SEOUL - PRESS BULLETIN; April 6, 2009

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 08 SEOUL 000560

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PREL PGOV MARR ECON KPAO KS US
SUBJECT: SEOUL - PRESS BULLETIN; April 6, 2009

TOP HEADLINES
--------------

Chosun Ilbo
Experts: "N. Korea Fails to Either Fire Satellite into Orbit
or Wring Concessions from Obama Administration"

JoongAng Ilbo
Intelligence Authorities: "N. Korea Sent 'Cargo Ship' to Monitor
Rocket Launch, but the Ship Broke Down On Its Way
to the Pacific Ocean"


Dong-a Ilbo
ROK Semiconductor Parts Supplier Withdraws
Key Production Line from Kaesong Industrial Complex

Hankook Ilbo, Segye Ilbo, Seoul Shinmun
Prime Minister Han: "We Need to Review Missile Agreement with U.S.
that Restricts ROK's Missile Range to Under 300km"

Hankyoreh Shinmun
"Inconsistent" Signals from ROKG on North Korea:
Seoul Says that It Will Send Special Envoy to N. Korea
If Need be, While Seeking to Join PSI


DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS
--------------

President Lee Myung-bak, in an April 6 meeting with leaders of the
country's three main political parties, said that the ROKG is
actively considering joining the U.S.-led Proliferation Security
Initiative (PSI) to join global efforts to stop the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction. (All)

Main opposition Democratic Party (DP) Chairman Chung Sye-kyun,
however, raised concerns that such a move could lead to armed
conflicts between the two Koreas. (All)

Prime Minister Han Seung-soo told the National Assembly yesterday
that the ROKG may push to revise a 2001 agreement with the U.S. that
prevents Seoul from developing missiles with a range of over 300km.
He was quoted: "At this time, we need to reconsider whether it is
right for us to be restricted. It is time to have serious
discussions at the ROK-U.S. defense ministers' talks." (Dong-a,
Hankook, Hankyoreh, Segye, Seoul)


INTERNATIONAL NEWS
--------------

The UN failed yesterday to agree on a response to North Korea's
latest rocket launch. The U.S. and Japan called for strong sanctions
on North Korea, calling the North's launch a "violation of UN
Security Council Resolution 1718," but China and Russia objected to
those demands. (All)

The U.S. Congress, meanwhile, called for total compliance to stop
the export of weapons and luxury goods to North Korea. (Chosun)

According to the April 5 issue of The New York Times, U.S. missile
experts consider North Korea's rocket launch to be a "failure,"
while downplaying the North's rocket technology. The experts believe
that the North's missile technology does not represent any kind of
near-term threat. (Chosun, Hankyoreh)

ROK experts commented that the Obama Administration would not be as
easily dragged along by North Korea as the Clinton Administration
was during the North's 1998 missile test. They added that if the
North tests the patience of the Obama Administration, the U.S.
Administration will deal with the North through "tough diplomacy."
(Chosun)

SEOUL 00000560 002 OF 008




MEDIA ANALYSIS
--------------

-North Korea's Rocket Launch
--------------
The ROK media gave wide attention to the UN Security Council's
failure yesterday to agree on a response to North Korea's latest
rocket launch. The media reported that the U.S. and Japan called
for strong sanctions on North Korea but that China and Russia
objected to those demands.

Conservative Chosun Ilbo's editorial commented: "Would China take
this casual attitude if the ROK and Japan developed nuclear weapons
and missiles which targeted it? China is emerging as a global power
comparable to the U.S. If China does nothing about North Korea's
nuclear and missile provocations that violate international
regulations, it only breeds doubt in the international community
about China's leadership."

Right-of-center JoongAng Ilbo editorialized: "We wonder if China and
Russia intend to bear responsibility for any future dangers that
could be triggered by their failure to punish North Korea. Even if
the North attempted to launch a satellite, it is evident that the
same technology can be used to launch a ballistic missile. Despite
this, China and Russia (continue to) stress taking a fair and
cautious reaction based only on North Korea's claims. ... It is
incongruous to turn a blind eye to North Korea's provocations while
hoping for stability and peace in Northeast Asia. If China and
Russia give deep thought to what a balanced reaction is, there is no
way they could object to the UN Security Council's effective
sanctions on North Korea.

Moderate Hankook Ilbo's editorial argued: "What is important now is
not only to send a clear message that North Korea will be punished
for its provocative behavior but also to maintain the momentum of
dialogue and negotiations, such as the Six-Party Talks. In
particular, we should caution against a reemergence of a Cold-War
confrontational structure between the ROK, the U.S. and Japan on one
side and North Korea, China and Russia on the other."

Most of the ROK media noted yesterday's remarks by Prime Minister
Han Seung-soo at the National Assembly saying that the ROKG may push
to revise a 2001 agreement with the U.S. that restrains Seoul from
developing missiles with ranges of over 300 kilometers. Prime
Minister Han was widely quoted as saying: "At this time, we need to
reconsider whether it is right for us to be restricted. It is time
to have serious discussions at the ROK-U.S. defense ministers'
talks." In a related development, conservative Chosun Ilbo noted in
its editorial: "What is important is not whether North Korea
launched a satellite or missile. The ROK and the U.S. must note the
rapid progress of North Korea's long-range missile technology. If
this trend continues, North Korea might soon get its hands on an
intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching the
American mainland." Conservative Dong-a Ilbo editorialized: "The
ROK lags far behind North Korea in missile capability. ... This is
because Seoul must follow a bilateral missile treaty with
Washington. ... In this regard, calls for a revision of the
(ROK-U.S. missile) agreement following Sunday's launch of the
Taepodong-2 are increasingly gaining ground."

Conservative Chosun Ilbo front-paged a report predicting that the
overall tone of President Barack Obama's North Korea policy is not
expected to change, due to the technical failure of North Korea's
long-range rocket launch. The report went on to say that
Pyongyang's plan apparently was to show off its rocket technology
through the latest launch and catapult itself to the top of Obama's
diplomatic agenda to win concessions. Instead, it appears that the
U.S. administration and scientific community have concluded that
North Korea still is not a major threat in terms of its capacity to
fire a missile at the American mainland. In another report citing
ROK experts, Chosun observed that the Obama Administration would not
be as easily dragged along by North Korea as the Clinton

SEOUL 00000560 003 OF 008


Administration during the North's 1998 missile test. Chosun went on
to say that if the North tests the patience of the Obama
Administration, the U.S. Administration will deal with the North
through "tough diplomacy."

-President Obama visit to Turkey
--------------
Moderate Hankook Ilbo and Seoul Shinmun and ROK TV networks,
including MBC and YTN, reported on President Obama's visit to
Turkey. The media noted that Mr. Obama had chosen Turkey for his
first visit to a Muslim country, because the U.S. is in desperate
need of help from Turkey to wind down the war in Iraq and bring
stability to the Middle East. Hankook Ilbo wrote in the headline:
"The Reason Behind Obama's Courtship is to Use Turkey to Mediate
Middle East Peace Efforts and to Hold Russia In Check" MBN's
Headline reads: "Obama Engages in All-out Courtship to Woo the
Muslim World." 24 hour news network YTN Headlined its Story:
"Obama: Iran Should Choose between Nuclear Weapons and a (Better)
Future."


OPINIONS/EDITORIALS
--------------

LONGER MISSILE RANGE NEEDED
(Dong-a Ilbo, April 7, 2009, Page 31)

On Sunday, North Korea increased its missile range in firing the
Taepodong-2 compared to its launch of the Taepodong-1 in 1998.
Although the range cannot reach Alaska or Hawaii, the Taepodong-2
traveled about 3,200 km before falling into the Pacific Ocean. The
North will step up efforts to develop inter-continental ballistic
missiles targeting the U.S. mainland through 2012, when it aims to
establish itself as a "powerful country." Coincidently, 2012 is the
year when the ROK-U.S. Combined Forces Command will be dissolved and
Seoul will take over wartime operational command from Washington.
The ROK cannot afford to relax just because the North has failed to
put its satellite into orbit.

The North could also pursue a second nuclear test sooner rather than
later. Pyongyang conducted an underground nuclear test in October
2006 soon after its failed Taepodong-1 launch in July that year.
Even without the Taepodong-2, the North far exceeds the ROK in
missile capability. Pyongyang holds 600 Scud B missiles and 200
Scud Cs with ranges of 300 to 500 kilometers. Pyongyang also has
200 Rodong missiles with a range of 1,300 kilometers, able to hit
Japan. The North also deployed in 2007 a new intermediate-range
ballistic missile with a range of 3,000 kilometers that can threaten
the U.S. territory of Guam.

In contrast, the ROK lags far behind North Korea in missile
capability. The Hyunmu missile developed by Seoul using homegrown
technology has a range of only 250 kilometers. The ROK's Army
Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missiles introduced from the United
States can reach only about 300 kilometers. This is because Seoul
must follow a bilateral missile treaty with Washington. And this is
an extension from 180 to 300 kilometers after renegotiating the
treaty following Pyongyang's test-firing of the Taepodong-1 in 1998.
Hence, calls for a further revision of the treaty following Sunday's
launch of the Taepodong-2 is increasingly gaining ground.

Another restriction is the missile technology control regime
initiated by the United States in 1987. The regime aims to prevent
the proliferation of missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads
weighing 500 kilograms or more to a distance of more than 300
kilometers.

Whether a country will follow the guidelines depends on its domestic
law, but the restriction is impractical for the ROK. Experts say
Seoul needs missiles with a range of at least 550 kilometers, which
will allow the ROK to cover all of North Korea. A cruise missile
under development by the ROK that possesses a range of more than
1,000 kilometers is a weapon that can precisely attack the North
while dodging the weight restriction.

SEOUL 00000560 004 OF 008



Seoul must speed up the missile's development. An immediate task is
to expand the missile capability of the Combined Forces Command,
including the deployment of additional Patriot missiles by U.S.
troops stationed in the ROK, and the loading of SM-3 missiles in the
Korean Aegis destroyer King Sejong the Great. If the ROK neglects
the North's ballistic missile development, the deployment to the
Korean Peninsula of additional U.S. forces mobilized from the U.S.
mainland and Guam and in the ROK-U.S. joint wartime operations could
be seriously disrupted.

(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is
identical to the Korean version.)


CHINA AND RUSSIA SHOULD BE IN STEP WITH INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO
SANCTION NORTH KOREA
(JoongAng Ilbo, April 7, 2009, Page 46)

The UN Security Council called an emergency session yesterday to
consider a response to North Korea's long-range rocket launch, but
failed to reach an agreement. The U.S., Britain and France said
that North Korea's rocket launch violates UN Security Council
Resolution 1718 adopted in 2006, which prohibits the North's
development of ballistic missiles. These countries also favored
imposing additional sanctions on North Korea. On the other hand,
China and Russia invoked North Korea's sovereign right to explore
outer space to justify its alleged satellite launch.

Although additional debate is expected, China and Russia are not
likely to change their positions. North Korea's launch of a rocket
that could potentially be used as a long-range missile is a flagrant
violation (of UN rules). However, it is very likely that North
Korea will be left unscathed because of China and Russia's
opposition to sanctions. We wonder if China and Russia intend to
bear the responsibility for any future danger that could be
triggered by their failure to punish North Korea?

Moreover, it was discovered that the alleged satellite failed to
reach orbit. Therefore, there is no way to confirm North Korea's
claims (to a satellite launch). Even if the North attempted to
launch a satellite, the same technology can also be used to launch a
ballistic missile. Despite this realization, China and Russia
(continue to) stress taking a fair and cautious reaction based only
upon North Korea's claims. However, these two countries are turning
a blind eye in condoning the North's provocative actions.

North Korea has already conducted a nuclear test and purportedly
made progress in miniaturizing nuclear warheads. Should North Korea
acquire Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM)-level technology,
it could have dreadful repercussions. China and Russia would lose
ground for objecting to the U.S.-led Missile Defense (MD) system.
This could be a great opportunity for Japan to accelerate its
military build-up. According to the Yomiuri survey, because of
North Korea's rocket launch, 88% of the Japanese felt insecure and
60% of them favored an increase in military spending. The ROK will
not just sit on its hands. Voices calling for the ROK to revise the
limitations on its developing missiles to ranges not exceeding 300
kilometers are increasingly growing louder.

It is incongruous to turn a blind eye to North Korea's provocative
actions while hoping for stability and peace in North East Asia. If
China and Russia give deep thought what a balanced reaction is,
there is no way they could object to the proposed use of UN
sanctions on North Korea.


STEERING CLEAR OF HARD LINE RHETORIC AND ARMS BUILD-UP
(Hankyoreh Shinmun, April 7, 2009, Page 23)

President Lee Myung-bak told the leaders of the three ruling and
opposition parties that his administration is considering
participation in the United States-led Proliferation Security
Initiative (PSI),and it "has no relation to North Korea's rocket

SEOUL 00000560 005 OF 008


launch." In other words, the government will soon announce a plan
of full participation. President Lee's attitude goes against the
more realistic comments he has been making about issues related to
North Korea as of late. On March 30, he told the British business
daily Financial Times in an interview that he opposed a military
response even if North Korea fired a rocket, and that he would
maintain the Kaesong Industrial Complex. On April 3, during a press
conference with international journalists in the United Kingdom, he
said, "participation in PSI is something we'll decide while
monitoring North Korea's attitude." He said he is ready to send a
special emissary to the North if it is ready to accept one. Those
comments signal a strategy to keep from further upsetting Pyongyang
while trying prepare for dialogue, when as evidenced by the mood in
the recent United Nations Security Council meeting, it is never easy
for the international community to be wholeheartedly and entirely in
favor of sanctions.

After just a few days, however, and Lee appears to have returned to
his earlier hard-line rhetoric. Although the way he says differing
things about the same issue when speaking in different contexts is
nothing new, he was particularly flippant regarding North Korea and
the international community. North Korea has said it would consider
full participation in PSI by Seoul as a "declaration of war."
Because Lee has a responsibility to stabilize inter-Korean
relations, his new comments seem inappropriate. Members of his
ruling Grand National Party (GNP) were just as inappropriate for
their unrestrained comments about participating in Missile Defense
(MD),closing down the Kaesong Industrial Complex, and postponing
the date for taking wartime operational control of its military
forces from the United States.

There are worrisome activities going on external to South Korea as
well. Japan is about to have its cabinet extend the ongoing
sanctions on North Korea for one year, as well as to explore the
possibility of enacting additional economic sanctions. It seems that
Japan, which deployed missile defense systems on land and sea for
the first time in response to the rocket launch, will commence a
massive arms buildup. U.S. President Barack Obama, known to have
been an abolitionist when it came to MD, now says that he will seek
to continue its development as long as Iran remains a threat. This
kind of hard-line rhetoric and calls for arms buildup using the
North Koreas rocket launch as justification are of no help in
resolving the North Korean nuclear and missile issues, or in
establishing a peace regime for the Korean peninsula and the
Northeast Asian region. Our government must not allow itself to be
pulled into the same hard-line rhetoric, which has no practical
benefit and has massive attendant costs, and instead calmly prepare
the mood for dialogue that will come after a time of cooling off.

(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is
identical to the Korean version.)



N. KOREA'S MISSILE TECHNOLOGY IS A THREAT TO THE SOUTH
(Chosun Ilbo, April 7, 2009, Page 27)

The long-range rocket North Korea launched on Sunday dropped into
the Pacific Ocean after flying over 3,200 km, a little under half of
the 7,000-8,000 km the South Korean and U.S. authorities
anticipated. The satellite launch ended in failure, but what is
important is not whether it was a satellite or a missile. Seoul and
Washington must instead pay attention to North Korea's rapidly
developing long-range missile technology. The Taepodong-1 missile
the North fired in 1998 flew 1,620 km and the Taepodong-2 missile in
2006 broke and fizzled in 40 seconds. But in over a decade, North
Korea has nearly doubled its missile range from 1,620 km to over
3,200 km. Should the trend continue, Pyongyang would before long
possess inter-continental ballistic missiles with a range sufficient
to reach America.

In the past, when it judged that its provocative actions were being
ignored by the international community, North Korea attempted to
recover credibility through additional provocative actions.
Following its failed missile test in 2006, Pyongyang demonstrated

SEOUL 00000560 006 OF 008


its strength by firing six Scud and Rodong missiles and tested a
nuclear device in October of that year. Thus, the urgent task
facing Seoul and Washington now is to prevent additional
provocations from the North. It has already made a series of
threats this year, including a rejection of the Northern Limit Line,
the de facto marine border off the west coast.

To stop these provocations, the international community must take
sanctions against the North. The UN Security Council discussed the
issue on Sunday but failed to reach a conclusion. South Korea, the
U.S. and Japan demanded sanctions, but China and Russia objected.
Beijing keeps saying the countries involved should remain calm and
exercise restraint. But will Beijing take such a laid-back attitude
when South Korea and Japan develop nuclear weapons and missiles
targeted at them? China wants to become a world power comparable to
America. It should keep in mind that by leaving Pyongyang's
provocations unpunished, it will only foster suspicions about
Chinese leadership in the international community.

North Korea depends on China for food and fuel, and the friendship
treaty Pyongyang and Beijing signed in 1961 provides the last
buttress for the North's security. If China does not prop up North
Korea in security and the economy, it grinds to a halt. North Korea
can be moved only if China is moved. Success or failure of South
Korean and American North Korea policies depends on how they move
China.

Noting that South Korea is restrained under an agreement with the
U.S. not to exceed 300 km in its missile range, Prime Minister Han
Seung-soo told a National Assembly session on Monday it was high
time that South Korea reviewed "if such a restriction is correct."
In 2001, Seoul agreed with Washington to limit the range of missiles
to 300 km and the weight of warheads to 500 kg. Seoul accepted the
restrictions assuming that Washington, in agreement with Pyongyang
on a missile moratorium, would persuade the North to join the
international Missile Technology Control Regime. But the missile
moratorium has already been broken and the North has demonstrated
rocket technology commanding over 3,000 km in range. With the
premise of the Seoul-Washington missile agreement broken, we must
review our own missile policy.

We have to consider calmly whether we consider the problem of the
North's nuclear weapons and missiles as a practical threat to our
existence and security. In a poll of 1,000 people across the
country on Friday and Saturday, 55.4 percent of respondents saw the
North's missile launch as aimed at "negotiating with foreign
countries," 19.4 percent at the consolidation of the system, 16.6
percent at missile development, and 2.6 percent at space
development. The ministry did not include the question whether the
missile launch constitutes a threat to South Korea. If that is how
the government feels, no wonder people aren't worried.

But North Korea is testing dangerous weapons of mass destruction on
the Korean Peninsula. If even something small goes awry, South
Korea will suffer most. We should not exaggerate the situation, but
it's important to realize that the North's nuclear weapons and
missiles are not the problem of others but squarely our own. Only
when we see that the main concerned party is South Korea can we move
toward resolving the problem.

(This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is
identical to the Korean version.)


ALTHOUGH IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR THE UN TO AGREE TO SANCTIONS ON
NORTH KOREA...
(Hankoook Ilbo, April 7, 2009, Page 35)

An emergency UN Security Council meeting on North Korea's rocket
launch ended inconclusively yesterday due to difference of views
between member nations. Although the outcome was expected, it is
difficult not to be disappointed. Fifteen members of the UN
Security Council, including five permanent members, were reportedly
divided ten to five over whether North Korea's rocket launch

SEOUL 00000560 007 OF 008


violated Security Council Resolution 1718, which bans North Korea
from developing ballistic missiles. The U.S., the U.K., France and
Japan argued for additional stringent sanctions on North Korea,
stating that (the North's rocket launch) was a clear violation of
the resolution, although China and Russia argued against a violation
since the North merely launched a satellite.

To penalize the North for defying the warnings from the
international community, a unified response from the international
community is essential. Although UN Security Council members may
well follow their own interpretations and seek their national
interests, they should behave more responsibly for the sake of peace
and stability in Northeast Asia and the whole world. China and
Russia cannot deny that regardless of whether or not North Korea
actually launched a satellite, the launch itself has doubled North
Korea's long-range ballistic missile capabilities. Based on this
fact, through its discussions, the UN Security Council should find
the greatest common denominator that takes into account the
positions of each member state.

Because the ROK is not a member of the UN Security Council, it's
level of influence over the Security Council discussions sanctioning
the North are limited. However, the ROK can display its diplomacy
through closely cooperating with other nations that share similar
views. What is important now is not only to send a clear message
that North Korea will be punished for its provocative behavior, but
also to maintain the momentum of dialogue and negotiations such as
the Six-Party Talks. In particular, we should caution against a
reemergence of a Cold-War confrontational structure between the ROK,
the U.S. and Japan on one side and North Korea, China and Russia on
the other.


FEATURES
--------------

GOV'T TO CONSIDER REVISING MISSILE ACCORD
(KBS, April 7, 2009)

Prime Minister Han Seung-soo says it is time to consider revising
the ROK-U.S. agreement prohibiting the ROK from developing missiles
with ranges of over 300 kilometers. The prime minister's
announcement came Monday as a reply to lawmaker Jo Sun-hyong's
question about whether the government is seeking to revise the
limitations on the ROK's missile development program to ranges not
exceeding 300 kilometers and warhead loads to less than 500
kilograms. Regarding the ROK's interest in fully joining the
U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI),Han said that the
government has agreed in principle to such a move and only the
timing was under discussion.


PYONGYANG'S MISSILE GAME: NORTH KOREA WILL DEMAND BROADER
NEGOTIATIONS WITH U.S.
(JoongAng Ilbo, April 7, 2009, Page 3)

By Senior Columnist Kim Young-hie

North Korea failed to launch a satellite, but succeeded in launching
a long-range rocket. At this rate, it is only a matter of time
before North Korea possesses an intercontinental ballistic missile.
North Korea deserves to be highly criticized by the international
community. However, no matter how harshly we may denounce the
North, the rocket launch has brought about certain unavoidable
changes.

North Korea, which flaunted its long-range ballistic missile
capabilities, will now demand from the U.S. high-level nuclear and
missile talks within a broader framework. In return for a missile
moratorium, the North may demand over 1 billion dollars a year.
Should the Six-Party Talks resume, North Korea will try to hold sway
in the talks. Immediately before entering the nuclear disablement
phase, North Korea practically launched a ballistic missile and now
it will drag its feet during the denuclearization process. In

SEOUL 00000560 008 OF 008


addition, there is still a possibility that North Korea may conduct
an additional nuclear test and develop intercontinental ballistic
missiles. At the negotiation table, the situation for the North
will be different after April 5 from before.

Now, the main crux of the problem is what measures we can employ in
response. In other words, the question is what the "end game" is in
achieving the denuclearization of North Korea and preventing the
export and proliferation of its nuclear and missile programs, as
agreed at the Six-Party Talks. All imaginable measures have already
been suggested. Among the suggestions are UN Security Council
sanctions and the ROK's full participation in the Proliferation
Security Initiative (PSI). However, UN sanctions are not expected
to go beyond a resolution. China and Russia claim that it is
unfair to impose sanctions on the North for its satellite launch.
They argue that many countries launch satellites, and that
sanctioning only the North goes against the principle of "equality."
This argument may sound logical, but it disregards the North's
clear pursuit of a long-range missile test. Nevertheless,
realistically the veto power of China and Russia cannot be
overcome.

The ROK's participation in the PSI cannot be the solution, either.
As the ROKG has said, even if we find a North Korean vessel carrying
nuclear and missile-related materials but cannot stop it in
international waters, joining the PSI carries no meaning.

Ultimately, the only real solution to the fallout from the rocket
launch is resuming the Six-Party Talks and dialogue between the two
Koreas and between North Korea and the U.S. President Lee Myung-bak
made meaningful progress by expressing his willingness to send a
special envoy to North Korea. The ROK needs to look into every
official and unofficial channel to open behind-the-scene
negotiations with the North about dispatching a special envoy.
Still, this is not sufficient. The ROK should make clear that it
intends to discuss the implementation of the June 15 and the October
4 Agreements. Some opposition to this course of action is expected.
However, a long pause in the dialogue could be the greatest risk to
not taking such steps.

A high-ranking ROKG official said in mid-January that he hoped North
Korea would cause serious trouble so as to change the status quo.
The North met his expectations. Since North Korea precipitated the
trouble, the ball is now in our court. This is an opportunity for
the ROK to update its North Korea policy in a pragmatic way and for
the U.S. to present its North Korea policy.



STEPHENS