@soback.kornet.nm.kr
 > Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 02:28:36 -0900
 > To: moogoonghwa 
 > From: Bill Harms 
 > Subject: RE: Another Set back to N-S relations
 >
 > At 09:19 AM 9/23/96 -0400, Jamie McDonald wrote:
 > >
 > >You refer to the "alleged" submarine incident, which also brings up
 > >interesting possibilities.  Are you suggesting that the ROK invented the
 > >incident?  
 >
 > No, it is perfectly plausible, however, that the vessel was on a routine
 > training mission in the northwestern part of the Sea of Japan and simply
 > drifted off-course after developing mechanical difficulties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------





moogoonghwa@ucsd.edu
Back to: Moogoonghwa