North Korea’s Ballistic Missile Tests:

(1)

Directorate of Research

Defense Concepts Series August 2006

10 G St, NE, Suite 610 :: Washington, DC 20002 :: 202 289 3332 :: www.c4ads.org

North Korea’s Ballistic Missile Tests:

Diplomatic Engagement is Key CADS Staff

While distressing, North Korea’s launch of ballistic missiles on 4 July has also generated several positive outcomes. North Korean missile technology namely proved far less sophisticated than claimed. The United States initially considered as a direct sign of aggression North Korea’s threat to launch the long-range Taepodong-2, which could hit the West Coast. However, when launched, the missile failed after a mere 42 seconds and, like the five short-range missiles launched that day, landed in the Sea of Japan. Furthermore, at least four of the short-range missiles were variations of Soviet-era Scud missiles, with ranges of a mere 100 to over 600 miles.

The launches refocused international attention back to North Korea following the stalled six- party talks and after Iran and its nuclear ambitions had occupied the headlines for weeks at a time. Kim Jong-il’s latest belligerent act did indeed place North Korea back on the front burner of US diplomatic action, but also drew more attention to the oppressive living conditions in the northern peninsula. Widespread hunger, human rights violations and an almost total lack of political freedoms stop empathy for the government right in its tracks and have provided an impetus to call for major, immediate reform.

Former US chief weapons inspector David Kay maintains that the launches represent a miscalculated attempt to force the US into direct negotiations with North Korea, which seeks to negotiate for economic and security reasons. The North has refused to return to the talks until the US lifts sanctions implemented last November to punish the country for financial offenses, including money laundering.

Chief US Nuclear Negotiator Christopher Hill consulted with allies in six-party talks that also include South Korea, Japan and Russia, and called on China to urge North Korea to stop the tests and return to the negotiating table. While the US has not conceded to North Korea’s desire for direct bilateral negotiations, it has responded to the latest missile launches by emphasizing the need to pursue the six-party talks without mentioning the possibility of military action. The US has thus demonstrated a commitment to resolving the crisis diplomatically even with the possible threat of Japanese military strikes on the North’s facilities. Since rumors of potential missile tests by North Korea began in May, the US and Japan have urged North Korea to adhere to its self- imposed 1999 moratorium on long-range missile tests that followed the firing of a Taepodong-1 missile over Japan in August 1998.

(2)

Directorate of Research

China, North Korea’s main ally and supplier of food, oil and economic aid, expressed regret and anxiety over the launches, but has consistently opposed a strong United Nations Security Council resolution to implement sanctions. China’s Foreign Ministry denounced a Japanese proposal demanding that North Korea stop developing, testing and selling ballistic missiles, and threatened to apply its veto power. Japan has already imposed its own sanctions on the northern peninsula. South Korea agreed with China that a resolution would escalate tensions and worsen the situation. In cabinet-level talks, the South told the North that the latter’s missile tests were destabilizing the region.

China and Russia submitted their own proposal to the Security Council on 13 July, calling for UN members to exercise vigilance rather than strictly forbid the supply and sales of missile materials and technologies to and from North Korea. The proposed resolution also deplores the missile launches and urges, rather than demands, a moratorium on launches. On 15 July, the Security Council secured a unanimous endorsement of a compromise resolution that condemned the missile launches, demanded that North Korea suspend all ballistic missile program activities, re-established the moratorium on missile launches and urged a return to the six-party talks.

While the US insists that the six-party talks are the only venue through which it will negotiate with North Korea, bilateral talks are more likely to achieve positive results. In late June, a testimony by South Korea’s director of national intelligence revealed that North Korea built a long-range missile in mid-1999. The missile idled on its launch pad for 50 days while the US and North Korea struck a deal in Berlin providing for a unilateral North Korean moratorium on ballistic missile launches as long as talks between the two nations involving the missile program and methods of improving relations continued. Had these talks continued, the most recent missile tests may have never happened. Instead, and against the recommendation of former Secretary of State Colin Powell, the Bush administration abandoned the bilateral talks.

Given the effectiveness of such talks, North Korea had good reason to resume them, but the missile launches significantly dimmed that possibility. Were bilateral talks reinitiated, North Korea would appear to have succeeded in forcing the United States into that position, an outcome the US is unwilling to accept. The US will therefore only consider the six-party talks option, as well as urging China to persuade North Korea to return to the negotiating table.

The Bush administration also maintains that avoiding bilateral talks in a bid to isolate will hasten the downfall of the nation’s regime. However, countries such as China and Japan play a significant role in containing North Korea. These nations would be affected greatly by the collapse of the North Korean government through, namely, the likely immigration of many of its citizens, related humanitarian issues and the quandary over how to secure the North’s military technologies, particularly its nuclear materials. Ensuring stability in North Korea therefore best serves the interests of regional powers, even at the expense of maintaining Kim Jong-il and his government in power.

(3)

Directorate of Research

Sources

Associated Press. July 17, 2006. “Security Council votes for N. Korea sanctions.” United

Nations: Cable News Network.

<www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/15/nkorea.un.ap/index.html>

July 12, 2006. “China urges N. Korea to pull back.” New York: Cable News Network.

<www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/12/koreas.china.ap/index.html>

July 10, 2006. “Vote on possible N. Korea sanctions delayed.” United Nations: Cable News Network. <www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/10/us.nkorea.ap/index.html>

Cable News Network. July 14, 2006. “Abe: Japan still wants NK sanction.” New York:

<www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/14/japan.korea/index.html>

Daalder, Ivo H. July 13, 2006. “Wrong on North Korea.” Washington: The Brookings Institution. <http://www.brook.edu/views/op-ed/daalder/blog20060713.htm>

Eberstadt, Nicholas. July 14, 2006. “Nuclear Shakedown.” Washington: American Enterprise

Institute for Public Policy Research. <

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.24657,filter.all/pub_detail.asp>

King, John. July 4, 2006. “Kay: North Korea tests a ‘desperate ploy.’” New York: Cable News Network. <www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/04/cnna.kay/index.html>

Labott, Elise. July 12, 2006. “China, Russia offer plan for North Korea missiles.” New York:

Cable News Network.

<www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/12/koreas.meeting/index.html/>

Lim, Wonhyuk. July 6, 2006. “North Korea’s Missile Tests: Malign Neglect Meets

Brinkmanship.” Washington: The Brookings Institution.

<http://www.brook.edu/views/op-ed/fellows/lim20060706.htm>

McIntyre, Jamie. July 7, 2006. “Bush: Tests a chance for globe to lean on N. Korea.” New York:

Cable News Network.

<www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/07/korea.missile.us.0620/index.html>

Pinkston, Daniel A. July 6, 2006. “Deadly Silence.” San Francisco: Salon.

<http://salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/07/06/missiles/>

Roth, Richard, McIntyre, Jamie, Ensor, David, Starr, Barbara, Malveaux, Suzanne, Shubert, Atika, Jie-Ae, Sohn, Neisloss, Liz, Labott, Elise and Justine Redman. July 5, 2006. “Key UN members weigh NK sanction.” United Nations: Cable News Network.

<www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/07/05/korea.missile.us/index.html>

Schmitt, Gary J. and Dan Blumenthal. July 24, 2006. “Letting Down Japan… And Currying Favor with China.” Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. <http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.24666,filter.all/pub_detail.asp>