6カ国協議、エネルギー支援が議題に浮上も

　【ソウル＝池田元博】米国のヒル国務次官補はソウルで4日、北朝鮮が年間50万トン以上の重油提供を要求するとの報道について「私は知らないし、（北朝鮮側とこれまで）協議したことがない」と指摘した。ただ2005年9月の6カ国協議で合意した共同声明には「北朝鮮へのエネルギー、経済支援の項目が盛り込まれている」と述べ、8日に再開する協議の議題に浮上する可能性は排除しなかった。

　北朝鮮の核問題を巡る6カ国協議の米国首席代表を務める同次官補は、4日、韓国首席代表の千英宇（チョン・ヨンウ）外交通商省朝鮮半島平和交渉本部長と会談した後、記者団に語った。千氏は今回の協議に向けて「米韓の戦略は完全に一致した」と語り、両国が共同歩調で臨む姿勢を強調した。(01:12)

NIKKEI NET：国際 ニュース

「拉致問題で過去清算を回避」労働新聞が日本批判

【ソウル４日聯合】北朝鮮の朝鮮労働党機関紙、労働新聞は４日、日本が拉致問題を取り上げていることについて「過去の清算を回避するための卑劣な術策だ」と強く主張した。

　同紙は、先ごろ西欧４カ国とフィリピンを歴訪した安倍晋三首相が先々で拉致問題を取り上げ北朝鮮制裁と圧力の国際化を画策したとし、「すでに解決済みの拉致問題で、世界各国を騒いで回っている」と批判した。過去に日帝が朝鮮とアジア各国で犯した罪の歴史を隠ぺいし清算を回避しようという陰険で凶悪な思惑が隠されていると指摘している。日本の狡猾（こうかつ）で不快な行動が朝鮮人民の日本に対する憤りや復讐（ふくしゅう）心を激発させていると述べ、こうした卑劣な策を直ちに中断すべきだと力説した。

YONHAPNEWS WORLD SERVICE : JAPANESE NEWS

North Korean Rumors

By Richard Halloran

A tantalizing rumor swept though the thin ranks of North Korea watchers in Asia and America a few days ago, speculating that the "Dear Leader" in Pyongyang, Kim Jong Il, had been placed under house arrest by disgruntled military officers.

The rumor was quickly denied in Seoul, Tokyo, and Washington but not before it raised intriguing questions--how did the rumor originate and why did it make serious analysts of North Korea sit up and take notice?

As with many rumors, it was not clear where this one started. One account said a South Korean intelligence agency planted it in a Japanese news service. Another said the Tokyo news service picked it up carelessly from an advertisement for a novel about North Korea. Whatever the facts, it rippled out swiftly from there.

Even if only a rumor, it underscored how little the outside world knows about the secretive hermit kingdom in Pyongyang; North Korea watchers thus grasp at every tidbit that leaks out. More important, it raised the question of "regime change," meaning the overthrow of Kim Jong Il or otherwise seeing him pass from the scene.

Kim probably has more power centralized in his hands than any ruler in the world. So far as is known, however, he has fended off naming a successor even though he is reported to be in ill health as he approaches his 65th birthday on Feb. 16.

Thus, a North Korea run by someone other than Kim would be a genuine mystery to policy makers in Seoul, Tokyo, Beijing, Moscow, and Washington. "The devil we know is better than the devil we don't know," said Alexandre Mansourov, who specializes in Korean affairs at the Asia Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu.

The timing of the speculation over Kim's fate added another twist to the puzzle as it came up just as two negotiations opened. US Treasury officials met last week in Beijing with North Korean officials seeking relief from US financial sanctions. Next week, also in Beijing, US diplomats are scheduled to resume the Six Party talks intended to persuade Kim to give up his nuclear weapons. China is the host for the talks that include diplomats from South Korea, Japan, and Russia.

The US plans to continue the nuclear negotiations even though there is a widening consensus among officials in the US government that Kim has no intention of giving up those weapons, no matter what the US offers.

Evidence for that assessment abounds. The North Koreans have begun, in official pronouncements, to refer to their nation as "a responsible nuclear weapons state." In addition, they have contended that the US is bogged down in a "quagmire" in Iraq, which they apparently think strengthens their bargaining position.

The Congressional Research Service in Washington, which prides itself on dispassionate, non-partisan analysis, said in a report this month that North Korea has shown an "intent to stage a 'nuclear breakout' of its nuclear program and openly produce nuclear weapons."

William Perry, the deliberate, cautious Secretary of Defense in the Clinton Administration, told a Congressional committee in mid-January that if Kim does not give up his nuclear weapons, "the United States may be forced to military action which, while it certainly would be successful, could lead to dangerous, unintended consequences."

Even President George Bush seems to have retreated from his onetime insistence that North Korea abandon its nuclear weapons. After North Korea detonated a nuclear device in October, he limited his response to warning North Korea not to transfer nuclear material or technology to others.

South Koreans appear to have accepted North Korea's position, many asserting that Kim will not use nuclear weapons against fellow Koreans. China and Russia are unhappy with a nuclear North Korea but have been unwilling to coerce Kim to give it up.

Japan, emerging from its postwar pacifist shell, has voiced the strongest opposition to Pyongyang's nuclear program. "North Korea's nuclear development," Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said in a policy speech translated by the Kyodo news service last week, "is something Japan cannot possibly tolerate." But he threatened no new action to force Kim to relent.

With this mounting evidence of Kim Jong Il's adamant stance, why does the US continue to negotiate? The main reason, say some US officials, is to keep up diplomatic appearances and to escape blame when diplomacy and the Six Party talks fail. Said one official: "They want to keep talking because they think that talking is better than doing nothing."
Richard Halloran, a free lance writer in Honolulu, was a military correspondent for The New York Times for ten years. He can be reached at oranhall@hawaii.rr.com

RealClearPolitics - Articles - North Korean Rumors