| |
PYONGYANG WATCH
No-penalty shootout
By Aidan Foster-Carter
"Events, dear boy. Events". Thus spoke former
British prime minister Harold Macmillan, asked what was
his biggest problem. As for politicians, so for us
humble hacks. You think you've got the story, grasped
the basic trend - and then, bam. Something happens, and
everything changes. Back to the drawing board.
Take last weekend's events. Shootout in Korea?
Soccer might be your first thought, after the co-host's
amazing run. Not this time. On Saturday, just hours
before South Korea's final match for third place, a
20-minute firefight in the Yellow Sea (West Sea, to
Koreans) sank a South Korean patrol boat, killing five
and wounding 19. The South returned fire, and then some:
it reckons 30 Northern dead and 70 wounded.
So
what happened, and why? As ever, there are rival
versions: each side says the other shot first. Time was
when you wouldn't trust either of them, but not now.
North Korea, of course, denies everything, on principle
and in Bart Simpson fashion: didn't do it/nobody saw
me/can't prove a thing. Why, they even still disavow
starting the Korean War (yet they celebrate the day,
June 25, as a big victory over the US imperialists),
even though the now open Soviet archives prove beyond
doubt that the Korean People's Army (KPA) struck first.
Besides, the North's swift advance in 1950
implies an enemy taken by surprise. Ditto on Saturday.
That the ROK (Republic of Korea) boat took a direct hit
to its steering room suggests premeditation, and no
warning. The North's aging armor would be lucky to score
so in the heat of battle. It certainly didn't, last time
this occurred in 1999, when a fierce Southern
counterblast sank one KPA boat, crippled three, and
killed up to 80.
Still, presumption isn't proof.
In 1999 the South had video evidence. Though equally
unexpected, the North fired while its boats were being
rammed in a standoff in disputed waters rich in blue
crab. Then as now the fishing season was in full swing,
and as usual Northern boats were testing Southern
waters.
Usually there's a ritual to these
encounters. Obviously a sea border is unmarked, and the
South tolerates minor infractions. On June 20 it
returned a Northern boat and two barges caught 35 miles
south of the Northern Limit Line (NLL), on which more
below. A day earlier, the ROK joint chiefs of staff even
complimented the North for "prevent[ing] unintentional
confrontations". If they crossed the line, it was to
control their own fishermen - or to chase off Chinese
boats. When warned, they retreated promptly.
Was
Seoul being lulled into a false sense of security? At
all events, last Saturday morning ROK boat PKM 357
thought this was a routine encounter. The crew told the
Northern ship to turn round, using signal lights and
loudhailers as the rules of engagement require. To be
audible means getting dangerously close: just a
kilometer. But no one expected an attack, so no one was
filming. US satellite pictures and sigint (signals
intelligence) monitoring of KPA radio traffic are now
being sought, to settle once and for all who started it.
Meanwhile, consider motive. Why on earth would
South Korea pick a fight? Under President Kim Dae-jung,
who staked his all on a policy of reconciliation now
left in tatters? When the whole nation was celebrating a
monster football party? It just doesn't add up. But if
not the president, might the ROK military want to
torpedo the "Sunshine" policy of reconciliation?
Possibly. On land, border incidents have been staged for
political reasons: especially just before elections, to
scare people into voting conservative. But that was in
the bad old days - and without casualties. I haven't
seen such a conspiracy theory suggested this time, and
it doesn't convince.
Rogue military are more
probable on the other side. North Korea isn't as united
as it likes to make out. The order to fire could have
come at any level, from the boat that did it right up to
Kim Jong-il himself and all points in between. In Seoul,
they now reckon the 1999 incident arose on the spot, in
the heat of the moment. After all, Northern vessels were
being rammed. That version was tacitly confirmed at the
summit a year later. Then again, who can say if this
wasn't just a face-saving excuse after the fact?
As to who was in whose waters, that's a red
herring. True, the North never formally accepted the
NLL. But it observed it in practice for 46 years, only
declaring it invalid in 1999. Its alternative is a
non-starter, taking no account of five ROK-controlled
islands near the northern coast, which mean a straight
line doesn't cut it. If the North Koreans just wanted to
fish, and had asked, Kim Dae-jung would surely have
agreed.
But someone in Pyongyang preferred to
shoot. Who, and why? KPA top brass, with a lot to lose
from an outbreak of peace? Or a petulant leader in his
palace: watching the on- and off-pitch action south of
the border on the latest Japanese wide-screen TV, and
grinding his teeth at how well it all went for the
enemy? Worse still, he could have had a piece of it all
too - for free. But he chose to spurn Seoul and offers
from soccer's world governing powers, staging a rival
mass display instead - and nobody came. Bad decision.
Lousy leadership.
Could the order have gone out:
Rain on their parade? Wipe that smile off their faces?
Cut 'em down to size? Nothing too risky, mind. Just a
nasty nip on the ankle to remind them we're still here.
A perverse way to get attention, but in character.
Outside the tent by choice, pissing in: that's North
Korea, all over.
(©2002 Asia Times Online Co,
Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
