The White Peril 白禍

Also re. the DPRK missile tests, the Asahi offers this item:

At least 112 cases of assault, verbal abuse and harassing phone calls have targeted students at Korean schools nationwide in the week since North Korea test-fired seven missiles, officials said Friday.

The 112 cases were reported by 20 Korean schools as of Thursday, according to officials of the union of Korean school teachers. Several more incidents were reported Friday, they said.

There's no excuse for such behavior, obviously. Targeting children for their elders' perceived political beliefs is barbaric. Besides, there are many points of view represented among ethic Koreans here.

At the same time, I don't buy this response:

The Korean schools are among 71 run by the pro-Pyongyang General Association of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongryun).

...

"Our students and parents fear for their safety in this abnormal situation. The harassment is aimed at students across Japan, even elementary school students," said Ku Dae Sok, principal of the Tokyo Korean Middle and High School in Kita Ward and chairman of the teachers' union.

"We cannot help feeling angry at the situation, as Japanese people have been falsely directing their warped anti-North Korea feelings against (long-term) Korean residents here, especially students," Ku said.

He said the Japanese government had stirred public anger with its harsh reaction to the missile launches. He urged the public to consider the recent problems between the two countries separately from the presence of Koreans in Japan.

How's that again? By all means, let's expose and punish attacks on children. But Here's a very brief run-down on the Chongryun:

Its organizational structure includes the headquarters in Tokyo, prefectural and regional head offices and branches with eighteen mass propaganda bodies and twenty-three business enterprises. Nearly one-third of the Japanese pachinko [pinball] industry is controlled by Chosen affiliates or supporters. Chosen remittences in hard currencies to Pyongyang have been variously estimated at between $600 million and $1.9 billion each year, with the most likely value in the lower to middle of this range. In recent years the amount has substantially decreased. In 1994, Japanese police testified that some $600 million was being sent to North Korea, though this amount has recently declined to $100 million a year or less.

...

The Chosen Soren supports intelligence operations in Japan, assists in the infiltration of agents into South Korea, collects open source information, and diverts advanced technology for use by North Korea. North Korea uses several methods to acquire technology related to nuclear, biological, or chemical warfare and missiles. The Chosen Soren has among other activities an ongoing effort to acquire and export advanced technology to North Korea.

Note that this does not indicate that these schools are fronts for espionage or anything like that. Who knows? Perhaps some are, but that isn't my point. My point is that the Chongryun isn't just an ethnic organization; it's an ethnic organization that maintains close political and economic ties with the mother country. And the mother country happens to be testing missiles that could reach Japan. For anyone working for a Chongryun institution to call for people to consider Japan-DPRK conflicts "separately from the presence of Koreans in Japan" is ludicrous.

The UN Security Council resolution on the DPRK's missile tests went along predictable lines:

The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously on Saturday for a resolution requiring nations to prevent North Korea from getting dangerous weapons and demanding Pyongyang halt its ballistic missile program.

North Korea immediately "totally rejected" the resolution. Its U.N. Ambassador Pak Gil Yon told the council that Pyongyang's missile development served "to keep the balance of force and preserving peace and stability in Northeast Asia."

...

Agreement came after Japan and the United States bowed to a veto threat from China and dropped a reference to a provision in the U.N. Charter, usually used to impose mandatory sanctions. In turn, China and Russia accepted stronger language in the resolution than they had first proposed.

The resolution requires all U.N. member states "in accordance with their national legal authorities" to prevent imports and exports of any material or funds relating to the reclusive Communist nation's missile programs or weapons of mass destruction.

It demands North Korea "suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile program," and re-establish a moratorium on the launching of missiles.

The Nikkei report additionally mentions that North Korea has accused Japan of using the missile test issue as a point of departure for "internationalizing" the abductee issue.

Internally here in Japan, the spin is that the resolution was a good thing for Japan:

Early on 16 July, Minister of Foreign Affairs Taro Aso spoke to the Foreign Ministry press corps about the unanimous adoption of a United Nations Security Council resolution condemning the DPRK: "North Korea must see this as a decisive message from the international community. There is no change to the binding power [of the resolution]."

He's referring to the compromise on Chapter 7 of the UN charter, the result of which was to water down commitments to sanctions against the DPRK. "There is more power in a unanimous vote" than in allowing Japan's proposed tougher resolution to fail, said Aso.

On the morning of 16 July, Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe also made a public statement: "This nation sought 'a resolution powerful enough to bind [member nations] to responses including sanctions,' and [the version adopted] reflects that position; we were able to articulate the decisive will of the international community." He also called for action on the abductee issue: "All surviving abductees should be repatriated immediately."

So that's that for now. Fingers have been duly wagged at Pyongyang, but the PRC and Russia haven't committed even nominally to sticking it to the DPRK. And, as usual, for all the blather about the unified front presented by the international community, the real lesson for the five countries in Northeast Asia is quite the opposite. Each has been pointedly reminded yet again why it doesn't trust any of the others--both in terms of motivation and in terms of the ability to assess danger accurately. At least no one appears poised to blow anyone else up in the foreseeable future, so, you know, well played overall.

The UN Security Council resolution on the DPRK's missile tests went along predictable lines:

The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously on Saturday for a resolution requiring nations to prevent North Korea from getting dangerous weapons and demanding Pyongyang halt its ballistic missile program.

North Korea immediately "totally rejected" the resolution. Its U.N. Ambassador Pak Gil Yon told the council that Pyongyang's missile development served "to keep the balance of force and preserving peace and stability in Northeast Asia."

...

Agreement came after Japan and the United States bowed to a veto threat from China and dropped a reference to a provision in the U.N. Charter, usually used to impose mandatory sanctions. In turn, China and Russia accepted stronger language in the resolution than they had first proposed.

The resolution requires all U.N. member states "in accordance with their national legal authorities" to prevent imports and exports of any material or funds relating to the reclusive Communist nation's missile programs or weapons of mass destruction.

It demands North Korea "suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile program," and re-establish a moratorium on the launching of missiles.

The Nikkei report additionally mentions that North Korea has accused Japan of using the missile test issue as a point of departure for "internationalizing" the abductee issue.

Internally here in Japan, the spin is that the resolution was a good thing for Japan:

Early on 16 July, Minister of Foreign Affairs Taro Aso spoke to the Foreign Ministry press corps about the unanimous adoption of a United Nations Security Council resolution condemning the DPRK: "North Korea must see this as a decisive message from the international community. There is no change to the binding power [of the resolution]."

He's referring to the compromise on Chapter 7 of the UN charter, the result of which was to water down commitments to sanctions against the DPRK. "There is more power in a unanimous vote" than in allowing Japan's proposed tougher resolution to fail, said Aso.

On the morning of 16 July, Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe also made a public statement: "This nation sought 'a resolution powerful enough to bind [member nations] to responses including sanctions,' and [the version adopted] reflects that position; we were able to articulate the decisive will of the international community." He also called for action on the abductee issue: "All surviving abductees should be repatriated immediately."

So that's that for now. Fingers have been duly wagged at Pyongyang, but the PRC and Russia haven't committed even nominally to sticking it to the DPRK. And, as usual, for all the blather about the unified front presented by the international community, the real lesson for the five countries in Northeast Asia is quite the opposite. Each has been pointedly reminded yet again why it doesn't trust any of the others--both in terms of motivation and in terms of the ability to assess danger accurately. At least no one appears poised to blow anyone else up in the foreseeable future, so, you know, well played overall.

So is everyone else on the edge of his seat like us in Japan...you know, waiting to see whether the chair of the UN Security Council will set the DPRK on its ear by deeming its missile tests "not all that neighborly" or "very naughty"? In between errands, I've been watching NHK's reporting. Today we were very pointedly informed the cool and not-so-cool people are (as in this Yomiuri article):

Japan, Britain, France and the United States on Friday jointly submitted to an informal U.N. Security Council meeting a resolution condemning North Korea's missile launches.

Clauses referring to sanctions in an original draft crafted by Japan had been modified.

...

"All options are on the table," he said, suggesting China has not ruled out the possibility of vetoing the resolution.

...

According to sources, Russia, which has called for the issuance of a U.N. Security Council presidential statement, did not speak out during the meeting. Some U.N. diplomats have interpreted this silence as an indication it will abstain from voting.

China and Russia can veto the resolution, abstain from voting, or demand that it be modified.

I didn't catch all the numbers, but NHK also reported the results of its latest poll. Unfortunately, the interesting parts don't seem to be posted: IIRC, 69% of respondents thought Japan should pursue economic sanctions against the DPRK. (Remember that the Japanese are thinking not only about missile testing but also about the still-unresolved issue of the Japanese abductees.) A plurality, if not a majority, believed that Japan's best avenue for pushing its North Korea policy was the UNSC; somewhat fewer thought it was the G7.

The Koizumi administration appears to have other ideas:

Defense Agency chief Fukushiro Nukaga said the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) should have the capability to attack foreign countries' missile bases following North Korea's test-launch last week of seven missiles.

"As an independent state, Japan should have the minimum capability (to attack foreign countries' missile bases) within the framework of the Constitution to protect its people," Nukaga told reporters on Sunday.

"We shouldn't jump to conclusions even though such a situation (the test firing of missiles) occurred. I'd like the ruling coalition partners to thoroughly discuss the issue," Nukaga said.

He made the remarks in response to North Korea's test-firing of seven missiles, including Taepodong 2 long-range ballistic missiles, last week.

His view was shared by Foreign Minister Taro Aso. "It's absolutely right (to attack missile bases within the framework of Japan's right to self-defense) to protect the safety of the people," he told an NHK program on Sunday.

The original Japanese story has Nukaga continuing: "As things are now, we have the Japan-US alliance, and we've been sharing [defense] roles. Strikes against enemy territory would be carried out by the US."

Instapundit's newest podcast, featured Austin Bay and Jim Dunnigan and was mostly about the North Korea situation. It provides a good primer on the diplomatic power plays involved. If you live in East Asia, it's also a good reminder that a lot about your everyday reality is news to people elsewhere (for example, the commonalities between Great Britain and Japan that are based on their both being island countries).

There was one moment that made me say, "WHAT?!" Jim Dunnigan said something on the order of "I've asked South Koreans I know whether being prickly and taking offense easily is a Korean characteristic, and they said, 'Not really,'" which he appeared to take at face value.

Please. The Koreans are in fact notoriously touchy about their position in East Asia...and do you wonder? Like Poland (just to spread the comparisons to Europe around), Korea has spent much of its history being overrun by its larger, hungrier neighbors. And look what's happened in the last half-century: Japan went from the humiliated pariah of the industrialized world to an economic titan that, for a decade or so, had academics and managers from the West looking to it reverently for secrets of success. China and Japan have had a massive tastemaking influence on global popular culture. Korea's coolness factor in Asia has increased noticeably over the last several years, and the ROK's economic growth since democratization has won much admiration from business analysts; still, nternational consciousness about Korea remains relatively low. I doubt many people sit around in Seoul seething about this in any focused way, but the feeling that Korea is misunderstood and put-upon is hard to miss.

Of course, the North has the additional problem of a non-functioning economy. It's hemorrhaging refugees. Have I mentioned the word 脱北 (dappoku: "escape to the north") lately? Oh, yeah--I haven't mentioned anything lately because I haven't posted. Well, it's a compound that, whatever its origins and at least in Japan, is used exclusively to refer to defecting from the DPRK over its border with the PRC. That is, the phenomenon has its own word. Jim Dunnigan, I think, mentioned that word about what a hellhole North Korea is has arrived in the South. It's arrived in Japan, also, largely through Japanese nationals who've returned from the DPRK. All of which is to say, the DPRK knows that, aside from the occasional puff piece by gullible lefty sympathizers from the West, how bad things have gotten there is no longer a secret.

One last stray thing: The NHK report I watched last night struck me as odd for some reason I couldn't put my finger on. Then, while a later segment about the opening of a border checkpoint between India and the PRC--you can bet the Japanese are watching how trade relations are going to develop between those two!--it hit me. The experts interviewed had all talked about how Japan's options for responding to the missile tests would be limited by whether the US was willing to back it up. What was strange was that they seemed to be regarding the tests as a regional problem, as if the US had no reason to get involved except to do right by its primary East Asian ally. Of course, that's part of it. We've known since 1998 that the DPRK can get missiles to Japan. (That was a fun day to watch NHK, too, IIRC.) But North Korea not only likes to get antsy about perceived US threats to its sovereignty and develop ICBMs but also likes to drag big-guns backers such as the PRC and Russia into things. The Koizumi administration appears to understand the import of that; it was strange that the commentators didn't.

So is everyone else on the edge of his seat like us in Japan...you know, waiting to see whether the chair of the UN Security Council will set the DPRK on its ear by deeming its missile tests "not all that neighborly" or "very naughty"? In between errands, I've been watching NHK's reporting. Today we were very pointedly informed the cool and not-so-cool people are (as in this Yomiuri article):

Japan, Britain, France and the United States on Friday jointly submitted to an informal U.N. Security Council meeting a resolution condemning North Korea's missile launches.

Clauses referring to sanctions in an original draft crafted by Japan had been modified.

...

"All options are on the table," he said, suggesting China has not ruled out the possibility of vetoing the resolution.

...

According to sources, Russia, which has called for the issuance of a U.N. Security Council presidential statement, did not speak out during the meeting. Some U.N. diplomats have interpreted this silence as an indication it will abstain from voting.

China and Russia can veto the resolution, abstain from voting, or demand that it be modified.

I didn't catch all the numbers, but NHK also reported the results of its latest poll. Unfortunately, the interesting parts don't seem to be posted: IIRC, 69% of respondents thought Japan should pursue economic sanctions against the DPRK. (Remember that the Japanese are thinking not only about missile testing but also about the still-unresolved issue of the Japanese abductees.) A plurality, if not a majority, believed that Japan's best avenue for pushing its North Korea policy was the UNSC; somewhat fewer thought it was the G7.

The Koizumi administration appears to have other ideas:

Defense Agency chief Fukushiro Nukaga said the Self-Defense Forces (SDF) should have the capability to attack foreign countries' missile bases following North Korea's test-launch last week of seven missiles.

"As an independent state, Japan should have the minimum capability (to attack foreign countries' missile bases) within the framework of the Constitution to protect its people," Nukaga told reporters on Sunday.

"We shouldn't jump to conclusions even though such a situation (the test firing of missiles) occurred. I'd like the ruling coalition partners to thoroughly discuss the issue," Nukaga said.

He made the remarks in response to North Korea's test-firing of seven missiles, including Taepodong 2 long-range ballistic missiles, last week.

His view was shared by Foreign Minister Taro Aso. "It's absolutely right (to attack missile bases within the framework of Japan's right to self-defense) to protect the safety of the people," he told an NHK program on Sunday.

The original Japanese story has Nukaga continuing: "As things are now, we have the Japan-US alliance, and we've been sharing [defense] roles. Strikes against enemy territory would be carried out by the US."

Instapundit's newest podcast, featured Austin Bay and Jim Dunnigan and was mostly about the North Korea situation. It provides a good primer on the diplomatic power plays involved. If you live in East Asia, it's also a good reminder that a lot about your everyday reality is news to people elsewhere (for example, the commonalities between Great Britain and Japan that are based on their both being island countries).

There was one moment that made me say, "WHAT?!" Jim Dunnigan said something on the order of "I've asked South Koreans I know whether being prickly and taking offense easily is a Korean characteristic, and they said, 'Not really,'" which he appeared to take at face value.

Please. The Koreans are in fact notoriously touchy about their position in East Asia...and do you wonder? Like Poland (just to spread the comparisons to Europe around), Korea has spent much of its history being overrun by its larger, hungrier neighbors. And look what's happened in the last half-century: Japan went from the humiliated pariah of the industrialized world to an economic titan that, for a decade or so, had academics and managers from the West looking to it reverently for secrets of success. China and Japan have had a massive tastemaking influence on global popular culture. Korea's coolness factor in Asia has increased noticeably over the last several years, and the ROK's economic growth since democratization has won much admiration from business analysts; still, nternational consciousness about Korea remains relatively low. I doubt many people sit around in Seoul seething about this in any focused way, but the feeling that Korea is misunderstood and put-upon is hard to miss.

Of course, the North has the additional problem of a non-functioning economy. It's hemorrhaging refugees. Have I mentioned the word 脱北 (dappoku: "escape to the north") lately? Oh, yeah--I haven't mentioned anything lately because I haven't posted. Well, it's a compound that, whatever its origins and at least in Japan, is used exclusively to refer to defecting from the DPRK over its border with the PRC. That is, the phenomenon has its own word. Jim Dunnigan, I think, mentioned that word about what a hellhole North Korea is has arrived in the South. It's arrived in Japan, also, largely through Japanese nationals who've returned from the DPRK. All of which is to say, the DPRK knows that, aside from the occasional puff piece by gullible lefty sympathizers from the West, how bad things have gotten there is no longer a secret.

One last stray thing: The NHK report I watched last night struck me as odd for some reason I couldn't put my finger on. Then, while a later segment about the opening of a border checkpoint between India and the PRC--you can bet the Japanese are watching how trade relations are going to develop between those two!--it hit me. The experts interviewed had all talked about how Japan's options for responding to the missile tests would be limited by whether the US was willing to back it up. What was strange was that they seemed to be regarding the tests as a regional problem, as if the US had no reason to get involved except to do right by its primary East Asian ally. Of course, that's part of it. We've known since 1998 that the DPRK can get missiles to Japan. (That was a fun day to watch NHK, too, IIRC.) But North Korea not only likes to get antsy about perceived US threats to its sovereignty and develop ICBMs but also likes to drag big-guns backers such as the PRC and Russia into things. The Koizumi administration appears to understand the import of that; it was strange that the commentators didn't.

Today's lead editorial in the Nikkei sensibly wonders whether reactions to the DPRK's missile shenanigans from the PRC and Russia will do more harm than good:

The countries on which North Korea, which has launched several successive ballistic [test] missiles over the Sea of Japan, most relies are surely China and Russia. One can see this in the way they responded to the joint proposal by the US and Japan that the United Nations Security Council issue a condemnation of North Korea with a push for the statement issued by the chairman to express criticism [but] have no real restraining power. North Korea has announced that it will continue to launch missiles; the result of China and Russia's position is that the DPRK is emboldened, and the security of both countries themselves is threatened.

On 6 July, a spokesman for the DPRK Minister of Foreign Affairs officially acknowledged the launching of the ballistic missile and stated that the DPRK will have no choice but to take even more unwavering, physically active measures in other forms if (1) it continues missile experiments from here on as one component of its strengthening of its defensive strike capability and (2) anyone attempts to pressure it [into not doing so, presumably]. The second stage will apparently involve keeping a close watch on the movements of the UNSC.

Something worth noting that informs but isn't explicit anywhere in the Nikkei editorial: Japan's deep and long-standing distrust of its two giant continental neighbors. It's hardly misplaced in this situation. Russia's ambassador to the UN has warned against getting too emotional over the attempted Taepodong 2 launch, and I think so-and-so party leader in the PRC urged everyone toward "calm."

Well, all right. But it's also worth noting that DPRK leaders seem to find a slight froth of righteous indignation on the part of its adversaries perversely affirming. Makes them feel like important geopolitical players or something, I guess. Given the humiliating failure of the Taepodong 2--which wasn't exactly predictable but is hardly a surprise--the DPRK may receive censure with somewhat more rawness than usual. But still, one might have expected China and Russia to allow for a bit more sternness with their friends in North Korea, if only out of long-term self-interest.