Lot’s of disturbing stuff going on around here.
First, according to Yonhap, the South Korean government has told Tokyo that it would be “undesirable” for Japan to unilaterally push a UN Security Council resolution punishing North Korea for its recent missile tests. A Foreign Ministry official said criticizing North Korea’s missile tests in the Security Council and working to prevent a repeat were OK considering how the tests were “provocative acts harming the situation in Northeast Asia” (tell that to Cheong Wa Dae), but this message needed to be conveyed to North Korea in stages. He said Seoul has used diplomatic channels to convey to the Japanese that pushing an overly-unilateral resolution would be undesirable.
The official also said Vice Foreign Minister Lee Kyu-hyung called in the Japanese ambassador to explain to him this position. The official said—and sit down for this—that the government has stressed to the Japanese it was more important than ever to present the North with a “united message” in the UN Security Council.
The Japanese resolution in being co-sponsored by seven Security Council members, including France.
The official noted that some permanent members of the Council, including China, oppose the resolution in both content and form, and that should it cause a rift in the UN and the body fail to adopt any message to the North, it would greatly harm of the prestige of the UN.
Another government official said it was also undesirable for some high-ranking Japanese figures to use the missile launches for domestic political reasons and/or to “cry about preemptive strikes and issue statements that seem to deny the principle of a diplomatic solution.”
The Chosun Ilbo ran a similar piece, but included this little part toward the end:
“A broad interpretation of the resolution would prevent us from helping North Korea in the way we would like to,” a government official said. “It could be read as a regulation giving the UN and other countries legitimate cause to take issue with our North Korea policies.” In other words, the U.S. and Japan, who favor harsh sanctions, could use the resolution as a means of pressuring Seoul to throttle back aid for Pyongyang.
The Japanese, meanwhile, are starting to get pugnacious. Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe, a leading candidate to replace Prime Minister Koizumi, told reporters that Japan needs to consider whether preemptive strikes on North Korean missile bases would constitute self-defense. Defense Agency Chief Fukushiro Nukaga said Japan should have the capability to attack foreign missile bases, a view apparently shared by Foreign Minister Taro Aso:
Japan must debate if it has the right to attack North Korea to protect itself from a nuclear missile launch, a senior Japanese defense official said Sunday.
Defense Agency Director General Fukushiro Nukaga said it was “natural” for a sovereign nation to protect its citizens when an enemy “puts a finger on the trigger of a gun,” the Kyodo News Agency reported.
In the wake of North Korea’s test firing of a long-range missile Wednesday, Nukaga said Japan must come to terms with its legal responsibilities, within the scope of its war-renouncing constitution, to launch a preemptive attack. Japan adopted a pacifist constitution in 1947.
His comments come as Japan’s foreign minister, Taro Aso, said Japan would have the right to attack North Korea if North Korea made a direct nuclear threat against Japan.
“It is impossible for us to do nothing until we are attacked,” Aso told Japan’s NHK television.
None of this bodes well, although in the South Koreans’ defense, there is some logic to what they say—yes, China is likely to veto any resolution put forth on North Korea, so putting one up to a vote and forcing Beijing to embarrass itself by playing a veto is unlikely to make the Chinese any more helpful in resolving the nuclear issue. Also in South Korea’s defense, Seoul has interests outside of the missile and nuke issues to protect. Now, in Japan’s defense, with the South Korean presidential office making statements like this and the Foreign Ministry seemingly more concerned about Japan than North Korea, Tokyo might very well believe that it cannot rely on Seoul (let alone the Chinese) to protect Japan’s vital interests, and that the time might come for Japan to take matters into its own hands—with or without the United States. Reading some of the netizen comments to this Kyunghyang Shinmun piece on Japan’s preemptive strike rhetoric (or Don Kirk’s July 7 piece in the Asia Times) wouldn’t make the Japanese feel any better.
16 Comments
Indeed.
If NK continues to test and improve their missile technology and if the U.S. missile defense system is not much more reliable, the Japanese may decide to rewrite their constitution and arm themselves with nuclear weapons, a choice that would really create some tension in the region and give movie makers in South Korea a chance to make more movies with Japanese villians.
Well, I WASN’T thinking of sending my money home, but now…
Tokyo might very well believe that it cannot rely on Seoul (let alone the Chinese) to protect Japan’s vital interests
Is it in Japan’s vital interests to attack another country?
The missile launch turned out to be a whole lot of nothing: the much-touted Taepodong-2 was a big failure, and the other missiles were nothing new (and they didn’t land anywhere near Japan, or Hawaii). Would that be an overreaction when other means are available as punishment (e.g., pulling out aid)?
North Korea was acting out for attention and now Japan is providing that. The best thing would be to pull out aid and send the message that North Korea acting out is going to be met with disincentives that hurt.
It seems that an attack on the NK missile sites is not going to be the end. Japan and North Korea may end up in a series of tit-for-tat needle pricks that have a potential to get out of control.
I’m not sure what Japan’s long-term goal is in this. I doubt it’s simply a move to justify re-militarization. Privately, I think they might be dismayed that the US is not doing enough to pressure China and South Korea. If so I would agree with them. However, talk of attacking NK out of a defensive motive won’t be accepted by their neighbors, even if it were completely above board. I think the US and Japan are headed for a moment of truth where they will finally have to regard China and South Korea as full collaborators in the NK fiasco and make THEM responsible as opposed to KJI. Their enablement has been a cause for KJI’s brinkmanship potential. Time to go after their money!!
if Japan scraps its Article 9 and begins developing nuclear weapons, I believe South Korea will be the most to blame for that development. I think the June 2000 summit has been the single most devastating act of “diplomacy” this region has seen. KDJ embraced blood over political allies disregarding the impractical nature of it. And he deceived his people, the world and his own allies to do so. It’s no wonder KJI has reason to believe SK and China will resist any US attempts to pressure him. Nobel should reflect and award KDJ the anti-peace prize in realization that he has done more to enable KJI and to hurt the NK people.
“to regard China and South Korea as full collaborators in the NK fiasco and make THEM responsible as opposed to KJI. Their enablement has been a cause for KJI’s brinkmanship potential. Time to go after their money!!”
Hard to slam the bankers when they hold a combined $700 billion in US Treasury debt. Even if the US wants to pull the plug, they can’t do so without pulling the plug on the Iraq war otherwise, how are they going to finance the war? US is basically stuck.
…..to protect Japan’s vital interests,….
let’s list these ‘vital interests’ explicitly and discuss how vital they are? sea lanes? hostage?
remember if NK is going to attack anyone anywhere, it would be SK. in the whole course of its history, NK had not did anything to Japan.
(the hostages were for spying purposes, but they were not kidnapped by a missile)
“if Japan scraps its Article 9 and begins developing nuclear weapons”….
…it would be japan’s own choice. no one else is repsonsible, even KJI who provided one of the many excuses.
if japan want to do it and it can do it without consequence, it would do it any moment, with or without KJI’s help.
Well, the “bankers” as I intended it to mean, refers only to specifically those harboring NK funds. I doubt the Chinese and South Korean governments have organized their entire banking structures, public banks included, to collaborate in providing services to the North Koreans.
Regarding their holding of US debt, its not as though they can act in concert with one big cash-in and have it not effect the individual owners of the debt. As soon as one large holder of debt starts an attempt to cash-in, the value of the debt by other holders will start to decrease. China’s central bank, if it acted first, would in affect be devaluating South Korea’s holdings. South Korea would only hold their investment if they waited until other investors picked up the slack. If they got out it would be a major loss to them. Meanwhile, China’s “non-market related” move would create extra demand for US investment instruments which could be scooped up domestically or by the Japanese who are slowly coming back to a point where they can start investing again. They already hold around 650 billion and I doubt they would start selling.
Further, we have to always keep in mind that holders of government instruments cannot force a government to pay up prematurely on government instruments. Laws on national sovereignty restrict foreign governments from trying to force payment. A lawyer will be more specific than I in that regard but essentially that means China and South Korea (or the individual holders there would be more accurate) can’t force payment for instruments that are not at maturity.
I agree that the US debt is a growing problem but not relative to the debacle most other developed countries’ economies are in and not so, considering the growth the US market has seen parallel to this rise in debt. Any future actions governments may try to take in cashing in the debt they hold have nothing to do with debt already accrued, i.e. funding for the Iraq War. That is debt on the books, not specific to what is held by any one creditor or groups of creditors. You can see more specifics on who owes or is due what at:
ftp://ftp.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdx122005.xls
I’m also wondering where you got the 700 billion number from. Chinese has roughly 330 billion in credit and they are the number two holder of US debt behind Japan. South Korean holdings are only around 70 billion. At 400 billion total that is right around one year’s deficit the way Congress is supposedly spending money these days.
Incidentally, last years deficit is now being calculated at over 100 billion less than estimates from the end of last year due to greater federal revenue from corporations and high income individuals. Funny how lower taxes can produce higher federal income…investment opportunity is a wonderful thing that only higher taxes can quench.
“if japan want to do it and it can do it without consequence, it would do it any moment”
That’s purely a statement of (willful) judgement not one of verifiable reason. Nor will it have any value when the world, excluding korea and china, agrees that South Korea and China are responsible for placing Japan in this predicament. To take the argument further I never said KJI was responsible for this, I said South Korea (mostly) and China are responsible for this. They gave KJI the opportunity and the guts to threaten and provoke Japan. They are responsible for Japan being placed in a situtation of the need to further protect themselves. And Japan does have the right to protect themselves regardless of the diplomatic belligerance South Korea will protest with.
Mr Chips,
North Korea’s nuclear brinksmanship began years before Kim Daejung was in the Blue House. His attempt at détente did not create it, and even if Seoul were to turn off the spigot today, China would be there to prop up the North. And possibly Russia, too, now that the Russians and the Chinese seem hell-bent on forming an axis to balance American power.
So what it comes down to is that the willfull Walmartization of Chinese-American relations becomes directly related to Pyongyang’s continued existence. We buy cheap Chinese VCRs, and the Chinese use that money to prop up an evil regime in Pyongyang.
Kim Daejung’s Sunshine Policy did not create this problem, but Roh Moohyun is wasting many opportunities — particularly in the form of demanding some quid pro quo — wrought by warming Seoul-Pyongyang ties.
Kushibo, You know that I know that NK’s brinkmanship began years before KDJ. I’ve been studying NK negotiation practices for the last 10 years both in my work and in grad school. I never said that his policies created the “brinkmanship.” I said his policies enabled and encouraged KJI to pursue nuclear weapons and ICBMs to be used as bargaining chips in that brinkmanship. Besides, brinkmanship is not the situation; NK having nukes and testing missiles is the situation; and a direct prescursor to position of those items is the shroud of “good will” KJI hid behind thanks only to KDJ’s stunt back in June 2000. While I did also lay blame for the funds flow on both South Korea and China, it is the Sunshine Policy that rescued the regime from the disasters of the 90s famine and impending collapse. It is the lifeline to which the NK leadership has clung. I’m going to assume your joking with the Walmartization comment. I’m sure you wouldn’t claim that trade benefits with China have had more of an impact on NK’s recovery from the 90s and subsequent investment in radioactive toys than the Sunshine Policy…
Kushibo, Belay my last…I really should go back and look at my own statements before I mouth off. I apologize.
Instead of saying KDJ caused the “brinkminship potential” I should have been more specific and said it caused the opportunity for Pyeongyang to pursue brinkminship with nukes and missiles as chips. I understand too that there is no “one” cause but a myriad. Sunshine, however, I think played a big role in setting up the current situation.
MrChips, my main point was that you can’t economically hurt China and South Korea without hurting yourself. Forget the massive US debt owed to these countries, what about all the US foreign investments in Asia? Shut down China, and you effectively shut down the world economy. There is no option here as far as I can see.
cm: Shut down China, and you effectively shut down the world economy.
That’s a bit of a stretch. Trade is just over 10% of the US economy. Most of it is with Europe and Uncle Sam’s immediate neighbors. Trade is a large component of China’s economy, and a huge component of South Korea’s economy. But the American economy is mostly self-sufficient. Cheap capital from abroad has served mainly to inflate US asset bubbles - first the telecom and internet bubble, and now the real estate bubble.
There is more than enough money available to fund the technological advances of the future. Note that semiconductor industry grew of age during the stagflation years. IBM and Apple developed the first personal computers during an era of mid-teen interest rates, during the early 80’s. A 15% Fed Funds rate (up from 5% today) reminiscent of that era would affect the US economy, but probably not much more than it did in the early 1980’s, when the computer and semiconductor industries were just specks on the US economic landscape.
At that point, the American consumer electronics, steel, auto and machine tool industries were being devastated by competition from Japan. American financial colossi like Citibank and AIG looked set to be plowed under by their hugely profitable Japanese counterparts. Peripheral industries that hadn’t learned to relocate production in low-cost East Asia were being slaughtered by their bottom-feeding cheap labor counterparts in South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaysia.
Today, American companies like Boeing, Intel, Pfizer, IBM, Caterpillar, Cisco, Oracle and Microsoft are world leaders in most of the important industries. American financial institutions set the standard for profitability and risk management. Even tiny sole proprietorships have learned the art of outsourcing assembly work to cheaper countries while keeping design work at home - to China if cost is all-important, and to other East Asian countries if timeliness and quality are more important. Bottom line is that America Inc. is at the peak of its powers and open for business. Anyone who thinks that a disruption in trade with Korea and China is going to bring about a rerun of the Great Depression needs a doze of valium (another 80’s medication).
“To take the argument further I never said KJI was responsible for this, I said South Korea (mostly) and China are responsible for this. They gave KJI the opportunity and the guts to threaten and provoke Japan.” - MrChips
I will go a step further. China told KJI to threaten Japan.
I wrote the following at the beginning of this year (Jan 06).
http://koreanamerican431.blogspot.com/
”
NK has always been a satellite of China, ever since the fall of USSR. Hu can order KJI around and Hu is calling shots about (now debunked?) six-party talks. KJI is just a puppet.
Actually this year is very interesting time for China-Korea-Japan relationship. China, after using NK nukes as trading chips against Taiwan acquisition, may try using NK in a new venture.
KJI visited China this year with military generals. This is significant move. And, I am afraid that the purpose of visit was not economic change as many media have reported.
China may start using NK to attack Japan!
The following events may take place.
1) NK will be very belligerent toward Japan, attacking Japanese boats and even SHOOTING SOME MISSILES.
2) The US will be put into an awkward position. To defend Japan, the US may have to start a war against NK. However, this will not pass in the Congress. Koizumi’s Yasukuni visits will be a convenient excuse for the US not to commit troop. The US will just take the issue to the UN.
3) When NK attacks heighten and the Japanese require the US to live up to the mutual defense treaty, the US will reluctantly have to commit troops.
4) This is where the most intriguing events will follow. South Koreans will ask the US to leave the country! SK will join NK and China alliance.
China wants this consequence and may activate this scenario.
The US will pull out of Korea and just supply the Japanese Self-Defense Corps some missles to fight the war against NKs. As soon as the US pulls out of SK, NK ends hostilities against Japan, with China working as the peacemaker.
Five years later, the Unified Korea attacks Japan under China’s orders. The US is nowhere to be found.
“