아리랑 위성을 관리하는 한국항공우주연구원 고위 관계자는 기자와의 통화에서 “북한 지역을 찍지 말라든가 하는 정부 지시는 없었다”며 “사전에 예정된 계획에 따라 활동했을 뿐”이라고 말했다.

So in more literal translation:

A high-ranking relevant person with the Korean Aerospace Research Institute—which manages the Arirang satellites—said in a telephone conversation with this reporter, “There were no government orders to not take pictures of North Korea,” and “[the satellite] merely functioned according to scheduled plans.”

It’s amazing the details one can miss! On closer rereading, I see now that the KARI official contacted for the story actually used a double negative, to explain that they were not explicitly asked to not watch the North.

A senior KARI official told the Chosun Ilbo on the phone there was no order from the government that pictures of North Korea were not to be taken. “The satellite just operated according to its pre-determined schedule,” he said.

Did you mean:

“The Korean Aerospace Research Institute says they were not asked to turn the cameras on the North. For the record, the whistleblower on this was an Uri Party lawmaker” as you wrote it, or:

“The Korean Aerospace Research Institute says they were ASKED TO NOT turn the cameras on the North. For the record, the whistleblower on this was an Uri Party lawmaker” as I read it in context?

I had read your “Helping China decide . . .” piece earlier. Terrill’s suggestion seems different to me. The essence of your plan you summed up as

“to convince China to use the leverage is has – oil, energy, etc. – to either a) force North Korea back to the Six-Party Talks and to the completion of a genuine agreement, or b) to isolate North Korea into collapse should Pyongyang not capitulate.”

Terrill also notes that Chinese action is indispensable, but I think he wants to see that leverage used for a different end: to force KJI to accept a creatively ambiguous “Federation” which he might hope to dominate, but which would evolve — swiftly or slowly — toward his eclipse.

I think Dogbertt is right to emphasize the radical differences between the two Koreas as an impediment (if anything, he understates his case). And your belief that KJI needs and clings to isolation also militates against Terrill’s plan. But I suggest (without irony) that Terrill deserves credit for ingenuity.

[KAERI] says they were not asked to turn the cameras on the North.

Or is it: KAERI were asked not to turn the cameras on the North. ?!?

Are the benefits of faking a nuclear test really worth it? I think it would be much more likely that North Korea was proving to a potential buyer that their bombs really work.