A Little Break

It has been over a month since I posted last. There have been some major personal events since my last posting - like moving the family across the Pacific Ocean.

The postings will begin again soon.

North Korean Media Characterization of the ROK-US Wartime OPCON Transfer Postponement

Background: In August 2006, the late South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun affirmed his strong position to pursue a policy toward regaining South Korea’s wartime operational control (OPCON), and in September 2006 South Korea and the US both agreed on the transfer of wartime OPCON during the South Korea-US Summit Meeting. Although the two sides initially agreed to expeditiously complete the transition of OPCON to South Korea after October 15, 2009, but not later than March 15, 2012, the agreed date was moved to April 17, 2012 after the South Korea-US Defense Ministerial Meeting held on February 27, 2007. Additionally, the two sides agreed to dissolve the ROK-US Combined Forces Command (CFC) by April 17, 2012, at the same meeting.

During a South Korea-US summit meeting held on June 26, 2010, however, the South Korean President Lee Myung-bak and the US President Barack Obama agreed to adjust the timeline for the handover of wartime OPCON from April 17, 2012 to December 1, 2015 given the increasingly uncertain and volatile security situation on the Korean Peninsula.

North Korean Reaction to the Delay of OPCON Transfer: On July 1, 2010, the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland (CPRF) spokesman issued a statement decrying the postponement of the OPCON transfer – which appears to be the first of the North Korean reaction to the announcement of the OPCON transfer postponement. As of the date of this posting, there have been seven other North Korean media reports criticizing the postponement since the CPRF statement.

The CPRF statement and the subsequent North Korean media reports uniformly condemned the South Korean President Lee Myung-bak for “begging” the US to postpone the transfer of wartime OPCON.

• “The traitor Lee Myung-bak, who went on a junket to Canada not long ago, met with Obama and played the game of begging and agreeing on the postponement of the wartime operational control [OPCON] transfer until 2015, while talking about the so-called changes in the security environment.” (The Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland Statement, 01 July 2010)

• “The South Korean conservative group persistently begged for the extension of OPCON of their own accord and, accordingly, the U.S. has got justification to strengthen its policy for military occupation and colonial rule over South Korea. Needless to say, the U.S., which pretended to reluctantly accept such request, will demand the high price for it. This resulted in putting the people of South Korea under heavier yoke of domination and subjugation by the U.S.” (Rodong Sinmun, 07 July 2010)

• “Traitor Lee Myung-bak of South Korea recently begged its American master to postpone "the transfer of wartime operation control (OPCON)" till 2015. This is a sordid act of sycophancy and treachery which can be committed only by a poor pro-U.S. stooge who stakes his life on the U.S. and a revelation of an unpardonable traitorous scenario to ignite a war of aggression against the DPRK at any cost with the backing of outside forces.” (KCNA, 13 July 2010)

North Korean Media Characterization of OPCON Transfer Postponement consistent with past characterizations of OPCON Transfer: The North Korean media characterization of the OPCON transfer postponement is consistent with the past North Korean media portrayals of the pending ROK-US OPCON transfer. The North Korean media has in the past portrayed the OPCON transfer as a “smoke screen” for a future attack on North Korea, claiming that the US will use the ROK forces as a “shock brigade” to facilitate its strategy to build up forces and equipment on the Korean Peninsula in preparations for war. Consistent with the past portrayals, the North Korean media claims the postponement of the OPCON transfer will provide the US an opportunity to strengthen its military presence on the Korean Peninsula so that it may “unhesitatingly wage an all-out war” against North Korea.

• “The CPRF brands the game of postponing the wartime OPCON transfer, which has been realized as a result of the conspiracy and collusion between the United States and the puppet gang, as an extremely grave provocation to drive the currently very dangerous situation to more serious extremes and to unhesitatingly wage an all-out war against us, and sternly denounces and condemns it in the name of the entire nation.” (The Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland Statement, 01 July 2010)

• “The U.S. extension of the OPCON under the pretext of the warship case made it possible for it to strengthen its military domination over South Korea and put its conservative ruling forces under a tighter control in a bid to effectively use them as a shock brigade for implementing its policy for invading the DPRK.” (Rodong Sinmun, 13 July 2010)

North Korean media’s Previous Portrayals of ROK-US OPCON transfer as a “smoke screen” for a future attack on North Korea:

• “The commander of the U.S. forces in south Korea made reckless remarks only to give the lie to the U.S. move for "transfer of the right to command wartime operations" to South Korea and disclose the sinister ambition for the aggression on the DPRK.” (KCNA, 09 February 2010)

• “It is the unchanging strategic design of the United States to cling more tightly to South Korea militarily, provoke another Korean war using it as a steppingstone, and going one step further, realize its wild ambition for achieving military domination over Asia.” (Roodong Sinmun, 09 February 2010)

• “In recent years alone, the US military forces have been turning the US imperialist forces of aggression forcibly occupying South Korea into the armed forces for mounting a preemptive attack centered on the navy and the air force equipped with far greater mobility and striking power, while blabbering about some kind of "strategic flexibility" and "return of wartime operational control," and they are cooking up new scenarios for a war of northward aggression reflecting a strategy for launching a preemptive nuclear attack and using this as a basis to more adventurously stage joint military exercises with the South Korean puppets.” (Rodong Sinmun, 07 March 2009)

• “The US imperialist warmongers currently regard the transfer of ‘wartime operational control’ to the puppet forces, which is to take place in 2012, as an occasion to perfect the operational system of preemptive attack, and attempt to reduce ground troops and equipment and shift the focus on the naval and forces, a system of preemptive attack.” (Rodong Sinmun, 27 November 2008)

• “The United States is attempting to pull the trigger of a new war on the Korean peninsula at any cost by turning the South Korean puppet forces into an autonomous force of war on the pretext of the ‘transfer of wartime operational control.’” (Rodong Sinmun, 16 September 2008)

North Korean Media’s Past Claims that the US will use the ROK as a ‘shock brigade’:

• “The U.S. seeks to turn its forces in South Korea into a task force capable of conducting military actions for aggression in vaster areas, not just the regional forces tasked with carrying out limited military duty in limited areas, and use the South Korean army as a shock brigade.” (KCNA, 09 February 2010)

• “The United States has been preparing US forces occupying South Korea as rapid mobile forces to make them carry out aggressive military actions in broader areas, not as a regional force that discharges its limited military duty in restricted areas, and use the South Korean forces as a shock brigade. The game of playing with the "transfer of wartime operational control" is a dangerous military move that seeks this very goal.” (Rodong Sinmun, 09 February 2010)

• “The US imperialists' maneuvers for pressing forward the "handover of wartime operational control" also serve the purpose of subordinating the puppet armed forces to the US imperialists more thoroughly and using them as a shock brigade in a war of northward aggression.” (Minju Joson, 24 June 2009)

• “If another Korean war breaks out, they will push forward the South Korean puppet forces as a shock brigade and [the US Forces] will use the method verified through Iraq and Afghanistan wars; [they] will attempt to easily achieve the purpose of northward aggression while reducing a force loss to the maximum by mobilizing the naval and air forces' state-of-the-art attack weapons.” (Rodong Sinmun, 27 November 2008)

• “The United States is attempting to pull the trigger of a new war on the Korean peninsula at any cost by turning the South Korean puppet forces into an autonomous force of war on the pretext of the ‘transfer of wartime operational control’ and by using them as a shock brigade, while enhancing the mobility and attack capability of the US imperialist forces of aggression occupying South Korea.” (Rodong Sinmun, 16 September 2008)

Overall Assessment of the North Korean Media on the Postponement of OPCON Transfer: Since the announcement of the postponement of the ROK-US OPCON transfer, the North Korean media has released eight reports condemning the postponement. All of the reports uniformly criticized the South Korean President Lee Myung-bak for “begging” the US to retain wartime OPCON and postpone the transfer. The reports also consistently claim the postponement of the OPCON transfer provides the US an opportunity to “strengthen its policy for military occupation and colonial rule over South Korea,” and thereby “escalating the tension on the Korean Peninsula” and “increasing the danger of war of aggression against North Korea.”

The North Korean media characterization of the OPCON transfer postponement is consistent with the past North Korean media portrayals of the pending ROK-US OPCON transfer. The North Korean media has in the past portrayed the OPCON transfer as a “smoke screen” for a future attack on North Korea, claiming that the US will use the ROK forces as a “shock brigade” to facilitate its strategy to build up forces and equipment on the Korean Peninsula in preparations for war. Consistent this logic, the North Korean media claims the postponement of the OPCON transfer will provide the US an opportunity to strengthen its military presence on the Korean Peninsula so that it may “unhesitatingly wage an all-out war” against North Korea.

KCNA: North Korean Permanent Representative to the UN Holds News Conference on Cheonan

Korean Central Broadcasting Station carried the following in Korean during its 11:00 PM KST newscast on July 10. Additionally, The Korean Central News Agency carried the following in English under the headline "Permanent Representative of DPRK at UN Holds Press Conference" on July 10.

==========

Sin Son Ho, permanent representative of the DPRK at the UN, held a press conference in New York on Friday as regards the issue of the presidential statement of the United Nations Security Council on the "Ch'o'nan" case.

The press conference was attended by correspondents of various countries at the UN.

Sin Son Ho said that the UNSC could not make any proper judgment or conclusion as it hastily tabled and handled the case before the truth of the case has been probed.

The "Ch'o'nan" case should have been settled between the North and the South without referring it to the UN, he said, adding: The DPRK will probe the truth behind the case to the last.

The recent development in which the situation on the Korean Peninsula reached a point of explosion in a moment due to a conspiratorial farce once again reminds us of the danger of the present cease-fire and the urgency to establish a peace-keeping regime.

The DPRK will make consistent efforts for the conclusion of a peace treaty and the denuclearization on the peninsula through the Six-Party Talks conducted on equal footing.

Answering the questions raised by reporters, Sin said that the presidential statement of the UNSC which said it took note of the DPRK's stand that it had nothing to do with the "Ch'o'nan" case meant a diplomatic victory of the DPRK.

South Korean Government Summons Russian Envoy to Protest Russia's Cheonan Findings

The Russian government apparently provided the findings of its investigation into the Cheonan incident to China and the US last week, leaving South Korea out of the loop. Understandably, the South Korean government summoned the Russian Ambassador to South Korea to lodge its objections on being left out of the loop on the matter.

The Russian investigation reportedly concluded that "it was unable to view the 'No. 1 torpedo' as being the cause of the sinking" of the ROKS Cheonan. Frankly, Russia's "findings" are not surprising given its past and present relations with North Korea as well as its interests in Northeast Asia - which do not necessarily coincide with the US or even China.

Below is a report from Hankyoreh by Lee Yeong-in that was filed on July 10 on this topic uner the headline, "Government Protests Russia's Conflicting Cheonan Findings":

==========

It came to light Friday that the South Korean government summoned the Russian Ambassador to South Korea and expressed strenuous objections over the Russian government’s failure to provide notification of the findings of its independent team that investigated the Cheonan sinking. The team was dispatched to South Korea around one month ago and concluded that it was unable to view the “No. 1 torpedo” as being the cause of the sinking.

According to military and foreign affairs supports connected to Russia, the Russian government provided notification of its independent investigation results only to the Chinese and U.S. governments last week, and South Korea only found out about the content indirectly through those two countries.

Following this, 1st Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Shin Kak-soo summoned Russian Ambassador to South Korea Konstantin Vnukov to the Foreign Ministry on July 4 to express “astonishment” at Russia’s investigation findings because the findings were a complete contradiction to the South Korean government’s announcement. They also expressed severe dismay about the fact that Russian notified only the U.S. and China about the findings, while leaving South Korea out of the communication loop.

Foreign affairs sources reported that Shin used forceful and diplomatically irregular language to denounce Russia’s behavior, calling it “unfriendly conduct that violates trust,” “bewildering,” and “disappointing.” It was also reported to Shin proposed additional discussions with Russia during the meeting, and that the South Korean government subsequently provided additional information to the Russian government.


“Was it not the South Korean government that provided assistance to the Russian investigation, saying that they would be objective?” asked a former senior official in foreign affairs and national security, adding that the Russian investigation results “raise fundamental doubts about the [South Korean] government’s announcement of its Cheonan investigation findings.”

It was reported that while the Russian investigation team did conclude that the Cheonan was not sunk by a North Korean bubble jet torpedo, it did not present any definitive conclusions about the direct cause, suggesting several possible scenarios such as a secondary mine explosion following a problem with the Cheonan during its maneuvers. Analysts are interpreting this as being due to the fact that the Russian team, made up of submersible and torpedo experts, focused its examination on the question of whether the sinking resulted from a strike by the “No. 1 torpedo.”

“The Russian investigation team’s primary interest was in whether North Korea, which had been unable to produce its own torpedoes until 1995, suddenly was able to attack the Cheonan with a state-of-the-art bubble jet torpedo,” said a South Korean diplomatic source.

Indeed, the technology for bubble jet torpedoes, which are capable of splitting a vessel in two through the expansion and contraction of a bubble resulting from a powerful explosion, is possessed only by the U.S. and a small number of other countries, and has only been successful to date in experiments on stationary ships rather than actual fighting. The joint civilian-military investigation team also acknowledged in its June 29 briefing to media groups that North Korea was the first to have succeeded in using a bubble jet torpedo in the field.

North Korea shifts to peace offensive

Analysts seem to think North Korea is shifting to 'Peace Offensive' after sinking the ROKS Cheonan.

Here's an Agence France-Presse (AFP) report By Park Chan-Kyong from AFP-Hong Kong:

After months of tensions, North Korea is now looking for a way out of the confrontation sparked by the sinking of a South Korean warship, analysts said Saturday.

After securing what its U.N. envoy termed “a great diplomatic victory” when the U.N. condemned the sinking without identifying the culprit, the North expressed willingness in principle to return to nuclear disarmament talks.

“The DPRK (North Korea) will make consistent efforts for the conclusion of a peace treaty and the denuclearization through the six-party talks conducted on equal footing,” its foreign ministry said in a statement.

The North noted the U.N. Security Council's statement encouraged the settlement of outstanding issues on the Korean peninsula through peaceful dialogue.

South Korea, the United States and other countries have accused the North of torpedoing the warship with the loss of 46 lives, a charge it vehemently denies.

“Pyongyang believes it put up a good defense at the United Nations as the statement stopped short of blaming the sinking on the North,” Professor Kim Yong-Hyun of Seoul's Dongguk University told AFP.

“North Korea is now taking a peace offensive, calling for dialogue.”

The North's statement also aims to “take the steam” out of an upcoming U.S.-South Korea joint naval exercise and the South's own reprisals including a planned resumption of psychological warfare against the North, he said.

The North warned “hostile forces” against carrying out “such provocations as demonstration of forces and sanctions” in contravention of the U.N. statement.

“They will neither be able to escape the DPRK's strong physical retaliation nor will be able to evade the responsibility for the resultant escalation of the conflict,” it said.

But a defense ministry spokesman said Saturday that South Korea would go ahead with the naval exercise with the United States in the Yellow Sea, which has also sparked protests from China.

The South in May announced its own non-military reprisals against the North, including a partial trade ban and the possible resumption of propaganda broadcasts through loudspeakers along the border.

Professor Yang Moo-Jin of Seoul's University of North Korean Studies said that despite the rhetoric, the North's statement is laying emphasis on dialogue.

“Pyongyang is now taking an exit strategy to extricate itself from the row over the sinking,” Yang said.

“The North is struggling to send a message that it is in favor of dialogue. This move is aimed at making the planned U.S.-South Korea joint naval exercise and the South's resumption of psychological warfare appear unwarranted.”

In an apparent policy shift, the North on Friday offered to hold military generals' talks with the United States to discuss the Cheonan sinking.

It announced on the same day that a U.S. citizen serving a prison term in the North for illegal entry had attempted suicide, driven by “despair at the U.S. government that has not taken any measure for his freedom.”

“This is all part of the North's efforts to attract Washington to dialogue,” Yang said.

Professor Jang Yong-Suk of Sung Kong Hoe University told Yonhap news agency that China might have urged the North to come back to dialogue in return for its support at the U.N. Security Council.

The six-party talks — which involve China, the two Koreas, the United States, Russia and Japan — have been stalled since North Korea quit them last year in protest over U.N. censure of its missile test.

The North has previously expressed willingness in principle to return. But first it wants the U.S. to agree to hold talks on a formal peace treaty and an end to sanctions.

The Greater Tumen Area Economic Project on the Move

It seems China and North Korea has moved forward on one of their economic venture. Japan's Kyodo World Service reported today China has completed the repair of the bridge in Hunchun at the Sino-North Korean border over the Tuman River, giving China a safer access to North Korea to reach Rajin Port. The report also says the Chinese government has approved a plan to transport coal and other items produced in Jilin, China, to Shanghai via Rajin, North Korea, in April this year.

Despite the Cheonan incident and continued North Korean temper tantrums, it appears the Sino-North Korean Tumen area project continues to roll.

Here's the entire Kyodo World Service report:

Yanji, China - China has repaired a bridge in Hunchun at the Chinese and North Korean border, giving it a safer access to North Korea for use of Rajin port to ship coal to Shanghai, according to Jilin Province officials.

China paid 3.6 million yuan ($528,526) to repair the bridge over the TUmen River, a project jointly pursued with North Korea, the officials said Tuesday.

Work was completed June 14.

The bridge serves as a gateway to Pier No. 1 at Rajin port, which a Chinese company has obtained the right to use for 10 years.

In April, the Chinese government approved a plan to transport coal and other items produced in Jilin to Shanghai via Rajin in northeastern North Korea.

China and North Korea have been in talks about financing of a plan to build a 50-kilometer road leading to the port, the officials said.

Rodong Sinmun's Comments about Secretary Hillary Clinton

Rodong Sinmun, in a signed commentary published on 22 June, said, “Not many words worth paying attention to come out of the mouths of meddlesome and garrulous women. Women of this type often insist that black is white. US Secretary of State Hillary [Clinton] can be said to be precisely this type of woman.” It also said Secretary Clinton’s remarks made during her recent junket through the Central and South American countries, where she stated North Korea is a threat to global peace, are “brigandish sophism” reminiscent of a thief crying “Stop the thief!”

While it is common practice for the Rodong Sinmun to mention foreign leaders and their administrations by name and criticize them for their policy practices or positions, it is uncommon for it to directly insult a foreign/international official.

Following are examples of common Rodong Sinmun criticisms:

• On 02 June 2009, Rodong Sinmun criticized the US President Obama for practicing “double standard” in his nuclear policy. In its criticism, Rodong Sinmun cited an article entitled “Speaking of the Matter of Israel’s Nuclear Weapons” to reinforce its position that President Obama and the US government practices “double standard” when it comes to global nuclear weapons reduction.

• On 28 July 2006, Rodong Sinmun charged that the US President George W. Bush and his administration is the true “culprits” responsible for bringing about the “danger of nuclear war” and heightened tension on the Korean Peninsula.

Personal insults on foreign/international officials, while more uncommon, is not unprecedented:

• On 14 June 2010, Rodong Sinmun denounced IAEA Director General Amano Yukiya for his remarks at the meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors held on 07 June where he stressed North Korea should fulfill all of its obligations related to the nuclear non-proliferation and comply with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Rodong Sinmun remarked Amano Yukiya is an ignorant man who is a Japanese with strong pro-US tendency who initially failed to be elected as the director general of the agency due to the opposition of the developing countries, but later barely managed to have himself elected through money diplomacy.

• On 19 June 2009, Rodong Sinmun decried the South Korean President Lee Myung-bak is “a wicked sycophant and traitor and confrontation-minded maniac, to realize his ambition to invade the north in league with foreign forces” in response to President Lee’s statement made during his visit to a South Korean Air Force base where he said “cooperation” with the United States would help “deter” a war.

• On 13 May 2009, Rodong Sinmun remarked the South Korean Foreign Minister Ryu Myong Hwan is a “a sycophant and traitor bereft of even an iota of the consciousness of being a member of the Korean nation and its soul” in response to Foreign Minister Ryu’s support for the UNSC’s decision to tighten sanctions on North Korea.

While the 22 June commentary was the first Rodong Sinmun’s personal insult on Secretary Clinton, this was not the first time North Korea has mocked her.

• On 23 July 2009, the spokesman for the North Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs blasted the “anti-North Korean vituperation” made by the US Secretary Clinton and said that Secretary Clinton has made a spate of “vulgar” remarks unbecoming of her position everywhere she went since she was sworn in.

• In the same statement, the spokesman also stated, “We cannot but regard Mrs. Clinton as a funny lady as she likes to utter such rhetoric, unaware of the elementary etiquette in the international community. Sometimes she looks like a primary schoolgirl and sometimes a pensioner going shopping. Anyone making misstatements has to pay for them. It is our view that she can make even a little contribution to the implementation of the U.S. administration's foreign policy as secretary of State only when she has understanding of the world, to begin with.”

Kim Jong-il makes Robust Outings amid Tension with South Korea

In one of his most energetic public outings this year, Kim Jong-il inspected a training base for military officers and a string of industrial facilities, North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) reported on Sunday, June 20 (KCNA report title: "Kim Jong Il Provides Field Guidance to Work in Various Fields of North Phyongan Province").

Kim "inspected the training center for commanding officers of KPA Unit 593" while visiting a mine, an electronics factory, a co-operative farm and a machine complex in northwestern North Korea, KCNA said in reports datelined Saturday, 19 June.

The trips come as South Korea is implementing a raft of measures to punish North Korea both economically and politically after it blamed Pyongyang for the sinking of the ROKS Cheonan in March.

Denying its role, North Korea has threatened war if it is punished for the sinking that killed 46 sailors.

Earlier this month, North Korea conducted a sweeping reshuffle in a rare extra parliamentary session, a step that analysts said appears to have set the stage for a hereditary power succession.

Since apparently suffering a stroke 2008, 68-year-old Kim has stepped up his public activities. The number of his outings in 2009 came in at 200, which tied his highest number of public appearances in a year that was set in 2001.

South Korean Residents getting Spooked by North's Threats

The South Korean military apparently reported two small scares on June 17, demonstrating that the South Korean residents and miitary are getting a bit jumpy at the recent threats of war made by North Korea.

The South Korean military reportedly received information from a resident living in Ansan (a city located Southwest of Seoul), South Chungcheong Province, that 40 to 50 unidentified objects resembling parachutes descended on a mountain during the night of June 16. The resident apparently tol the military authorities that he also sensed human movements in the area where the objects fell. The South Korean military and police mobilized a special task force in the early morning of June 17 in response to this report.

The military did not find anything suspicious, but a report was apparently sent up the chain of command, all the way to the Defense Minister, just in case North Korea was really trying to infiltrate into the South, who ordered a military task force be formed to investigate the reporting.

The investigation revealed the "flying objects" were balloons from a nearby kindergarten.

Click here for more from the JoongAng Ilbo on this topic.

North Korea's rhetoric and threats are ordinarily intended to bring about anxiety and restlessness to the South Korean residents and authorities. Although it does not seem to be a trend, yet, it certainly seems the Norks are having some success in meeting its IO (information operations) goals against the South.

A South Korean Computer Security Firm expects Another Round of DDoS Attacks Today

(From Financial News in Korean; By Hong Suk-Hui; Translation by 'Straight and Stalwart')
Possible China-Originated DDoS Attack on June 16 Detected(Click here for the original Korean reporting)

Following the two recent Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks that originated from China, it has been detected that there will be another round of DDoS attack on the 16th.

ESTsoft, a computer security firm, stated on the 14th that it has detected some movements for a third DDoS attack to commence on the 16th. The upcoming DDoS attack is being planned by the same group of Chinese netizens that twice earlier attempted DDoS attacks on the South Korean government portal sites, some governmental agencies sites, and sites related to a boy band Super Junior, ESTsoft added.

ESTsoft does not expect the upcoming DDoS attack to have a large-scale damage; however, because the number of IP that was used in the recent DDoS attack is on the rise, it warrants caution.

What sets the upcoming DDoS, which is being called "the Holy War" among the Chinese netizens, apart from other typical DDoS is that this DDoS is being conducted manually - the organizers of the attack are actively recruiting for participants and distributing specific software designed to attack a designated website.

ESTsoft said, "The first and second attacks, which occurred on the 9th and the 11th, respectively, were not very effective, and the third attack will most likely be similar in form to previous attacks." "The number of IP used in the second attack was over double of that used during the first attack; therefore, it needs to be watched closely," it added.

North Korea sends a Letter to the UNSC and wants a New Investigation into the Cheonan Incident

(From Yonhap News Agency in English, published June 9; By Sam Kim)
SEOUL - North Korea said Wednesday [9 June] it has sent a letter to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to urge a new probe into the sinking of a South Korean warship in March, warning of "serious" consequences if punishment against Pyongyang is discussed.


The North is accused of sinking the 1,200-ton South Korean corvette and killing 46 seamen on March 26 near the Yellow Sea border with South Korea. Seoul has formally requested the 15-member UNSC to discuss ways to hold Pyongyang to account, citing a multinational investigation that concluded the ship was torpedoed.

"In case the unilaterally forged 'investigation result' is put on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council ... it will be more than clear that the sovereignty and security of (North Korea) is infringed upon," a letter by Sin Son-ho, permanent North Korea representative at the U.N., was quoted as saying by the communist state's official Korean Central News Agency.

"By then, no one would dare imagine how serious its consequences would be with regard to the peace and security on the Korean Peninsula," the letter, addressed to UNSC President Claude Heller and sent on Tuesday [8 June], was quoted as saying.

North Korea has threatened war if it is punished or sanctioned for the sinking, demanding Seoul accept an inspecting group from Pyongyang and verify the results of its probe in front of it.

Earlier Wednesday, the South Korean foreign ministry said a multinational team of investigators will brief the UNSC members on the outcome of their probe that found North Korea responsible.

South Korea referred the sinking to the council last week for a rebuke of Pyongyang. South Korean investigators are scheduled to depart for New York late Wednesday, a ministry official said on the condition of anonymity.

China and Russia, two of the veto-wielding UNSC members, have yet to acknowledge the results. Britain, France and the United States are also permanent members.

U.S. Cautious About U.N. Condemnation of North Korea

(From Yonhap News Agency in English, published in June 9 [Korea Time], June 8 [EDT]; By Hwang Doo-hyong)

WASHINGTON - The United States Tuesday [8 June] was cautious about how to punish North Korea for the torpedoing of a South Korean warship amid China's lukewarm position on further sanctions on its communist ally.


"Just to clarify, to be sure that you didn't mishear me, the South Korean government has sent a letter to the president of the Security Council," State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said. "We do expect the matter to come up within the council in the next couple of weeks. We would expect to have, per the South Korean request, an appropriate response from the U.N. Security Council. But what that specific response is will be a part of the upcoming debate."

Crowley was clarifying the remarks he made the previous day that the U.S. expected "a strong statement" on North Korea from the Security Council, which in some circles was interpreted as a scolding from the council presidential statement, viewed as weaker than a resolution.

* Link to the US Department of State Daily Press Briefing for June 7 (EDT) where Mr. Crowley made his "a strong statement" comment.

* Link to the US Department of State Daily Press Briefing for June 8 (EDT) that this Yonhap reporting is based on.

North Korea is already under U.N. sanctions imposed after its nuclear and missile tests.

Departing for Beijing earlier in the day to seek Chinese support for condemnation of North Korea, South Korean Vice Foreign Minister Chun Yung-woo said in Seoul that a resolution seeking additional sanctions "will not have practical benefits" as bilateral and multilateral sanctions have already been imposed on North Korea.

Chun, however, called for the Security Council to take "appropriate action" as the world body responsible for maintaining peace and stability in the world.

Chun's remarks appear to embrace the reality that China, a veto-wielding council member, has not yet officially blamed the North for the sinking of the warship Cheonan. China has only emphasized the need to "avoid conflict" and "maintain peace and stability" on the Korean Peninsula.

Many analysts believe it will take a considerable time before the council acts, whether it be non-binding presidential statement or a resolution with or without sanctions. It took about two weeks for the council to adopt resolutions against North Korea for its nuclear and missile tests.

An international team of investigators concluded last month that a North Korean mini-submarine torpedoed the Cheonan, but North Korea vehemently denies involvement and has threatened all-out war if sanctioned. The March 26 incident claimed 46 lives.

South Korea severed all ties with North Korea, except for the joint industrial complex in the North's border town of Kaesong, and is preparing for resuming propaganda broadcasting along the border after a six-year hiatus.

South Korea and the U.S. will also conduct a joint military exercise in waters near the scene of the sinking late this month in a show of force against North Korea with the participation of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington.

Russian Defense Minister says the Conclusion of the Cheonan Incident Premature; Russia will Announce its Conclusions in a Month

(From Itar-Tass in English, published on June 9)

MOSCOW-Russian specialists need another month to ascertain the cause of the destruction of a South Korean corvette in the Yellow Sea, Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov told "the Government Hour" session in a closed regime at the Federation Council upper house of the Russian parliament on Wednesday.

"Our specialists have returned from South Korea with fragments of the sunken ship and the explosive device. We need about a month to examine them and draw conclusions," chairman of the FC committee for defense and security Viktor Ozerov quoted Serdyukov as saying.

"It is premature to draw conclusions until we have processed all the information," Serdyukov added.

The South Korean warship Cheonan split asunder and sank in the Yellow Sea near the demarcation line with North Korea on March 26. Forty-six sailors perished.

A South Korean commission probing the accident, in which western experts participated, announced in May that the ship had been destroyed by a torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine.

* Note: Remainder of the Itar-Tass reporting omitted because the article shifted focus onto another topic.

(From Interfax-AVN in English, published on June 9)
MOSCOW- Russian military experts' report on an inquiry into the sinking of the South Korean corvette, the Cheonan, will be drawn up within a month, Viktor Ozerov, the Federation Council's defense and security committee chief, said, quoting Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov.


"The issue of North Korea was raised and the minister said that Russian experts have returned from South Korea, bringing in parts of the wreckage of the sunken ship and of an explosive device. The minister also said that we need about four weeks to carry the analysis through and to draw conclusions," Ozerov told journalists.

"Making conclusions would be premature before the experts process all information brought from South Korea," Ozerov said.

Sino-US Military Tensions on Full Display

(From South China Morning Post; by Greg Torode, Chief Asia correspondent in Singapore)

Sino-US military tensions broke out into the open at a security conference in Singapore yesterday, as a senior PLA strategist directly challenged US Defence Secretary Dr Robert Gates over the freeze in ties.

The rare exchange saw Major General Zhu Chenghu warn that "you, the Americans, are taking China as the enemy" in response to a strong speech from Gates defending arms sales to Taiwan and blaming Beijing for the breakdown in military relations. Gates insisted he wanted co-operation with China and did not view it as an enemy.

The exchange was part of a series of statements to the informal Shangri-La Dialogue that crystallised many of the issues clouding ties. While both sides spoke of a yearning for a deep and comprehensive military relationship, differences were also sharply described.

The lead PLA delegate, General Ma Xiaotian, for example, said arms sales and US surveillance operations in the South and East China Seas were obstacles to the resumption of exchanges. Gates' address made clear that Washington was not about to budge on such issues, and expressed deepening US concerns over the South China Sea.

The exchange across a conference room crowded with regional government and military officials and academics ended in a brief handshake between Gates and Ma. It represented the only conversation between the two countries this weekend when hopes for a formal meeting were scuppered by China's decision to scrap a visit by Gates to Beijing after the conference.

Beijing halted military exchanges following a fresh package of US$6.4 billion worth of arms to Taiwan in February - the first under the administration of President Barack Obama - and a White House visit by the Dalai Lama soon after.

Gates said such sales were based on "well-established precedent and ... longstanding [US] belief that a peaceful and non-coerced resolution to the Taiwan issue is an abiding national interest - and vital for the overall security of Asia". "Taiwan arms sales over the decades have not impeded closer political and economic ties. Only in the military-to-military arena has progress on critical mutual security issues been held hostage over something that is, quite frankly, old news."

Describing Beijing's break-off of ties as "making little sense", he said the US remained committed to agreements between Obama and President Hu Jintao to advance sustained and reliable military relations. "The key words here are `sustained and reliable' - not a relationship repeatedly interrupted by ... the vagaries of political weather."

Zhu, director general of the department of strategic studies at the National Defence University, said it was not fair to blame the PLA or Beijing for the breakdown.

"I believe that this sort of arms sale sends to the Chinese the wrong signal ... that is Chinese are taking the Americans as partners and as friends and you the Americans are taking the Chinese as the enemy."

Most Chinese people believed the "sole purpose" of the arms sales was to prevent the reunification of China, he said.

Ma, deputy chief of the PLA General Staff, warned that military relations were "trapped in a cycle of ... suspension and development". "Both sides hope through joint efforts we can break this cycle. Unfortunately efforts have not worked so far ... It takes two to tango."

He also reiterated concerns about cold war-era alliances and called for more equal, trusting relationships across the region - another crack at Washington's traditional approach.
The sinking of the South Korean warship Cheonan by a North Korean torpedo also sparked debate.

Gates said the region shared the task of tackling "dangerous provocations", warning that inaction would represent a failure to protect peace and stability. Beijing has to yet detail its response. Zhu questioned the differences between the US response to the sinking and its caution over the fatal boarding by Israel of a Gaza-bound aid ship last week.

In 2005, Zhu said China would use nuclear weapons against the US if Washington intervened militarily in a conflict between Beijing and Taipei.

The average South Korean university student is simply not interested in North Korea

(From the Global Post; By Teke Wiggin. Comments by the author of this blog in green text. )

Many South Koreans indifferent about North
Polls show S. Koreans haven't completely accepted findings that N. Korea blew up their warship.

Usually Shin In-young and her friends don't think about North Korea and its pudgy, reclusive strongman who dons retro sunglasses, abhors airplanes and may have ordered a surprise attack on a South Korean warship. But when pressed for their views on their pariah-state neighbor, Shin’s age group has some things to say that might come as a surprise to the average Westerner.

A 23-year-old Yonsei University journalism major, Shin says North Korea doesn’t bother her much.

“I have never taken their provocations as threats because none of them have ever changed my life,” she said.

This is a typical response I get from the people in their 20's and even those in their early 30's in Korea on just about all topics, not just North Korea. If it does not affect their daily lives/life style, they just don't seem to care about anything but what affects them immediately (of course, perhaps they are not really any different than any other young people around the globe...however, the South Koreans seem to be far, far, far more self-centered when it comes to this kinds of things).

Shin and her friends represent a demographic inside South Korea that is mostly indifferent to the bellicose rhetoric and saber-rattling that characterizes the North’s foreign policy approach.

“The average South Korean university student is simply not interested in North Korea,” said Brian Myers, who is director of the international studies department at Dongseo University in Busan, South Korea, and wrote a New York Times Op-Ed on the matter.

Just take his current North Korean affairs seminar as an example, he says: Only four students chose to enroll in the class.

“If it was a course on American politics, there would probably be 30 kids,” he said.

College students’ apathy toward the impoverished communist state is so acute that many of Myers’ students lack even basic geographical knowledge of the North.

“If you show a map of North Korea, he’s going to have a hard time telling you the cities or even the main rivers, which is amazing when you consider how tiny the peninsula is,” he said.

In this hyper-capitalistic society where parents spend exorbitant amounts of money to send their children to specialty schools and “K-pop” music seems to blare out of every nook and cranny, Shin says her friends are more interested in trying to work for Korean business conglomerates like Samsung and LG.

But the North does manage to turn heads every once in a while, Myers said. And when that happens as it has with the sinking of the South Korean warship, the Cheonan, intriguing attitudes toward the North come to light.

Shin says that because of the crisis she and her friends now worry a little but still think of “North and South Korea in brotherhood all the time.”

Sung Han-na, a student at Han Se University, says hostile views toward the North are rare among South Koreans: “I’ve never met anyone who treats North Korea as an enemy.”

Kim So-yeon, a 23-year-old liberal and Joongang Law University student, also values a common bloodline and heritage. “I’m one of the supporters of unification, so I try to speak about North Korea in a friendly way,” she said.

Kim wants the North to keep its nuclear weapons. She thinks it’s a justified deterrent against U.S. aggression. And she does not believe the North sank the Cheonan.

These views about North Korea is also a common thing here. Majority of the South Koreans think that the North Koreans are their "long lost brothers" and that the North and South Koreas are actually one country divided only due to political differences in the ruling elites (and to some extent Kim Jong-il). Interesting thing is that the North Koreans for sure do not think that the North and the South Koreans are "long lost brothers." North Koreans see their country as a separate and independent country that has nothing to do with the South. In fact, if you ask a North Korean refugee (or a defector) about what they think about the unification of the two Koreas, the first thing they will ask you is, "Then what happens to my country?"

On March 26, the South Korean navy corvette was severed in two by a mysterious underwater explosion, killing 46 sailors. After an exhaustive investigation, on May 20 a commission of South Korean and international experts announced that North Korea had launched a torpedo strike on the warship.

South Korean Investigators Looking Into Possible Leakage of OPLAN 5027

(From the Korea Herald)

Military intelligence officials and prosecutors are investigating whether an Army major general, recently booked on espionage charges, had leaked the Korea-U.S. combined war scenario "Operational Plan 5027."

The Defense Security Command (DSC) has been questioning the two-star general, identified only by the surname Kim, over whether he handed over the core content of the OPLAN 5027 to a spy for North Korea.

The spy, surnamed Park, was a former South Korean military intelligence official recruited by North Korea. Kim is purported to have given classified information regarding military management and operations to Park between 2005 and 2007.

Prosecutors arrested Park and an executive of a local defense firm last Thursday on charges of offering military secrets to the communist state.

"We are not yet at a stage to conclude that OPLAN 5027 has been handed over to the North. We are conducting our investigation over the possible leak of the military secrets in a variety of directions," said a DSC official on condition of anonymity.

The DSC plans to seek an arrest warrant once it finds Kim handed over the content of the war plan over to the communist country. The military is expanding its probe on the case to verify if more military officials are implicated in the alleged espionage activities.

The South Korean and U.S. militaries maintain the joint war plan in case of North Korean aggression. The plan was first drawn up in 1974 and has been revised and complemented several times.

Under the plan, if hostilities break out, the United States would deploy up to 690,000 troops, 160 vessels and 2,000 aircraft to the peninsula, in addition to the current troops stationed here, which total 28,500, to help South Korean forces remove the regime of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and defeat his 1.19-million-strong military.

Korea Institute for National Unification Researcher predicts North Korea's Third Nuclear Test in Reaction to Cheonan Situation

Following is an English translation of a piece written by Chon Song-hun, a Senior Fellow at the Korea Institute for National Unification (KINU).

This piece was printed in Korean and published on the KINU Online Series CO 10-19 in Korean.

==========

North Korea's Position on the Ship Cheonan Incident and Projected Future Attitude

[First part of the paper is about the official statements from South Korea and North Korea on the Cheonan incident, and those passages were not translated.]

North Korea's Projected Future Attitude

The North Korean authorities must have expected that the surprise attack by a small-sized midget submarine would remain a case of permanent unsolved mystery, if not a perfect crime. [They] must have expected that [the South Korean] Government would be at a loss due to its inability to find material evidence despite strong belief, and hoped that it would find itself in a tight dilemma due to criticism of security incapability from the conservative camp and criticism from the progressive camp calling for the withdrawal of the hostile policy toward the North.

Nevertheless, such an expectation proved futile with the announcement of the scientific, objective investigation results by an international joint investigation team. Instead, with the revelation that the sinking of Cheonan was a clear military provocation by North Korea, North Korea finds itself in a tight spot. Whenever a deception tactic to deceive a counterpart failed, North Korea used to choose a path that further deteriorated the circumstance. A case in point is that in the early 1990s when a false report to the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] turned out to be a fact, [the North] severed North-South dialogue and declared the withdrawal from the NPT [Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty]. In view of such an experience, this time, too, North Korea is likely to take an offensive reaction that damages stability on the Korean peninsula while using a strategy of offensive advancement to evade a defensive phase. Under the basic premise that the sinking of Cheonan has nothing to do with North Korea, North Korea will define the nature of all the measures it takes as a reaction in the self-defensive dimension against the international community's pressure on the North.

In the future, North Korea will attempt to incite mistrust and criticism for the [South Korean] government and create conflict among South Koreans by giving a political, economical, psychological blow by means of heightened tension through an offensive strategy toward the South. North Korean ships' infiltration of the NLL [Northern Limit Line] will continue and there is a likelihood that North-South maritime collisions may occur. As a counter offensive to South Korea's reaction, [the North] may fire surface-to-ship missiles against [the South] ships. Regarding the Kaesong Industrial Zone, [the North] would not easily close it in consideration of economic benefits and the domestic, international burdens in the aftermath of closing the zone. For the time being, [the North] will use the tactic of pressuring South Korea with the card of possible hostage-taking of the South side's workers. Nevertheless, in case the situation worsened, [we] cannot rule out the possibility that [the North] would take the measure of closing the zone.

Since strained North-South relations are inevitable for a considerable period, South Korea's internal strategy is likely to be adjusted. It appears that [the North] will promote the power-succession project, which will be concretized with the opening of the door to a powerful state in 2012, with the focus placed on the military aspect. [The North] will actually give up economic assistance from South Korea and try to find a breakthrough of economic losses from the military sector. In other words, it is likely that [the South] will create a semi-war situation with heightened confrontation against South Korea and achieve power succession amid the atmosphere of war. This is to overcome the people's discontent over the poor economy and the three-generation hereditary succession, by creating a threat of war.

In the international stage, including the United Nations, [the North] will unfold diplomatic warfare on the basis of two pillars of "North Korea's non-involvement" and "self-defensive reaction." A method that North Korean may choose to give a strong shock externally is a third nuclear test. It is expected that [the North] is highly likely to conduct a third nuclear test in a period between the conclusion of the eighth NPT evaluation meeting at the end of May and before the November US mid-term election this year.

In connection with this, [we] need to take note of the Rodong Sinmun report dated May 12 that North Korean scientists successfully conducted a nuclear fusion reaction. Nuclear fusion is a technology for manufacturing the H-bomb, which is mightier by tens or hundreds of times than the atomic bomb, whose principle is nuclear fission. [I] view that lurking behind the background of announcing North Korea's success in fusion technology is a calculation to conduct an additional nuclear test. It is expected that by carrying out a third nuclear test, which is much bigger in scale than the previous ones, [the North] will exaggerate its nuclear deterrent, implicitly showing off the fact that it has made a new nuclear warhead relying on the nuclear fusion technology.

The nuclear tests conducted in 2006 and 2009 were small-scale nuclear tests at the level of 1 kiloton and 2 kilotons, respectively. North Korea must have conducted small-scale nuclear tests with some calculation of its own, but with the West's reaction that North Korea's nuclear capabilities are nothing much, it is evaluated that [the North] plans an additional nuclear test that has much larger destructive power. In conclusion, the report of successful nuclear fusion may be a political move, and a prior ground-laying work, to conduct a third nuclear test by taking advantage of a tense atmosphere created by the Cheonan incident.

Kim Jong-Il: Right-Wing Mole?

An interesting piece published on Foreign Policy in Focus World Beat, Vol. 5, No. 20, 25 May 2010.

Kim Jong Il must work for the American Enterprise Institute. Or maybe it's the Heritage Foundation. The North Korean dictator doesn't talk much about his non-resident fellowship at a right-wing U.S. think tank. It might not go over well with the Politburo in Pyongyang.

But actions speak louder than words.

North Korea's sinking of the Cheonan, a South Korean ship that went down in March in the Yellow Sea near the maritime border between the two countries, is just what the right-wing doctors have ordered. Japan was looking a little squishy on the Okinawa base issue. China needed some reminders about just how rogue its erstwhile ally really is. And South Korea's conservative President Lee Myung Bak wanted confirmation that his containment approach to the north was justified.

Right on cue, Kim Jong Il torpedoed a South Korean ship, killing 46 sailors. The incident plays so much into the hands of North Korea's adversaries that some analysts have looked for other culprits, including friendly fire from either South Korea or the United States. While such speculation is interesting, it seems rather farfetched. In this age of WikiLeaks, it's hard to imagine a successful cover-up of such friendly fire. And the evidence implicating other actors is circumstantial, to say the least.

Meanwhile, Pyongyang's fingerprints are all over this one. The South Koreans have produced torpedo fragments from dredging the area where the ship sank. There's Korean lettering on the propulsion shaft that matches the font used in another North Korean torpedo the South Koreans have. And the South Koreans also matched traces of propellant to an earlier North Korean torpedo. Skeptics have challenged some of these findings, but the rebuttals in both news outlets and blogs are rather convincing.

Perhaps the South Korean government fabricated the evidence? Maybe. But South Korea was reluctant to point the finger at the north in the first place. A successful North Korean strike embarrasses the South Korean military and casts a shadow over the South Korean economy.

So, it looks as though AEI's overseas fellow is the most logical perp. As a result of his bold move, South Korea is suspending all contact with the North. Forget about trade (about a quarter of a billion dollars a year) and access to South Korean shipping lanes. Washington is backing its South Korean ally 100 percent. The hard right has been pushing for this kind of isolation policy against North Korea for some time.

Even more timely is the role the Cheonan sinking plays in U.S.-Japan relations. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama was wavering on whether or not he should accede to U.S. pressure to build a new base in Okinawa to replace the aging Futenma Marine Corps facility. But, according to a senior U.S. official, the Cheonan incident reminded the Japanese government "that this is still a very dangerous neighborhood and that the U.S.-Japan alliance and the basing arrangements that are part of that are critical to Japan's security."

North Korea, in other words, has managed to torpedo all attempts to break the isolation of the country and reduce military tensions in the region. If the Dear Leader didn't receive under-the-table payments from John Bolton and friends, what on earth motivated such a self-destructive act? Perhaps Kim wanted to rally nationalist sentiment in the country on the eve of his son's succession to the top spot. Perhaps it was simple revenge for South Korea's firing on a North Korean ship that passed into South Korean waters last November. The maritime boundary between the two countries has been long disputed, so trespass is truly in the eyes of the beholder.

Actually, the situation is even more complicated, as Mike Chinoy points out in Forbes. When South Korean president Lee Myung Bak took office, he backtracked on his predecessor's pledge to work with North Korea to build confidence around the disputed maritime boundary. "The North was infuriated by what it saw as a deliberate belittling of accords signed by its all-powerful leader - what one western analyst described as 'sticking a finger in Kim Jong Il's eye,'" writes Chinoy. "So Pyongyang responded in a predictably belligerent fashion - by ratcheting up tensions in the disputed waters."

So, like with the Maine and the Tonkin Gulf incident, are we going to war? Fortunately, no one is calling for military retaliation against North Korea. South Koreans oppose military action by two to one, and they even support the maintenance of the south-managed Kaesong Industrial Complex, which employs 40,000 North Koreans (and would likely cost the south half a billion dollars to close). Even the Heritage Foundation is going only so far as to recommend an economic cutoff, further isolation of North Korea, and a clear condemnation in the Security Council. China remains lukewarm about any major challenge to North Korea and will do its best to throw a wet blanket over the controversy.

Washington will still try as hard as it can to pressure China into taking as hard-line a stance as possible. Other than express legitimate outrage, what would these stepped-up containment efforts achieve? About as much as Lee Myung Bak's initial hard-line posture. The North Korean government doesn't apologize when pushed up against the wall - it's content to fall back on its policy of self-reliance, or juche. And the North Korean people haven't risen up against their rulers when pushed into starvation. As Joel Wit points out in The New York Times, diplomacy remains our most viable strategy: "In the aftermath of the Cheonan sinking, the United States and South Korea must recognize that a return to dialogue would serve our interests. It is the only realistic way to rein in North Korea's objectionable activities."

This isn't a particularly palatable message right now in Seoul. And it probably won't go down very well here in Washington. But after a couple months of denunciations and attempted arm-twisting, it would be best if the countries involved in the Six Party talks take this advice to heart. If we want to prevent any future Cheonans, we need to sit down with North Korea. The last thing we want is a regime with nothing to lose - and plenty of weapons - to go out in a blaze of juche and take as many with them as possible.

**********

Foreign Policy In Focus is a network for research, analysis and action that brings together more than 700 scholars, advocates and activists who strive to make the United States a more responsible global partner. It is a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in Washington.

The Institute for Policy Studies is a community of public scholars and organizers linking peace, justice and the environment in the U.S. and globally. It works with social movements to promote democracy and challenge concentrated wealth, corporate and military power.

**********

North Korea denies Involvement in the sinking of the Cheonan – Nothing Really New

A South Korean naval vessel Cheonan sank under mysterious circumstances on the night of March 26, 2010. A South Korean joint civilian-military investigation team (joined by a multinational team of experts) had been investigating the cause of the incident. The anticipation for the investigating team’s official announcement, with indications that a North Korean torpedo is the most likely culprit, had been building for a few weeks.

Throughout the investigation period, North Korea has vigorously denied it had anything to do with the sinking of the Cheonan. It’s first statement of denial was issued on April 17, 2010 (22 days after the actual incident), where North Korea accused South Korean “warmongers” of trying to link the sinking to Pyongyang to build an “international consensus” against it.

May 20, 2010, the South Korean joint civilian-military investigation team officially announced the results of its investigation to determine the cause of the sinking of the South Korean naval vessel Cheonan. The joint team concluded a North Korean midget submarine fired torpedo was to blame for the incident and made public torpedo debris salvaged near the site of the sinking.

In a surprising move, North Korean National Defense Commission (NDC) issued a strong protest against the South Korean findings while the results of the joint investigation were still being announced. The NDC stated it will dispatch its own inspection team to South Korea so that it can verify the “material evidence” that links the sinking to North Korea. The NDC also stated it will “promptly react to any ‘punishment’ and ‘retaliation’ and ‘sanctions’ infringing upon” North Korean “interests with various forms of tough measures including an all-out war.”

While the threat of “all-out war” seems to be harsh, such language is not unusual. In March 2008, North Korea threatened South Korea with destruction after Seoul’s top military officer said South Korea would consider attacking the North if it tried to carry out a nuclear attack – “Our military will not sit idle until warmongers launch a pre-emptive strike...everything will be in ashes, not just a sea of fire, if our advanced pre-emptive strike once begins.”

North Korea denying attacks on South Korea is nothing new.

On September 18, 1996, 26 North Korean commandos snuck into South Korean waters on the east coast in a submarine. Five days later, the North argued its submarine went adrift because its engine broke down. Under pressure from South Korea and the United States, the North's Foreign Ministry in December expressed its regrets.

Pyongyang was also in denial mode in November 1987, when two North Korean spies put a time bomb on a Korean Air passenger flight that exploded midair over the Andaman Sea, killing all 115 aboard. A week after the bombing, the North said it had nothing to do with it. In February 1988, Kim Il Sung called the accusation a "conspiracy" by the United States and South Korea.

The North's Rangoon bombing in Burma on October 9, 1983 targeted President Chun Doo Hwan but ended up killing three cabinet ministers and other officials. Three days later, North Korea denied any links and called the Burmese government's accusation of a North Korean assassination attempt "ludicrous."

On January 21, 1968, 31 North Korean armed commandos invaded northern Seoul with the mission to assassinate President Park Chung Hee. Twenty-eight of them were killed but not before they killed two South Korean police officers and five civilians. On January 24, the North hailed the infiltration as "the brave fight by South Korean armed commandos."

But more than four years later, North Korean leader Kim Il Sung apologized to South Korean intelligence chief Lee Hu-rak when Lee visited Pyongyang, and said some radical leftists in North Korea planned the mission.

Serial Number on torpedo propeller matches those used for the North Korean torpedoes - South Korea's Chosun Ilbo reports

Today's front page headline of the Chosun Ilbo (a conservative South Korean daily morning paper) read: Torpedo Serial Number Font Confirmed to be North Korean (어뢰 일련번호, 북한 글자체로 확인).

The report stated, according to a high ranking South Korean official, the joint civilian-military investigation team looking into the sinking of the South Korean naval vessel Cheonan has found "conclusive evidence proving" the North Korean torpedo was what caused the sinking of the Cheonan.

The report stated, the joint investigation team reportedly was able to retrieve a pair of torpedo propellers in relatively good shape last week in the mud near the location where the Cheonan went down. After comparing the serial number imprinted on the retrieved propellers to a known North Korean sample, the investigation team reportedly found the font and the imprinting style used in the serial number of the retrieved propeller to be a match to the North Korean sample.

The South Korean official told the Chosun Ilbo that given the torpedo debris recovered in the area, the presence of traces of RDX explosives on the hull of the Cheonan, and the latest discovery about the serial number, there is now conclusive evidence that the North Korea is behind the sinking of the Cheonan. The South Korean official also said the "foreign experts" agrees with the joint investigation team's analysis.

To read the entire Chosun Ilbo report in Korean, please Korean title provided above. If you would like to read the report in English, please read on for the translated version.

* There were some editorial liberties taken with the translation for style and grammar purposes, but not for content. Please let me know if there are parts of the translation that could be worded differently to better reflect the original Korean text.

==========

Torpedo Serial Number Font Confirmed to be North Korean

"The joint investigation team has found conclusive evidence (smoking gun) proving the Cheonan was sunk by a North Korean torpedo," a high-ranking official said on 18 May.

The joint investigation team has recently retrieved torpedo propellers (propulsion device) in relatively good shape. After analyzing the imprinted serial number, investigators discovered that the font and imprinting style match with that of a North Korean torpedo. The official said "after analyzing the serial number, foreign experts (of the joint investigation team) also agreed that the torpedo came from North Korea. Together with the finding of torpedo debris and traces of explosives, this is conclusive evidence", he added.

Another government official said "last weekend, a pair (2) of nearly intact torpedo propellers were found embedded in the mud."

"These propellers can be distinguished as such, even by non-experts," he added.

It was reported that the joint investigation team compared the recovered propellers with the North Korean light torpedo propeller that was obtained seven years ago and concluded that both samples share similar quality of material. Of note, a (North Korean) torpedo propulsion device is composed of two propellers rotating in opposite directions.

A computer simulation run by the joint investigation team has temporarily concluded that it is highly possible that a sound-guided torpedo with a 250kg warhead exploded around 3m underneath the gas turbine room of the Cheonan.

Analysis of the traces of explosives retrieved also revealed that they are similar to those recovered from the seven year-old sample.

Military authorities announced they found the diesel engine (of the Cheonan) which apparently fell apart during the explosion and it was transferred to Second Fleet Command in Pyongtaek, (South Korea), for gunpowder analysis. It was also reported that the (Cheonan’s) gas turbine was located and will soon be salvaged for further analysis.