SEOUL - PRESS BULLETIN; April 22, 2009

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 06 SEOUL 000654 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL PGOV MARR ECON KPAO KS US SUBJECT: SEOUL - PRESS BULLETIN; April 22, 2009 TOP HEADLINES -------------- Chosun Ilbo ¶N. Korea Demands More Money for Workers at Kaesong Industrial Complex JoongAng Ilbo Commander of N. Korean Fleet in West Sea: "There Shouldn't Be Such a Thing as PSI. We Must Not Fight Even If We Carry a Dagger in Our Heart" Dong-a Ilbo, Hankook Ilbo, Hankyoreh Shinmun, Segye Ilbo, Seoul Shinmun, All TVs ¶N. Korea: "We Will Reconsider All Special Benefits to ROK Companies Operating in Kaesong" DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS -------------- The first inter-Korean government-level meeting yesterday in more than a year ended after just 22 minutes; the two Koreas spent most of the day bickering over the location and format of the talks. (All) At the brief meeting, North Korea reportedly called for the ROK to raise the salaries of North Korean workers at the joint Kaesong Industrial Complex and to begin paying rent on the complex beginning next year, instead of in 2014 as had been previously agreed. The North also stated its intention to reconsider all of the special benefits to ROK companies operating in the complex. (All) North Korea, furthermore, voiced strong discontent with the ROK's plan to join the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), which aims to prevent the transfer of weapons of mass destruction, and refused to grant access to the ROK worker who has been detained for over 20 days. (All) The Blue House held a meeting of security-related ministers shortly after the inter-Korean meeting ended without results. The Blue House is reportedly agonizing over when to announce its decision to join the PSI, with the Foreign and Unification Ministries remaining at odds over the timing. (Chosun, Dong-a) INTERNATIONAL NEWS -------------- According to the Kyodo News Agency, Japan's Prime Minister Taro Aso has sent an offering to the controversial Yasukuni shrine which honors 2.5 million Japanese war dead, including 14 top war criminals from World War II. The ROK and Chinese governments immediately expressed regret over the prime minister's move. (All) MEDIA ANALYSIS -------------- -North Korea -------------- Inter-Korean Talks Yesterday's 22-minute inter-Korean meeting received wide press coverage. The ROK media reported that the meeting was delayed for most of the day as the two sides bickered over the location and format of the talks. Media coverage focused on North Korea's demands to raise the salaries of North Korean workers at the Kaesong Industrial Complex and to begin paying rent on the complex beginning next year, instead of in 2014 as had been previously agreed to. The North also stated its intention to reconsider all of the special benefits to ROK companies operating in the complex and refused to grant access to SEOUL 00000654 002 OF 006 the ROK worker who has been detained for over 20 days, according to media reports. Newspapers carried the following headlines: "N. Korea Demands More Cash While Pretending to be Upset over PSI" (Conservative Chosun Ilbo); "What N. Korea Wants After All Is Money" (right-of-center JoongAng Ilbo); "The North Unilaterally Abrogates Existing Agreements, Shifting Responsibility for Crippled Operation of Kaesong Complex Onto the South" (conservative Dong-a Ilbo); "N. Korea Presses Seoul on Kaesong... Lee Myung-bak's Administration in Deep Agony" (moderate Hankook Ilbo); and "Kaesong Industrial Complex at Critical Juncture... Now the Ball Is in S. Korea's Court" (left-leaning Hankyoreh Shinmun) Conservative Chosun Ilbo, in an editorial titled, "North Korea Demands More Money while Holding Kaesong Hostage," argued: "It is obvious which side has more need of the Kaesong Industrial Complex. ... Since North Korea has raised fundamental issues with the joint industrial complex, the ROKG should review its North Korea policy from scratch." Moderate Hankook Ilbo's editorial called the North's demands "preposterous," because "such demands should have been made only after the detained ROK worker was released and the operation of the Kaesong Complex resumed." Six-Party Talks Conservative Chosun Ilbo's Chinese Affairs Reporter opined in a commentary: "It is true that the Six-Party Talks to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue have already failed. ... What China has done as the host of the talks was to merely bring a sulky North Korea to the table. I wonder if it is time for us to exclaim: 'We will never again attend the Six-Party Talks. Since the host country is incompetent, why not replace it?'" OPINIONS/EDITORIALS -------------- WHY DON'T WE ALSO BOYCOTT THE SIX-PARTY TALKS? (Chosun Ilbo, April 22, 2009, Page 34) By Chinese Affairs Reporter Park Seung-joon As it did in 1993, North Korea again proclaimed in 2003 that it would possess nuclear weapons after withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),thereby alarming the international community. This event led to the first round of the Six-Party Talks, which were held in Beijing during August of that year. The Six-Party Talks lasted sixth rounds over six years. From the first to sixth round, North Korea has always acted as it pleased. North Korea boycotted the Six-Party Talks in September 2004 and announced that it possessed nuclear weapons in October 2005. It launched the long-range Taepodong-1 missile in July 2006. Moreover, North Korea conducted an underground nuclear test in October 2006 and launched a rocket that can cover over 3000km. It is true that the Six-Party Talks to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue have already failed. The Six-Party Talks are covered live by Chinese television and radio stations through a nationwide network. The Chinese watch televisions and listen to radios, emotionally engaged, while stating that China plays a big role in maintaining the peace and stability of the world. Now we should face reality. As the Six-Party Talks progress, the ROK has increasingly seemed less capable of guaranteeing security and military control. The Six-Party Talks have repeatedly gone through ups and downs similar to Sisyphus' rock. What China has done as the host of the talks was to merely bring a sulky North Korea to the table. I wonder if it is time for us to exclaim: 'We will never again attend the Six-Party Talks. Since the host country is incompetent, why not replace it?' SEOUL 00000654 003 OF 006 NORTH KOREA DEMANDS MORE MONEY WHILE HOLDING KAESONG HOSTAGE (Chosun Ilbo, April 22, 2009, Page 35) ROK and North Korean officials met for just 22 minutes in the border city of Kaesong on Tuesday, with each side merely informing the other of its position. It was to be expected that the talks would not produce any results. The ROK delegates arrived in Kaesong at around 9 a.m. and offered to hold a preparatory meeting to discuss the agenda, participants and venue of the talks. Until they arrived, the North Koreans had declined to inform the ROK of who was taking part and where the meeting was to take place. Then they told the ROK officials to come over to the North's office in the Kaesong Industrial Complex. It is obvious which side has more need of the Kaesong Industrial Complex. It is not difficult to guess why North Korea acted this way. Its aim was to make the ROK feel small by forcing officials to travel to the North, bombard them with scathing criticism over the implementation of UN sanctions and Seoul's participation in the Proliferation Security Initiative, and threaten the possible closure of the Kaesong Industrial Complex. The North Koreans intended to humiliate the ROK while the entire world was watching. By agreeing to it, the ROK colluded in its own humiliation. The ROK officials asked to meet the Hyundai Asan employee who has been detained incommunicado by North Korean authorities for 23 days now, but North Korea refused. Pyongyang has demonstrated that it is incapable of abiding by even the most basic humanitarian principles. Since North Korea has raised fundamental issues with the joint industrial complex, the ROKG should review its North Korea policy from scratch. The problem for the ROK is that it has no choice but to deal with such a country. Our government must stick to its principles and pursue genuine dialogue with North Korea instead of getting caught up in the results of individual instances. The ROKG must clear up the confusion over whether or not it is going to join the PSI and get to work focusing on its overall North Korea policy. (This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is identical to the Korean version.) RATIFICATION OF FTA URGENT (Dong-a Ilbo, April 22, 2009, Page 31) North Korea's rocket launch and inter-Korean tension over the ROK's joining of the Proliferation Security Initiative are pending issues for the U.S. Washington has blasted the rocket launch as a provocative act. As the ROK expresses its support for U.S. policy, the initiative has grown into a matter for the two Koreas. Pyongyang has raised tensions while rejecting policies of engagement with Seoul and cooperative relations with Washington. The U.S. and the ROK, however, should overcome the challenges posed by the North to nurture their "strategic alliance suitable for the 21st century" and help each other pursue mutual value and contribute to world peace. In a letter sent to President Obama Monday, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus and Republican Senator Charles Grassley urged the president to move forward with the ROK. In response to the North's launch of its Taepodong-2 missile and announced intent to resume its nuclear program, the two senators urged Washington to maintain and expand its strong and proven partnership with Seoul. Because both allies seek to defuse threats to national security, the senators said the U.S. must also work to resolve bilateral economic issues for the sake of common prosperity. Though they reiterated previous arguments that disputes over the auto and beef sectors should be resolved under principles of the bilateral free trade agreement, it is inspiring for them to consider the deal's ratification as a measure to strengthen the bilateral partnership. The Foreign Affairs, Trade and Unification Committee of the ROK's National Assembly also plans to vote on the agreement's ratification SEOUL 00000654 004 OF 006 today. Despite strong resistance from anti-U.S. protesters and certain politicians, Seoul has made steady progress to keep its promise with Washington. Along with the ROK-U.S. Economic Conference, the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea submitted a recommendation to the Obama Administration and Congress last week to ratify the agreement as soon as possible. The White House should consider the moves by the two nations to ratify the deal and make more effort to that end. As part of its global strategic alliances, the Obama Administration has made several requests to Seoul, which has proactively responded to them. The ROK sent a warship to Somalia to protect ships from pirates and is willing to help the U.S. government bring stability and peace to Afghanistan. Obama has begun "smart diplomacy" to improve relations with Iran, CUBA and Venezuela. North Korea's provocative threats and the ratification of the free trade deal, however, are also urgent matters needing quick resolution. A passive U.S. response could encourage the North to misunderstand Washington's intentions. The U.S. government needs to make more efforts to deal with pending issues surrounding the Korean Peninsula and move quickly to prove that ROK-U.S. relations are airtight. President Obama and ROK President Lee Myung-bak held their first meeting in London on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit, but it just lasted 30 minutes. So their first full-fledged meeting is coming up in Washington in June. The U.S. needs more proactive efforts to strengthen its alliance with the ROK to bear more fruit at the meeting. (This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is identical to the Korean version.) ASSEMBLY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO RENEGOTIATE THE KORUS FTA (Hankyoreh Shinmun, April 22, 2009, Page 27) It looks like the subcommittees for foreign affairs, trade and unification will approve the bill to ratify the free trade agreement with the U.S. (KORUS FTA) today. The Democratic Party, saying the procedure of putting the matter before a subcommittee vote was invalid from the start, intends to abstain, essentially permitting the committee's approval. Analysts suggest this will make ratification possible whenever the Grand National Party (GNP),which holds the majority of seats, wants to push it through the ROK legislature. It seems, however, that revisiting the agreement one way or another is inevitable. While the U.S. has not used the word renegotiate, U.S. officials have said on more than a few occasions that the deal as is needs to be reexamined, making it clear they would like to change the content of the agreement. The U.S. holds the position that the deal cannot be ratified unless there is a provision that allows the U.S. to gain a greater market share for car sales in the ROK, and a relaxation of the 30-month rule that currently does not permit the import of U.S. beef from cows older than 30 months at the time of slaughter. At any rate, now is the time for the two nations to open talks on the KORUS FTA whether or not they call it a "renegotiation" or a meeting for "additional negotiations." The U.S. is pressuring Canada and Mexico to reopen and make concessions on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA),a document that is already 15 years old. It is overly simplistic to assume the U.S. will accept the deal in its current form if South Koreans move with haste and get it ratified. Rather, we should take the opportunity to reconsider the whole agreement from the perspective of how well it fits our national interests. Being unwilling to renegotiate the deal or thinking that early ratification is a good strategy are both out of touch with reality. One can only hope that we will not make the mistake of surrendering all the practical advantages that are to be had from the KORUS FTA by insisting on either approach. What is of greatest concern is that we will commence "additional negotiations," after ratifying the KORUS FTA, so as to say we are SEOUL 00000654 005 OF 006 not engaged in "renegotiations," only to capitulate to U.S. demands on auto and beef import issues where harmful clauses remain. In other words, we will effectively give away the opportunity to revise harmful clauses like the investor-state claim (ISD, Investor-State Dispute) procedures, the ratchet clause on market openness (which disallows reverting to earlier levels),and the most favored nation clause of the KORUS FTA. The proponents of ratification need to abandon the idea of ratifying the KORUS FTA ahead of the U.S.-Korea summit in June. Haste and impatience could make us lose more than we would gain. When the administration hastily announced it was opening the ROK's markets to U.S. beef prior to the April 2008 US-Korea summit in order to win favor, it faced great opposition by citizens in the form of candlelight vigil demonstrations. The Democratic and other opposition parties need to take a clear stance on this issue. They need to strongly demand that the harmful clauses are remedied based on national interests. Otherwise, they will also have to bear the responsibility for going through the motions of playing tug of war with the ruling party only to let it have its way. (This is a translation provided by the newspaper, and it is identical to the Korean version.) NORTH KOREA'S DEMANDS PREPOSTEROUS (Hankook Ilbo, April 22, 2009, Page 35) An official inter-Korean meeting held yesterday at the Kaesong Industrial Complex, the first such meeting since the inauguration of the Lee Myung-bak Administration, was quite disappointing. Although the ROK and North Korea wrangled over the location and agenda for over 11 hours, the actual meeting lasted for only 22 minutes. At the meeting, North Korea allegedly notified the ROK that it will punish the detained Hyundai Asan worker, a Mr. Yoo, on charges of espionage. North Korea, however, said it will not indict Mr. Yoo, leaving room for future negotiation. We cannot buy into North Korea's allegation of Mr. Yoo's espionage as it is. North Korea has held him in custody for 20 days without guaranteeing basic access rights. It is widely known that investigation results produced in a coercive atmosphere are not objectively reliable. During the meeting, North Korea did not accept the ROK's strong request for access to Mr. Yoo. His safety and early release are very important in a humanitarian aspect. Furthermore, this matter is directly related to (the prospect) of developing the Kaesong Industrial Complex with stability. If North Korea uses the detention to its advantage, it will breed doubts about the sustainability of the Complex. Therefore, North Korea should release him to safety without delay. North Korea may intend to link Mr. Yoo's detention with the ROKG's full participation in the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), which aims to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The ROKG has delayed announcing its full participation in the PSI three times, showing its sincere intention to avoid straining inter-Korean relations. Nonetheless, if North Korea maintains an inflexible stance, the tide may turn in a totally different direction. Even now, there is a scathing criticism within ROK society that the ROKG is being influenced by North Korea. Moreover, North Korea outrageously announced that it will adjust the salaries of North Korean workers (at the Kaesong Industrial Complex) upwards and reconsider the special benefits accorded to (ROK companies operating in) the complex. These demands should have been made only after the detained ROK worker was released and the operation of the Kaesong Complex resumed. North Korea's ulterior motives behind these preposterous and unilateral demands are very dubious. North Korea should wisely consider what exactly would benefit the country. SEOUL 00000654 006 OF 006 WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR HARM INTERNET DOES (JoongAng Ilbo, April 22, 2009, Page 42) Where is the line between freedom of expression and responsible behavior in cyberspace? A Seoul district court found Park Dae-sung, also known as Minerva, not guilty on charges of criticizing the government's economic policies. This ruling should be a starting point for drawing out a social consensus. Because the prosecutors announced their plans to immediately file an appeal, we will carefully watch what decision the higher court will render. Moreover, serious social discussions should be conducted on how to minimize the side effects of irresponsible cyberspace postings. If necessary, the National Assembly should set out to rectify any legal deficiencies. The court said that it was difficult to prove that Minerva had posted the writings with full knowledge that his information was false and with a clear intent to cause public harm. The prosecutors seem to have strictly interpreted the Telecommunications Act. The aftermath of this ruling will be problematic. Established media such as newspaper, publication and broadcasting outlets routinely censor false reports or claims based on related regulations and company rules or take rigorous after-measures. They take responsibility commensurate with freedom of the media and freedom of expression. Accordingly, the Shindonga reporters who sparked the 'Minerva scandal' were subjected to harsh disciplinary action including dismissal. Anonymously posting demagogic arguments on the internet, which is used by 80% of the public over the age of 10, could inflict great damage. Is it just that this action is left unpunished? The Telecommunications Act that was applied to Mr. Park was implemented in 1984, 10 years before the start of widespread internet service. The charge of engaging in false communication to harm the public interest still remains the same even though the fines were raised. Therefore, it seems that the prosecutors had insufficient grounds to apply the outdated law and the court faced considerable difficulty in making a ruling. Consequently, new norms to keep pace with the rapidly evolving internet environment are required. These days, it is much faster and more effective to communicate through the internet than established media. However, emphasizing responsibility may foolishly lead to the suppression of expression and media, which are guaranteed in the Constitution. The smooth operation of the Internet should not suffer because of powerful groups such as government organizations. Now is the time to actively discuss the issues of freedom and responsibility in cyberspace. We need to establish a 'red-line,' which guarantees the merits of internet and freedom of expression, while also holding people responsible for their actions. Irresponsible internet postings can harm everyone. Therefore, political interests have no place in these discussions. STEPHENS