U.S., N. Korea To Hold Talks On Missile Test

By Doug Struck Washington Post Foreign Service Friday, August 27, 1999; Page A19
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-08/27/116l-082799-idx.html

TOKYO, Aug. 26-North Korea has agreed to talks with U.S. officials next month over a new missile the communist state has threatened to test-fire--raising questions among diplomats and analysts about whether American and Asian warnings against the firing had prevailed in Pyongyang or the reclusive country had bluffed Washington into diplomatic concessions.

Now American negotiators are puzzling over how to ensure that the talks in Berlin succeed in keeping North Korea from test-firing the long-range missile without provoking criticism that the United States is submitting to blackmail by giving Pyongyang increased trade, aid or other benefits.

U.S. special envoy Charles Kartman will take the American delegation to Berlin on Sept. 7 with at least one achievement: North Korea has agreed to talk, rather than push the launch button right away, on its Taepodong II rocket.

"It's a positive sign North Korea decided to meet bilaterally," State Department spokesman James Foley said Wednesday. "We intend to use this meeting to stress the advantages to North Korea of improving its relations."

The State Department did not assert that North Korea has suspended its launch preparations, and North Korea said nothing publicly about the planned four-day meetings, to which they will send Deputy Foreign Minister Kim Gye Gwan. But a deal was implicit, and diplomats confirm there has been no activity at the launch site since North Korea started sending signals recently that it was willing to talk.

In fact, North Korea has never even shown its trump card. American sources said three weeks ago that fuel had been delivered to the launch site. But, said a Japanese official familiar with intelligence reports, "We haven't seen a missile. There's nothing on the launch site."

All of which adds to the mystery of whether North Korea's test launch of a shorter-range missile last Aug. 31--and its thumping insistence on its "sovereign right" to conduct another test firing soon--was intended to bluff the United States into concessions at the negotiating table. The 1998 firing of the three-stage Taepodong I missile over Japan--which North Korea said was a satellite launch--rattled East Asia and heightened tensions from Tokyo to Washington. Analysts suspect the new Taepodong II may have a range sufficient to reach Hawaii or Alaska, and there is no certainty that Pyongyang has not obtained a chemical, biological or even nuclear warhead.

The United States, Japan and South Korea have responded to the potential Taepodong II launch with coordinated and concerted warnings to Pyongyang. If it test-fires another missile, Pyongyang could lose the food aid it desperately needs to alleviate widespread famine, along with international assistance in developing safe atomic power for civilian use and any hopes of improved diplomatic relations.

The joint warnings of "serious negative consequences" issued by the foreign ministers of the three countries are expected to be amplified by a similar joint statement after a summit meeting in New Zealand Sept. 12 that is to be attended by President Clinton, Japanese Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, and South Korean President Kim Dae Jung.

"This will just ruin everything," if North Korea fires another missile, said Rep. Tony P. Hall (D-Ohio), who is currently visiting Pyongyang. "There will be a move in Congress to take away everything, including food aid," he said Wednesday in Tokyo.

But Pyongyang has complained, with some evidence, that the United States has not kept promises made in the 1994 Framework Agreement, under which North Korea agreed to forgo development of nuclear weapons in expectation of an opening of trade with the United States and faster development of two power plants, neither of which has happened.

Kartman now must take more than a threat to the Berlin meeting; he must offer something to persuade North Korea to keep the lid on the Taepodong II. But he does so at the risk of furthering a revolt by congressional critics who say North Korea is continuing its bellicose ways despite repeated concessions by the United States.

A U.S. special envoy, former secretary of defense William Perry, approached North Korea four months ago with an offer of improved relations in return for more moderate behavior, but it is not clear if North Korea even replied to the proposal.

"There are a lot of incentives on the table: lifting trade sanctions, increasing trade. That's what North Korea wants," said Hall. But the North Koreans are intractable negotiators, and Hall, who has campaigned steadily for increased humanitarian aid for North Korea, says he is often perplexed at their behavior.

"I just try not to figure them out," he said.

---

U.S. congressman in Pyongyang

Updated 7:05 AM ET August 27, 1999, By CHARLES LEE
http://webcrawler-news.excite.com/news/u/990827/07/international-us

SEOUL, South Korea, Aug. 27 (UPI) Amid looming signs of a breakthrough in North Korea's missile launch plan, a U.S. congressman flew into the communist country with a fresh message against Pyongyang's brinkmanship.

The North's official Radio Pyongyang said (Friday) that U.S. Rep. Tony Hall, D-Ohio, arrived in Pyongyang on Thursday.

The state-run media, however, did not provide further details on the American's visit. Hall said earlier that his trip would be primarily to evaluate famine in the trouble-ridden country.

It was his fifth tour to the reclusive country in five years. As recently as last November, he traveled through rural areas in the North and issued an urgent call for the international community to offer more food aid to North Koreans, who were suffering extensive starvation.

This time, Hall's mission is to encourage the hard-line North to abandon efforts to test-fire a new missile.

"My message to North Korean officials will be very simple: Do not fire the missile," he said in a press conference in Tokyo shortly before leaving for Pyongyang.

Firing a missile now would be the worst possible timing and the worst possible thing North Korea can do, he said.

While in the North, Hall is expected to meet with high-ranking North Korean officials, including Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye-gwan.

Hall's visit came at a time when signs are emerging of a breakthrough in North Korea's missile test-fire plan. North Korea hinted at easing its insistence on a missile launch.

The Foreign Ministry said Wednesday, "We are already ready for negotiation if the hostile nations honestly ask for it out of an intention to alleviate our (security) concern."

Kim Yong-sun, secretary of the North's ruling Workers' Party, indicated in an interview with CNN that his country might renounce the missile test if it is given a "cake."

The United States offered to lift its economic sanctions against the North if it aborts a planned missile launch.

Washington and Pyongyang agreed to begin a new round of negotiations in Berlin next month to address the missile issue and bilateral relations.

U.S. special envoy Charles Kartman and Kim Gye-gwan are scheduled to meet between Sept. 7 and 11.

A South Korean official said Kartman and Kim might strike an important deal on ways of easing the decades-long trade embargo.

U.S. State Department spokesman James Foley said North Korea must forgo testing a long-range missile to "exploit the opportunity" for good relations with the United States.

---

North Korea using missile threat to pry economic gains from Japan

Updated: 08/27/1999 by Chon Shi-yong Staff reporter Digital Korea Herald
http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/news/1999/08/__02/19990827_0244.htm

North Korea appears to be using the threat of a missile launch as leverage in negotiations not only with the United States, but also Japan, a top presidential aide said yesterday.

Hwang Won-tak, President Kim Dae-jung's chief security adviser, bases his assumption on the North's recent renewal demands that Japan pay compensation for its colonial rule of Korea.

"It is unusual for the North to make the demand in an official statement issued by its Foreign Ministry," Hwang said in a breakfast forum of Christian journalists at the Korea Press Center. The North Korean statement was issued two weeks ago.

Hwang said it should be noted that the North raised the issue again, in an official manner, at a time when its plan to test-fire a missile created security concerns in the region.

Japan is extremely sensitive to North Korea's nuclear and missile capabilities. Tokyo reacted furiously when Pyongyang test-launched an intermediate-range missile over the Japanese islands about one year ago.

Hwang indicated that the North may demand hard currency from Japan in return for its decision not to test-fire another missile.

"North Korea got food, heavy oil and a lot more from its negotiations with the United States, but it would be difficult for Pyongyang to secure hard currency from Washington," he said.

North Korea reportedly demanded economic and diplomatic incentives from the West in its recent negotiations with the United States on missile issues.

The United States, which has already offered thousands of tons of food assistance to the starving North, is also providing heavy oil as an interim energy supply while two light-water reactors are built in line with a 1994 nuclear accord that froze Pyongyang's nuclear program.

Hwang said there have been no recent signs that the North would push ahead with its missile test-launch.

"I received an intelligence report that the launch pad has been set up and the work for putting the fueling pipes in place is moving forward," he said.

"But we still do not see any move toward launching a missile, such as transporting the rocket (from its assembly site to the launch site) or actual fueling work."

He said that South Korean intelligence capability enables Seoul officials to watch such preparations and detect a North Korean missile launch at least one to two weeks in advance.

Hwang repeated Seoul's position that South Korea and its allies should continue to maintain the engagement policy toward North Korea even if Pyongyang goes ahead with the missile firing.

"But the North will have to deal with painful retribution if it launches a missile," he said.

The presidential aide ruled out the possibility that South Korea and the United States might take military action against the North in case of a missile firing.

"In view of the degree of the North's dependence on the outside world, economic and diplomatic actions would suffice," he said.

---

S. Korean Defense Minister Seeks Support For Missile Test Halt

BEIJING, Aug 24, 1999 -- (Agence France Presse); Inside China Today August 27, 1999
http://www.insidechina.com/news.php3?id=87347

South Korean Defense Minister Cho Sung-Tae held talks in Beijing with his Chinese counterpart, Chi Haotian, the official Xinhua news agency reported Tuesday as Seoul stepped up efforts to head off a new North Korean missile test.

The two military chiefs met on Monday following Cho's arrival in Beijing for the first China visit by a South Korean defense minister since the two countries established diplomatic relations in 1992.

China, which fought side-by-side with the communist North in the 1950-53 Korean War, is still considered the only foreign country retaining a level of influence over Pyongyang's leaders.

While Xinhua made no mention of North Korean missile development, Cho's talks here are believed part of a diplomatic blitz aimed at rallying foreign opposition to new tests.

South Korean Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Hong Soon-Young discussed the feared test in a meeting in Tokyo Monday with Japanese Foreign Minister Masahiko Komura.

Chi was quoted as sending a warning about the Korean situation to the United States during the ministers' meeting here.

"Multi-polarization has become the current world trend and it is wrong to enhance military alignment and attempt to establish a single-pole world," he said.

Beijing frequently accuses Washington of imposing its views on the international community and seeking to isolate non-cooperative states like North Korea.

It has criticized recent joint military maneuvers held by South Korea and the United States as destabilizing to the Korean peninsula.

"China sincerely hopes that the situation there will ease and the peninsula will be a nuclear-free region and finally realize a lasting peace and stability," Chi said.

South Korea, the United States and Japan suspect that North Korea is preparing to test a long-range ballistic missile capable of hitting the United States.

They have threatened to suspend economic and humanitarian aid to the famine-wracked country if it carries out such a test.

Pyongyang a year ago test-launched a suspected Taepodong I medium-range ballistic missile that Tokyo said plunged into the Pacific after overflying Japanese territory.

North Korea has denied the allegation, saying it was only a satellite launch. ((c) 1999 Agence France Presse)

---

Seoul welcomes U.S.-N.K. contact

08/27/1999 by Chon Shi-yong Staff reporter Digital Korea Herald
http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/news/1999/08/__02/19990827_0243.htm

While welcoming Washington's announcement Wednesday on the resumption of U.S.-North Korea talks, officials and analysts in Seoul expected little progress to be made in the Berlin meeting Sept. 7-11.

"We welcome the decision, and expect the bilateral talks to smoothly proceed to make progress in resolving North Korea's missile test and other nonproliferation issues," ministry spokesman Chang Chul-kyoon said yesterday.

Chang's remarks came a day after the announcement by the U.S. State Department that it would hold negotiations with North Korea to discuss ways of improving bilateral ties, and just after Pyongyang hinted that it was ready to negotiate a diplomatic solution to the missile issue. As for the prospects of the proposed talks, however, officials were rather pessimistic.

"I will be surprised if the North agrees not to test-launch...," said Jang Jai-ryong, deputy minister of foreign affairs and trade.

He expected that the upcoming Washington-Pyongyang talks would serve as an occasion to confirm the North's latest indication that it would address the missile issue through dialogue.

"If the North's intention was to be reconfirmed at the Berlin meeting, that would likely be the greatest achievement of the talks," the official noted.

Early this month, the North expressed a willingness to address concerns about its missile threat through dialogue, for the first time since the missile test-launch emerged as a hot international issue in May. A North Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman also said last week that Pyongyang was "always" ready to bargain on the missile issue.

"Given such remarks, North Korea is expected to be more serious than before at the Berlin talks," Jang said.

Another ministry official said the United States and North Korea would discuss not only the missile issue but also improvement of relations between the two countries.

"The outcome of the coming talks will affect Washington's decision on the scope of lifting economic sanctions on Pyongyang," said the official, on condition of anonymity.

The economic sanctions include the freezing of North Korea's assets in the United States, a ban on financial transactions between the two countries and the North's commodity exports to the United States.

A private expert, meanwhile, ruled out the possibility that the Berlin talks would proceed far enough for the two sides to strike a deal on the suspension of Pyongyang's plan to test-fire a long-range ballistic missile.

"This time, Washington will likely convey to Pyongyang the concrete measures it would take in return for a promise not to test-fire a missile," said Park Jong-chul, an expert on the North Korea-U.S. relationship.

However, Park, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for National Unification, said the North is expected to use the Berlin meeting as an occasion to gain more concessions from the United States in future talks.

Not all outlooks were pessimistic, though. A North Korea watcher at the Sejong Institute said the North would eventually give up its missile program, including missile test-launches and exports, and accept economic and diplomatic incentives being considered by the United States.

"Under dire economic circumstances, the North has no way out but to turn to the outside world and to accept the deal," said Paik Haksoon, a fellow of the Sejong Institute.

"If the U.S. government lifts economic sanctions on North Korea, Pyongyang may as well consider a moratorium on its ballistic program this year, just as it agreed to freeze its nuclear program in the Geneva Agreed Framework in 1994," he said.

---

Pakistan-N.Korea ties trouble U.S.
Military connection has officials worried about transfer of missile and nuclear weapons secrets

By Dexter Filkins / Los Angeles Times
http://detnews.com/1999/nation/9908/25/08250165.htm

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- Amid the clamor that followed Pakistan's nuclear tests last summer, the wife of a shadowy North Korean diplomat here was shot to death in her home. The police filed no reports. The newspapers were silent. The husband, believed to be a key figure in North Korea's secretive missile program, left the country.

Today, more than a year after the incident, the few Pakistani officials who will talk about the case say that Kim Sanae was killed by mistake, when a neighbor's cook accidentally fired a shotgun he had borrowed from a guard.

"I spoke with our intelligence agencies, and they said it was an accident," said Abdul Qadir Khan, the head of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. "You Americans always try to put the blame on us."

Other officials say the truth about Kim's death is more sinister. Some say that she was killed on purpose -- probably by her own government -- because she was spilling secrets about North Korea's missile and nuclear programs or because she was planning to defect.

Kim's death has thrown new light on the military connection between Pakistan and North Korea -- at a time when the Stalinist regime is reportedly planning to launch a long-range missile capable of hitting Alaska.

While U.S. officials believe that North Korea has provided crucial help to Pakistan's missile program, the chief worry now is that economically troubled Pakistan may be tempted to pay for that help with secrets from its nuclear weapons laboratories.

That could give North Korea's leaders nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them far beyond the country's shores. Some experts believe that North Korean scientists may soon be able to assemble a nuclear bomb, and they are troubled by the country's relationship with nuclear-capable -- and nearly bankrupt -- Pakistan.

"Pakistan has the bomb, wants North Korea's missiles and doesn't have any money," said Henry Sokolski, an arms control expert in Washington. "North Korea has missiles and wants the bomb. That's a prescription for trouble."

Officials at Pakistan's embassy in North Korea refused to talk about their relations with Pakistan or Kim's death. Pakistani officials have given repeated assurances that they will keep their nuclear secrets to themselves.

In recent years, the North Korean government has emerged as one of the world's most unpredictable regimes, relentlessly developing modern weaponry even as hundreds of thousands or even millions of its people die of starvation.

U.S. officials believe that North Korea has shipped missile components to several countries, including Iran and Libya. In 1994, in a highly publicized deal with the United States, North Korea's leaders agreed to quit developing nuclear weapons -- but many worry that they will renege on the promise.

---

North Korean's Death in Pakistan Adds to a Mystery Over Missiles

By Dexter Filkins Los Angeles Times Service, Paris, Wednesday, August 25, 1999 International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/IHT/TODAY/WED/IN/pak.2.html

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan - Amid the clamor that followed Pakistan's nuclear tests last summer, the wife of a shadowy North Korean diplomat here was shot to death in her home.

The police filed no reports. The newspapers were largely silent. The husband, believed to be a key figure in North Korea's secretive missile program, left the country.

Today, more than a year after the incident, the few Pakistani officials who will talk about the case say that Kim Sanae was killed by mistake, when a neighbor's cook accidentally fired a shotgun he had borrowed from a guard.

''I spoke with our intelligence agencies, and they said it was an accident,'' said Abdul Qadir Khan, the head of Pakistan's nuclear weapons program. '

Other officials say the truth about Mrs. Kim's death is more sinister. Some familiar with the case say she was killed on purpose - probably by her own government - because she was spilling secrets about North Korea's missile and nuclear programs or because she was planning to defect.

Mrs. Kim's death has thrown new light on the military connection between Pakistan and North Korea - at a time when the Stalinist regime is reportedly planning to launch a long-range missile capable of reaching as far as Alaska.

While U.S. officials believe North Korea has provided crucial help for Pakistan's missile program, the chief worry now is that economically troubled Pakistan may be tempted to pay for that help with secrets from its nuclear weapons laboratories.

''Pakistan has the bomb, wants North Korea's missiles and doesn't have any money,'' said Henry Sokolski, an arms control expert in Washington. ''North Korea has missiles and wants the bomb. That's a prescription for trouble.''

Officials at Pakistan's embassy in North Korea refused to talk about their relations with Pakistan or Mrs. Kim's death. Pakistani officials have given repeated assurances that they will keep their nuclear secrets to themselves.

But some experts say they're worried. Pakistan's economy is reeling toward collapse, and its nuclear technology is among its most valuable assets. Some say that North Korean technicians are already working at the nuclear laboratories.

U.S. officials believe that North Korea has shipped missile components to several countries, including Iran and Libya, and that its relationship with Pakistan has helped aggravate the confrontation on the Asian Subcontinent. In 1994, in a deal with the United States, North Korea's leaders agreed to quit developing nuclear weapons, but many worry that they will renege on the promise.

As U.S. officials ponder North Korea's intentions, they have uncovered evidence of a continuing relationship with nuclear-capable Pakistan.

In June, Indian officials seized a North Korean cargo ship that they said was bound for a Pakistani port. The crew said they were ferrying water-purification equipment to the Joint Economic Development Corp. in Malta. Indian officials found that no such company existed. Inside the ship, they discovered 177 crates of blueprints, manuals, parts and machine tools for Scud missiles.

Pakistani officials said the ship was headed somewhere else.

After Pakistan tested a medium-range ballistic missile in April 1998, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Pakistan's Khan Research Laboratories and a North Korean company that allegedly shipped missile components to Pakistan. U.S. officials believe that the Pakistani missile, the Ghauri, was a carbon copy of a North Korean rocket known as the Nodong.

A month later, leaders in India, alarmed by the Pakistani missile test, conducted five underground nuclear explosions - and proclaimed their country a nuclear-armed state. Two weeks later, Pakistani leaders exploded six underground nuclear devices. The nuclear arms race in South Asia had begun in earnest.

A week after the last Pakistani test, on June 8 last year, Mrs. Kim - the wife of the North Korean diplomat - was killed in Islamabad, the Pakistani capital.

Few details are known about Mrs. Kim's death, and Pakistani authorities do not appear eager to talk about it.

Mrs. Kim's husband, Kang Thae Yun, is believed to be one of North Korea's busiest arms dealers. In 1997, while living in Islamabad, Mr. Kang brokered a deal with a Russian company to bring maraging steel to Pakistan and North Korea, Western experts say. Maraging steel is a key component of missile bodies and nose cones. Mr. Kang is also suspected of arranging the delivery of North Korean missile components to Egypt.

According to diplomatic sources, Mr. Kang was the local director of the North Korean Mining Development Trading Corp., which U.S. officials believe is a front for North Korean arms sales.

This is the company that Washington sanctioned following the Pakistani missile test in April 1998.

Sources said technicians from Pakistan's Khan laboratories frequented Mr. Kang's home in Islamabad.

Mr. Khan, Pakistan's nuclear weapons chief, lived in the same neighborhood. He says he made just one deal with Mr. Kang: the purchase of 200 SA-16 shoulder-fired antiaircraft missiles in the mid-1990s.

The missiles aren't capable of carrying nuclear warheads, and Mr. Khan says that North Korea has provided no assistance to Pakistan's missile program.

At the time of Mrs. Kim's death, according to diplomatic sources, North Korean planes were delivering missile components to Pakistan twice a month. The flights stopped in May last year, they said, shortly before her death.

-----------

Why Do Kazakhs Keep Trying to Ship MIG's to North Korea

By STEVE LeVINE, August 27, 1999
http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/world/kazakhstan-nkorea-art.html

ALMATY, Kazakhstan -- The sale of about 40 MIG fighter jets to North Korea has set off a diplomatic furor here, including a possible U.S. threat to cut off aid.

What Kazakhstan officials describe as a rogue group that included senior government officials had already delivered an undisclosed number of the jets to North Korea before the deal was discovered last month and the shipments halted.

The affair has brought down Nurtai Abukayev, head of the State Security Committee, who had been considered one of the most powerful men in the country after President Nursultan Nazarbayev.

In an interview, Foreign Minister Kasymzhomart Tokayev said neither Nazarbayev nor Prime Minister Nurlan Balgimbayev knew of the sale in advance.

Yet the sale, the second such incident this year, has angered some of Kazakhstan's most important foreign allies and caused the government to appear inept, naive or reckless. The episode comes at a tense moment in which the United States, Japan and South Korea have protested North Korea's ostensible plan to test-fire a long-range missile.

Details are sketchy, but diplomats say a Kazakh company agreed to provide North Korea with 30 to 40 MIG-21s, a 1960s-era fighter that is still effective in an arena like the Korean Peninsula.

For the second time in a month, Japan and South Korea have issued diplomatic protests to Kazakhstan, but the government seems particularly worried about a diplomatic breach with the United States, a guarantor of Kazakhstan independence from Russia.

The Clinton administration is reviewing the matter and "there certainly is the possibility that sanctions may be triggered," a U.S. official familiar with the case said in a telephone interview from Washington.

Kazakhstan is scheduled to receive about $75 million in much-needed U.S. aid this year, but that money and future funds are in jeopardy because of the sale, the official said.

North Korea is one of seven nations that Washington considers sponsors of terrorism, and U.S. law prescribes sanctions against countries that provide "lethal military assistance" to any of them. The State Department has a range of options, from waiving sanctions entirely to halting all assistance.

In the last publicly disclosed application of such sanctions, in April, three Russian companies were barred for a year from any business with the United States after they sold antitank weapons to Syria.

When the Soviet Union collapsed at the end of 1991, some of its military goods were in republics that eventually became independent nations, and became their property.

While a thriving global arms market has resulted, experts say it has been relatively unusual for the weapons to be sold to nations on the U.S. list of nations that support terrorism.

Four months ago, the Kazakhstan government managed to smooth over a similar incident. On March 19, Azerbaijan announced that it had impounded a Russian-registered cargo plane on a flight from Kazakhstan that was carrying six disassembled MIG-21s.

There was confusion as to its destination. The manifest listed Slovakia. Kazakh officials said it was headed for the Czech Republic. Crew members said they were going to North Korea. Azerbaijan said the jets were headed to Yugoslavia, which is subject to a U.N. embargo and was then being bombed by NATO. In the end, no conclusion was reached.

"Maybe they didn't realize the importance of selling these planes, especially to a terrorist country like North Korea," a diplomat here said. "They do now."

---------------

BARC yet to decide on nuclear-waste dump

By Our Staff Reporter - The Hindu, August 27, 1999
http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/1999/08/27/stories/0227000k.htm

HYDERABAD, AUG. 26. The Director of the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), Dr. Anil Kakodkar, has said that a final decision has not yet been taken on the selection of a permanent site for nuclear waste depositories. ``We are still several decades away from the necessity of having such a site. However, studies are being done to find a location and several places are being examined for identifying a possible site in the future,'' he said.

Denying reports that a remote site in Madhya Pradesh has been selected for the nuclear waste depository, Mr. Kakodkar said, ``We have enough time to reach that stage as we are still at the level of nuclear waste immobilisation.''

The BARC Director was addressing a gathering at the one-day meet on ``Nuclear Power - Y2K and Beyond'', organised by the Indian Nuclear Society (INS), Hyderabad Chapter, here on Thursday.

There were several misconceptions among people about nuclear energy which arose due to the atomic bomb explosion in Japan. ``But, it has also led to emphasis on safety which is the highest when compared to any other technology. The safety norms are quite comprehensive and parameters have been established for any eventuality,'' he said.

The country with its self-reliant nuclear energy programme has been able to develop a chain of technologies, including different power stations on the basis of a strong foundation, Dr. Kakodkar said. If the income levels in the country are to be raised we should look at technologies that can increase the efficiency of domestic energy resources.

While the coal and oil reserves in the country were quite negligible when compared to global reserves, we have 32 per cent reserves of thorium, he said, explaining that coupled with solar energy these reserves could meet energy needs of the future.

Among the three-phase nuclear programme that we have the first one had been using uranium in pressurised heavy water reactors (PHWRs), the second one was of reprocessing spent uranium and using recovered plutonium in the fast breeder reactors (FBRs) and the third stage was that of using thorium plus uranium. A 30 KW research reactor `Kamini' had become operational and work on an advanced heavy water reactor was on in the third phase, he said. BARC is also setting up a sea water desalination plant at Kalapakkam which would produce 6,300 cu.mt. of fresh water using the heat generated from the atomic plant there. It had developed a pipe inspection gauge for the Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) which could move along the pipelines at 100 km per day and record data on possible defects and their location.

The Director of the Nuclear Fuel Complex (NFC), Dr. C. Ganguly, said importance must be given to increase the energy output through nuclear power in the next few decades because of the high density eco-friendly nature of it. Sophisticated technology could take care of the risk factors, he said.

Dr. K.K. Dwiwedi, former AMD Director and President, of INS, Hyderabad chapter, presided.

---

IS THE BUDDHA STILL SMILING?
The BJP's nuclear doctrine

By P R CHARI - Deccan Herald, August 28, 1999
(The author is Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi)
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/aug28/top.htm

A SURFACE view of the nuclear doctrine announced by the National Security Adviser with great fanfare and soft-pedalled thereafter by the Prime Minister would suggest that it reflects the Government`s usual one-step-forward one-step- backwards approach to national issues. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Its announcement was designed to derive maximum electoral advantage. Nation-in-danger and the BJP`s unique concern with national security are the main planks of its election sloganeering; hence, the announcement of the nuclear doctrine at this time was in character. Besides, the voters` minds needed to be diverted from the charge of negligence, which permitted the Kargil intrusions to occur.

The alarm and consternation engendered within the international community must have been anticipated; this is now being sought to be allayed by the Prime Minister`s statement that the nuclear doctrine announced is only a draft - not a final document; it displays the Government`s 'transparency` in such matters. The country is beseeched to discuss the doctrine; this is designed to lure the national debate into the security arena and encash the mood of patriotism Kargil has stirred up. A case of eating the cake and having it too.

Another surface view might suggest that the nuclear doctrine would only formalize the BJP`s nuclear policy declared after its nuclear tests were conducted in May last year.

They included statements that India would not conduct more tests and join the CTBT with some conditions; enter negotiations on stopping fissile material production without conditions; pursue a ''no-first-use``policy against nuclear weapon powers and a ''non- use``policy vis-a-vis non-nuclear weapon States; and finally, establish a credible minimum nuclear deterrent.

Minimum deterrence

What numbers and types of nuclear forces would constitute this credible minimum nuclear deterrent was kept vague; attempts to ascertain its quantity and quality were met with the obfuscation that it was a dynamic concept, admitting of no precise definition.

But, official strategists kept hinting that India`s nuclear deterrent would be unique and distinct from those of the other nuclear weapon powers. In the event, the nuclear doctrine now enunciated is no different from that of the other nuclear weapon States.

Underlying principles

A preamble contains its underlying principles. This is followed by an enunciation of objectives, a general description of the nuclear forces required stress on the need for credibility and survivability, command and control, security and safety, which closely resembles other nuclear doctrines. Even the jargon is the same with references to ''unacceptable damage``,''triad`` and ''weight of nuclear attack.``

Further, the BJP`s nuclear doctrine, the nuclear/defence scientists have been reassured therein, that no restraints would be placed on building up further R & D capabilities to improve the nuclear arsenal.

In other words, these important supporters of the BJP`s Weltanschauung will have access to large budgets and primacy in the security decision-making processes.

Finally, a routine genuflection has been made to disarmament, arms control and the hallowed goal of nuclear disarmament, besides the need for risk reduction/ confidence-building measures.

Haste is written all over the document. It would trivialise the issue to speak of its errors in grammar or syntax, but three assertions in the nuclear doctrine need to be highlighted that seem to reflect confused thinking.

First, the purpose of India`s nuclear forces has been declared to be deterring the use/threat of use of nuclear weapons by ''any State or entity against India and its forces``. Now, entity in the strategic literature implies to ''non- State actors``and, more plainly,''terrorists``.

There is a growing global fear that they might acquire fissile material, if not nuclear weapons, from the former Republics of the Soviet Union. The nuclear doctrine suggests that India could use its nuclear weapons against an ''entity`` which begs the question how this could be effected without devastating the country in which the ''entity``is located. Would India contemplate a nuclear strike against Afghanistan, for instance, to retaliate against the various ''entities``located there ? A clarification here would be helpful.

Second, the doctrine states that India will not use/threaten the use of nuclear weapons against States which do not possess nuclear weapons, or are not aligned with nuclear weapon powers. The distinction made between non-nuclear weapon States and countries that are not aligned with nuclear weapon States is wholly incomprehensible.

Does this imply that India would contemplate their use against non- nuclear weapon States aligned with nuclear powers? That would include Germany and Japan.

Third, an assured capability to shift from peace-time deployment to fully employable forces in the shortest possible time is to be sought. Does this mean a ''launch- on-attack``capability will be established ? In other words, would India be prepared to suffer a nuclear strike indeed to ''endure repetitive attrition attempts``(read multiple nuclear attacks) in the belief that the certainty of its retaliatory attack would deter the attacker.

The unanswered questions that intrude into this design is whether anything would be left to defend after suffering multiple nuclear attacks and whether the adversary shares these perceptions in the absence of an extended dialogue.

In truth, nuclear weapons, being weapons of mass destruction, possess their own intrinsic logic. They are intended to deter conventional and nuclear conflict. The essential, unresolved paradox is that should deterrence fail and a nuclear conflict result between adversarial States, mutual annihilation is inevitable.

Arcane logic

But, for making the deterrence relationship robust the threat of nuclear retaliation must remain credible at all times; this requires nuclear forces to survive a nuclear first strike at all times. This arcane logic is inescapable; hence it is futile for any nuclear doctrine to discover a unique way of avoiding this contradiction.

The banal question of costs also intrudes here. The nuclear doctrine informs that ''highly effective conventional military capabilities``would be maintained to ensure that the use or threat of using nuclear weapons is only considered in extreme crises.

No reduction

Before the nuclear tests were conducted, the official strategists were arguing that induction of nuclear weapons would permit a reduction in defence expenditure. This argument is no longer being urged.

Besides, the nuclear doctrine contemplates the establishment of a full panoply of nuclear weapon systems that would comprise aircraft, mobile land-based missiles and sea-based ''assets`` (read naval vessels, including submarines); an ''effective and survivable command and control system``, ''space- based and other assets``for providing early warning of attack, and so on. None of this can be got on the cheap as other nuclear weapon powers have discovered.

Hopefully, the Government will go into some details to cost these requirements of the nuclear force for public debate. What these nuclear forces will deter is another basic question that the Government should clarify and must be debated, since Kargil was not deterred, and militancy continues in Kashmir and the Northeast.

There are instances, finally, of unconscious humor in the nuclear doctrine. A ''disaster control system``is to be established for handling ''potential incidents involving nuclear weapons and materials``. Given our accident record this is very unreassuring. Then, again, one of the requirements of deterrence is listed to be ''the will to employ nuclear forces and weapons``. Given its frequent verbalising of the nuclear threat, this is a qualification the Government does possess.

Is the Buddha still smiling?

-----------

India denies nuclear cooperation with Israel

Friday 27, August 1999, Sri lanka Foreign Daily News
http://www.lanka.net/lakehouse/1999/08/27/for01.html

CAIRO, Thursday (AFP)- India Wednesday denied a charge by the Arab League that it was cooperating with Israel in nuclear matters, the official Egyptian news agency MENA reported.

"There is no nuclear cooperation between India and Israel, but the two countries enjoy good relations," said a statement issued by the Indian embassy here, quoted by MENA.

The statement added that New Delhi also had long standing relations with various Arab countries, based on contact between their peoples and cooperation in political and economic fields.

"India always supports Arab issues, and in particular the Palestinian cause," it said.

"Our position has not changed, and the relationship between India and Israel will not develop at the expense of its various relations with Arab countries," the statement said.

The Arab League issued a report Tuesday accusing Israel of "military and nuclear cooperation" with India and warned against its consequences for the Arab and Islamic world.

League deputy secretary general Mohammed Zakaria Ismail said the League had information to prove the alleged nuclear cooperation, but refused to disclose it.

-----------

Pakistan Evaluating Chinese Fighters For Its Air Force

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN, Aug 24, 1999 -- (Agence France Presse)
http://www.insidechina.com/news.php3?id=87566

Pakistan is evaluating Chinese built F-7MG fighter aircraft as part of a plan to augment its fleet, officials said as the country's air force chief returned Tuesday from a visit to China.

Air Chief Marshal Parvaiz Mehdi Qureshi witnessed a demonstration of the aircraft and visited several Chinese air force installations, they said.

He also got an update on a joint venture by Pakistan and China to manufacture a Super-7 fighter aircraft.

The existing Pakistani air force fleet includes US-built F-16s and French Mirages.

In 1996 Pakistan entered a deal with France worth $120 million for 40 used but upgraded Mirage-V aircraft. Eight of the planes were delivered last year and the delivery of the rest is to be completed by the end of 1999.

The deal came after the United States canceled delivery of 28 F-16 aircraft in a vain attempt to force Islamabad to abandon its nuclear program. Washington last year refunded around $500 million paid by Islamabad for the planes. ((c) 1999 Agence France Presse)