2012.07.12 DPRK Daily


N. Korea tells Asia meet it needs nukes to deter U.S

North Korea insisted Thursday it needs atomic weaponry to deter a U.S. nuclear threat, and vowed never to give up its right to launch rockets as part of what it called a peaceful space program.

Washington's aim is to "eliminate the political ideology and system our people have opted for", Foreign Minister Pak Ui-Chun told a regional Asian gathering in Cambodia.

Pak told fellow foreign ministers at the ASEAN Regional Forum that it was the U.S. which scuppered the February 29 deal and was to blame for tensions on the Korean peninsula.

The United States, Japan and South Korea held a joint meeting on Thursday which warned that "any provocation by North Korea... will be met with a resolute and coordinated response from the international community."

Pyongyang says its uranium enrichment plant is intended to fuel light water reactors to generate power. Scientists say the plant could easily be reconfigured to produce bomb-making material, supplementing its current plutonium program

Pyongyang's atomic deterrent had helped maintain the regional nuclear balance and reduced the risk of atomic war, it said.

The paper reiterated calls for a peace treaty with the United States to replace the armistice which ended the 1950-1953 Korean War.

Six-party talks, which envisage a peace treaty and other benefits if the North scraps its atomic weaponry, have been stalled since December 2008. (AFP)


S. Korea, U.S. press N. Korea to give up policy of confrontation

PHNOM PENH, July 12 (Yonhap) -- South Korean and U.S. nuclear envoys discussed North Korea and reaffirmed they will not ease pressure on Pyongyang's new leadership until it gives up a policy of confrontation, a senior Seoul diplomat said Thursday.

Cho Hyun-dong, deputy South Korean envoy to the six-party talks on ending North Korea's nuclear program, held talks with his U.S. counterpart Clifford Hart on Wednesday evening ahead of the ASEAN Regional Forum, an annual venue for talks on security in Asia,

The talks between Cho and Hart came a day before South Korean Foreign Minister Kim Sung-hwan, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba are scheduled to hold a trilateral meeting on the sidelines of the forum.


S. Korea, U.S., Japan move closer to building trilateral alliance

PHNOM PENH (Yonhap News) -- South Korea, the United States and Japan announced Thursday the establishment of a three-way security consultative body, laying the groundwork to build a trilateral alliance in the face of North Korean aggression.

The announcement was made after South Korean Foreign Minister Kim Sung-hwan, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba held a trilateral meeting earlier in the day on the sidelines of the ASEAN Regional Forum.

 Clinton hailed the new organization, named the Steering Group and to be based in Washington, as an initiative to "build even deeper connection" among the three nations and across the Asia-Pacific region to "bring even greater order and structure to our three-way partnership."

The launch of the consultative body reflected Washington's plan to reinforce trilateral policy coordination with Seoul and Tokyo and more efficiently deal with North Korea's growing threats as well as China's rising military influence in the region, Seoul officials said

"It is the first time that South Korea, the U.S. and Japan have formed such a trilateral consultative body,"


(Yonhap Interview) U.S. not 'sandwiched' between Korea, Japan: Stephens

Kathleen Stephens, an iconic figure in recent South Korea-U.S. ties, emphasized Wednesday that Washington's alliances with Seoul and Tokyo are not a zero-sum game.  Japan's gain does not have to be Korea's loss, or vice versa, she said.

She dismissed a view that the U.S. is sandwiched between Japan, apparently seeking to expand the role of its self-defense forces, and South Korea, which remains wary of Japan's possible return to military imperialism.

Japan seems intent on building up its military power, putting South Korea and other Asian neighbors on alert.  Critics accuse the U.S. of maintaining a lukewarm stance on the matter.


China in Huge Infrastructure Projects Near N.Korean Border

China is building a massive highway and rail network in Liaoning and Jilin provinces near the border with North Korea. Beijing is expected to spend more than US$10 billion on the project by 2015.

Experts believe the aim is not only to tap into North Korea's mineral resources but to secure easy access for Chinese troops in case of an emergency in the North.


How and Why North Korea Could Experience Economic Reform

David Matthew is pursuing a Master’s degree in Public Policy at Edinburgh University in the UK with a focus on security, trade, and technology in the Asia-Pacific.  7/12/12

In a recent interview with the Korean Economic Institute scholar Andrei Lankov argued that North Korea is not in a position to follow the path of economic reform witnessed in countries like China due to the onerous presence of South Korea. As he put it, “In China, reforms are possible because there is no South China.” But the notion that China was able to undertake economic reforms in a cultural or geographic vacuum does not seem well-supported by evidence.

What we do know is that when Deng Xiaoping started instituting economic reforms in China in 1978, the various countries with high populations of ethnic Chinese in the region – Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan among others – had per capita GDPs as high as 15 times that of mainland China. Moreover, there was a sizable Chinese diaspora around the world numbering as many as 50,000,000 – a number of whom we might imagine would have been in contact with citizens of the mainland about outside levels of prosperity and opportunity. All of which is to say that an economically opened China, where the citizens often still live below the prosperity of ethnic Chinese elsewhere in the world or even in nearby Asian nations, is not experiencing the type of dramatic revolution that many like Lankov forecast for an economically opened North Korea.

The method of China’s reform could be valuable for the DPRK, not least of all because China has the organizational capacity to help achieve it in North Korea. Deng started reforms with what was referred to as the Household-responsibility system that partially privatized agriculture and provided people with ownership of plots of land. This increased agricultural output dramatically and was popular enough to have been adopted by 93 percent of the agriculture-based production teams by 1983. This has short term attractiveness in regard to boosting the food supply and making the country less reliant on foreign food aid, but it is also a good place to start economic liberalization because rural communities are the least likely to reach a critical mass of revolution and the most likely to be in the dark about outside prosperity differences.

Information Flows and the Nexus of Revolution

Of course information flows are capable of subverting regimes by virtue of connecting people both within a state and between states. Additionally, information can travel faster and farther than ever before in history, and North Korea does possess some of the physical infrastructure to facilitate such movement. But while this might be the source of a large existential problem for the Kim regime, the government has demonstrated before its ability to circumscribe the amount and type of information that permeates its borders. There is no reason to suspect that economic liberalization would equally demand full or even partial openness. China is a clear example of a country that thrives on market principles but has restricted access to information. The Great Firewall of China being one example, but the quick scrub job by the online censors of the Bo Xilai scandal is one too. There are plenty of other instances where regimes maintain tight control of information in conjunction with high levels of economic competitiveness and growth, such as Bahrain and Vietnam.

Even within the implausible context of everyone in North Korea becoming fully informed about the disparity in prosperity between themselves and the rest of the world, it would not necessarily indicate the undoing of the government. On the contrary, it might be sold to citizens as further evidence not only of the immoral culture of consumption that drives the West, but also of the past and continuing efforts of North Korea’s enemies to deprive the country of goods and resources. As North Korean defector Sohn Jung-hoon noted in a post by Reuters, “[The] regime won’t stop brainwashing and saying that poverty is because of our enemies.”

Additionally, the notion that rebellion would more easily foment, or would be guaranteed to foment, at the point where North Koreans are fully informed about the disadvantaged position is disputable. The Arab Spring was a pan-cultural idea that captivated and moved forward the spirit of an entire geographic region. While this is assuredly true, the number of countries that witnessed regime change as a result of popular uprising comprise a tiny margin of the whole. In very poor Sudan, where per capita GDP is around $3,200, protests have been minimal and the Arab Spring has been largely absent. This, despite the fact that the Sudanese are primarily ethnically Arabic like their neighbors in Egypt, a full magnitude poorer than their neighbors in Egypt, and reasonably aware of their relative poverty and lack of democratic process. While it is not necessarily fair to use another part of the world as analogous for the Korean situation, the landscape in the wake of the Arab Spring does provide some clarity about the reasons and incentives for outright revolution.

As it stands now though, many in North Korea are increasingly aware of South Korea’s wealth and material success. A number of recent reports, mostly stemming from a  recent Intermedia study,  indicate that “a substantial, consistently measurable portion of the population has direct access to outside media”. This has come through highly fictionalized accounts of life like South Korea’s famous dramas, but also through illegal file sharing, news reports and films. Whether or not citizens in the DPRK take these at face value is difficult to ascertain, but they do not seem to be pushing the country toward revolution. B.R. Myers and others have well-documented the cultural superiority that North Koreans are indoctrinated with by the state. It may be the case that this sense of cultural superiority can carry the country through a transition from an autarky to a developmental state.

How Liberalization Could Look

It is possible that North Korea could reform its economic engine relatively quickly. As Orascom figured out when implementing North Korea’s mobile network, the absence of many technologies and logistics frameworks means that upgrading the country to a high level of quality is not as difficult as it would be in, say, the United States or Western Europe where pre-existing redundancies slow down adoption and change. As China and East Asia’s other developmental states have shown, rapid economic growth can paper over weaknesses of governance or a lack of freedoms.

From a development standpoint, North Korea may well be in a fortuitous geographic location. Undoubtedly China and South Korea are interested in developing its economy and stabilizing the country, but it is also neighbors with Russia and Japan. In other words, it is surrounded by some of the largest exporters of both raw and manufactured goods in the world, as well as some of the largest markets.

The opening of trade financing opportunities and FDI could also see the government in a position of strength in terms of offering more welfare options for citizens in exchange for steady control over the population. While some countries would surely not go along with this set of circumstances unless there were promises for political reform alongside proposed economic reform, it is highly unlikely that its potential primary investment and trade partners – Russia and China in particular – would ask for these same conditions.

With the North Korean population constantly on the verge of famine due to poor resource allocation and the systemic inefficiency of the Korean economic model, Pyongyang has almost always relied on aid from other countries. After the collapse of the Soviet Union this was largely achieved through regional belligerence. But if March’s incidents were anything to go by, the current government may not as deft at pulling the levers of global economic manipulation as the previous one. The next time talks of providing aid are conducted the United States and others will be even more wary that Pyongyang will immediately renege on the agreement. If Kim Jong-un cannot effectively harass and cajole the United States and others into providing aid, his government may find that it has little other option but to liberalize the economy.