Theatre of War and Prospects for Peace on the Korean Peninsula on the Anniversary of the Yeonpyeong Incident 延 坪島事件一周年にあたり、朝鮮半島における戦域と平和への見込み
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 9 | Issue 51 | Number 1 | Article ID 3665 | Dec 18, 2011 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Theatre of War and Prospects for Peace on the Korean Peninsula on the Anniversary of the Yeonpyeong Incident 延 坪島事件一周年にあたり、朝鮮半島における戦域と平和への見込み Tim Beal Theatre of War and Prospects for Peace on the Korean Peninsula on the Anniversary of the Yeonpyeong Incident Tim Beal Keywords: Yeonpyeong Incident; Lee Myung- bak; South Korea; North Korea; Military buildup; US containment of China; Collapse Russian dolls South Korean sailors on exercises in the 23rd November 2011 was the first anniversary West Sea (Source) of the artillery exchange between the two Koreas around the island of Yeonpyeong off the But things are not quite as they seem. Whilst west coast of Korea. The artillery battle in 2010 the dangers are real, the portrayal of what has was the first such since the Korean War been happening is based on layers of armistice and brought the peninsula to a state deception. Just as the 2010 incident was not 1 of heightened tension. With the Lee Myung- the result of an unprovoked, surprise attack as bak administration mulling an invasion of the South Korea claims, so too the massive North in the event of a collapse of the DPRK, a commemorative exercises of 2011 were really a local conflict could easily explode into war. The matter of theatre, designed to raise tension but last year has seen a lopsided arms race with not, at this stage, precipitate conflict and South Korea dramatically increasing its military certainly not, as was claimed, to deter an capabilities on a scale the North cannot match. attack from North Korea. However, like Russian dolls, rhetoric and gestures on the The South Korean military are under American Korean peninsula take place within the context ‘wartime’ control, and since for technical of US-China contestation. The theatre of war in reasons as well they cannot engage in war Korea (“We will deter North Korean without US support, the Americans would be aggression”) nestles inside a theatre of peace automatically involved in any war. A US-ROK (“The United States is not bent on containing invasion of the DPRK would almost certainly China”).2 The rhetoric of this theatre of peace is force China to intervene, as it did in 1950. A as deceptive as that of the theatre of war and second Sino-US war would have calamitous, whilst there is not space here to go into details consequences. about US strategy, it is clear that Lee Myung- 1 9 | 51 | 1 APJ | JF bak’s Nordpolitik is only acceptable to headquartered in Pyongyang. KCNA would Washington because it is compatible with, and make Goebbels sigh; it is pretty hopeless as a reinforces, the containment of China, of which propaganda medium. Its (English tension over North Korea is an integrallanguage)releases are usually uninformative part.3 However, crucial as this US-China and wooden. Sometimes when it reproduces context is, Korean politics have their own communiqués from the Foreign Ministry the specific dynamic, and that is the focus of this arguments are lucid and coherent, but article. statements from the military tend to be flowery and blustering. Anniversary of a battle The other conduit is Yonhap News Agency, Deception and knowledge, as the ancient South Korea’s official voice, headquartered in Chinese strategist Sun Zi pointed out, is at the Seoul. It too is government controlled though heart of war. Know yourself, know your enemy, newspapers that use its services are too polite deceive and destroy. These arts were much in to point that out. Yonhap is much better evidence in recent theatrical displays around resourced than KCNA and its English is good. the island of Yeonpyeong, off the west coast of Its articles are professional and informative. It Korea. tells a much better story. However, that does not mean it tells a more accurate story. Indeed rd st 23 November 2011 marked the 1 anniversary its description of the Yeonpyeong Incident, and of the Yeonpyeong Incident, an artillery duel its anniversary, are deeply deceptive. As is its between the two Koreas which was the first coverage of the Cheonan Incident of 2010. The since the Korean War, and which, many South Korean naval ship Cheonan sank, killing believe, brought the peninsula perilously close 46 of its crew. The issues remain controversial, to war. However, what happened on 23 but it probably having detonated a South November, in 2011 and in 2010, was not quite Korean mine. This was falsely blamed on North what it seemed. Korea and the government went as far, it would appear, of fabricating evidence.4 The Cheonan and Yeonpyeong incidents were major propaganda issues for the Lee Myung-bak government in Seoul, and Yonhap is the vehicle by which the government line is articulated and disseminated. Scratch an article in the South Korean press, or most of the international media, and you will usually find Yonhap provided the original. Smoke from artillery fire Yeonpyeong Island, 23 November 2010( source) There are two main conduits of information about events on the Korean peninsula. One is North Korea’s official, state news agency, Korea Central News Agency (KCNA), 2 9 | 51 | 1 APJ | JF extend the demilitarised zone (DMZ) in a straight line out to sea, separating the two sides.6 The two lines placed the islands on different sides of the line. South Korean F-15K. This outperforms any North Korean fighter (source) But this is a business of more than lies and deception, though they figure strongly. It is also about the names of islands being rendered into English in a number of different variants, Fig 1. Sea of contention: the NLL,MDL, and about a sea called both the Yellow Sea and the the DMZ. Source: Beal, Tim. Crisis in Korea: West Sea, about the NLL, the MDL, and yes, ’ America, China, and the Risk of War. London: the West Sea Special Zone for Peace and Pluto, 2011. Cooperation’. In other words what is needed is a bit of background to what is quite a complicated situation. The Northern Limit Line is a problem. It is not accepted by North Korea and it cuts off their The contested boundary in the West Sea fishing boats from rich crab grounds. It has no legal basis, as has been admitted in private by Yeonpyeong (Yonphyong is the North’s English the Americans, including Henry Kissinger.7 version) is one of the four main islands held by After the Yeonpyeong incident of 2010 many South Korea off the North Korean coast. These commentators, including the staunchly pro- islands were occupied by the United States American International Crisis Group, argued during the Korean War and after the armistice that it should be abandoned and replaced by a was signed in 1953 they were handed over to line acceptable to both North and South.8 The the South Koreans. The US, worrying that North’s Military Demarcation Line is an South Korean president Syngman Rhee would obvious choice, but a problem remains. The reignite the fighting (he opposed the armistice North does not contest the South’s control of and wanted the Americans to continue the war the offshore islands and it has suggested the and reunite Korea under his control), solution to be lanes of access (Fig 2). unilaterally established the Northern Limit Line (NLL). This demarcation line, instead of extending the ceasefire land on land in a straight line out to sea, curved up the North Korea coast and embraced the offshore islands (Fig 1).5The North Koreans subsequently proposed their own line, the Military Demarcation Line (MDL) which did, in effect, 3 9 | 51 | 1 APJ | JF The South Korean version of the Yeonpyeong Incident contains at least two important inaccuracies. One is a deliberate falsehood, and the other more a matter of spin. Firstly the falsehood. It is claimed that the North Korean shelling on 23 November was a ‘surprise’. This has been reiterated so often that even liberal newspapers such as the Hankyoreh repeat it. Thus we read, in 2011, that: North Korea’s surprise artillery attack on Nov. 23, 2010, brought major changes to the thinking and routine of military personnel Fig 2. The NLL (A), MDL (B), and lanes of stationed on Yeonpyeong Island. K9 artillery access (source) company members alternate over three shifts a day at artillery installations. The barracks is One important point to note is that the North just 150 to 200 meters away, but they eat and considers the waters surrounding these islands, sleep by the artillery in order to be able to fire down as far as the MDL, to be theirs. This was back within five minutes in the event of a North a key issue in the 2010 confrontation. Korean provocation. The situation is difficult, but no one complains. The prevailing view is When the South’s Roh Moo-hyun and the that they were taken unaware once before, and North’s Kim Jong Il met for a summit in they need to respond comprehensively if 11 October 2007 they agreed, amongst other another opportunity arises. things, to set up ‘The West Sea Special Zone Reading this one would get the impression that for Peace and Cooperation’.9 This was scrapped the South Korean soldiers were calmly going by Lee Myung-bak when he came into office the about their daily routines on 23 November following year. If there were joint management when out of the blue the North Koreans opened of fishing and transportation in this area (it is fire.