Atomic Activity in North Korea Raises Concerns

WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 - President Bush and his top advisers have received intelligence reports in recent days describing a confusing series of actions by North Korea that some experts believe could indicate the country is preparing to conduct its first test explosion of a nuclear weapon, according to senior officials with access to the intelligence.

While the indications were viewed as serious enough to warrant a warning to the White House, American intelligence agencies appear divided about the significance of the new North Korean actions, much as they were about the evidence concerning Iraq's alleged weapons stockpiles.

Some analysts in agencies that were the most cautious about the Iraq findings have cautioned that they do not believe the activity detected in North Korea in the past three weeks is necessarily the harbinger of a test. A senior scientist who assesses nuclear intelligence says the new evidence "is not conclusive," but is potentially worrisome.

If successful, a test would end a debate that stretches back more than a decade over whether North Korea has a rudimentary arsenal, as it has boasted in recent years. Some analysts also fear that a test could change the balance of power in Asia, perhaps leading to a new nuclear arms race there.

In interviews on Friday and Saturday, senior officials were reluctant to provide many details of the new activities they have detected, but some of the information appears to have come from satellite intelligence.

One official with access to the intelligence called it "a series of indicators of increased activity that we believe would be associated with a test," saying that the "likelihood" of a North Korean test had risen significantly in just the past four weeks.

It was that changed assessment that led to the decision to give an update to President Bush, the officials said.

The activities included the movement of materials around several suspected test sites, including one near a location where intelligence agencies reported last year that conventional explosives were being tested that could compress a plutonium core and set off a nuclear explosion. But officials have not seen the classic indicators of preparations at a test site, in which cables are laid to measure an explosion in a deep test pit.

"I'm not sure you would see that in a country that has tunnels everywhere," said one senior official who has reviewed the data. Officials said if North Korea proceeded with a test, it would probably be with a plutonium bomb, perhaps one fabricated from the 8,000 spent nuclear fuel rods that the North has boasted in the past few months have been reprocessed into bomb fuel.

A senior intelligence official noted Saturday that even if "they are doing something, it doesn't mean they will" conduct a test, noting that preparations that the North knew could be detected by the United States might be a scare tactic or negotiating tactic by the North Korean government.

Several officials speculated that the test, if it occurred, could be intended to influence the presidential election, though a senior military official said while "an election surprise" could be the motive, "I'm not sure what that would buy them."

While the intelligence community's experience in Iraq colors how it assesses threats in places like North Korea, the comparisons are inexact. Inspectors have seen and measured the raw material that the North could turn into bomb fuel; the only question is whether they have done so in the 20 months since arms inspectors were ousted. While Iraq denied it has weapons, the North boasts about them - perhaps too loudly, suggesting they may have less than they say.

On the other hand, the divisions within the administration over how to deal with North Korea mirrors some of the old debate about Iraq. Hard-liners in the Pentagon and the vice president's office have largely opposed making concessions of any kind in negotiations, and Vice President Dick Cheney has warned that "time is not on our side" to deal with the question. The State Department has pressed the case for negotiation, and for offering the North a face-saving way out. While the State Department has won the argument in recent times, how to deal with the North is a constant battle inside the administration.

Some of the senior officials who discussed the emerging indicators were clearly trying to warn North Korea's leader, Kim Jong Il, that his actions were being closely watched. Asian officials noted that there has been speculation in South Korea and Japan for some time that Mr. Kim might try to stage an incident - perhaps a missile test or the withdrawal of more raw nuclear fuel from a reactor - in an effort to display defiance before the election. "A test would be a vivid demonstration of their view of President Bush," one senior Asian diplomat said.

The intelligence information was discussed in interviews with officials from five government agencies, ranging from those who believe a test may occur at any moment to those who are highly skeptical. They had differing access to the intelligence: some had reviewed the raw data and others had seen a classified intelligence report about the possibility of a test, perhaps within months, that has circulated in Washington in the past week. Most, but not all, were career officials.

If North Korea successfully tested a weapon, the reclusive country would become the eighth nation to have proven nuclear capability - Israel is also assumed to have working weapons - and it would represent the failure of 14 years of efforts to stop the North's nuclear program.

Government officials throughout Asia and members of Mr. Bush's national security team have also feared it could change the nuclear politics of Asia, fueling political pressure in South Korea and Japan to develop a nuclear deterrent independent of the United States.

Both countries have the technological skill and the raw material to produce a bomb, though both have insisted they would never do so. South Korea has admitted in the past few weeks that it conducted experiments that outside experts fear could produce bomb-grade fuel, first in the early 1980's and then in 2000.

Senior officials in South Korea and Japan did not appear to have been briefed about the new evidence, beyond what one called "a nonspecific warning of a growing problem" from American officials. But it is a measure of the extraordinary nervousness about the North's intentions that earlier this week, South Korean intelligence officials who saw evidence of an intense fire at a suspected nuclear location alerted their American counterparts that a small nuclear test might have already occurred. American officials reviewed seismic sensors and other data and concluded it was a false alarm, though the fire has yet to be explained.

North Korea has declared several times in the past year that it might move to demonstrate its nuclear power. It is impossible to know how such a test might affect public perceptions of how Mr. Bush has handled potential threats to the United States. Senator John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee, has already accused President Bush of an "almost myopic" focus on Iraq that has distracted the United States while North Korea, by some intelligence estimates, has increased its arsenal from what the C.I.A. suspects was one or two weapons to six or eight now.

Mr. Bush, while declaring he would not "tolerate" a nuclear North Korea, has insisted that his approach of involving China, Russia, Japan and South Korea in a new round of talks with the North is the only reasonable way to force the country to disarm. He has refused to set the kind of deadline for disarmament that he set for Saddam Hussein.

When asked in an interview with The New York Times two weeks ago to define what he meant by "tolerate," he said: "I don't think you give timelines to dictators and tyrants. I think it's important for us to continue to lead coalitions that are firm and strong, in sending messages to both the North Koreans and the Iranians."

The differing assessments of North Korea's intentions may reflect the competing lessons of two huge intelligence failures: the failure of the C.I.A. and other intelligence agencies to detect India's preparations for a nuclear test in 1998, and the false warnings about the state of Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical programs in 2002, which became the chief justification for invading the country. An investigation into the first failure, a test that took intelligence officials by surprise and led to Pakistan's first tests, prompted searing criticisms of the nation's intelligence agencies. It also created an atmosphere, intelligence professionals say, that encouraged early warning of any hint that another country is preparing a nuclear test.

Of course I'm not advocating that any classified information be released — specific ship names, sailing times, etc. I'm just saying that any unusual activity of the kind visible to the general public could be a sign of something going on. Reporters covering the White House and Pentagon routinely use pizza orders, etc. to gauge the seriousness of a crisis — and so can we.

Nevertheless, in case I didn't make this point clear in my original post, let me reiterate that secret information should be kept secret, and that Freeper reporters limit their posts to those of a general sort — "lots of activity in Sasebo harbor today", etc. — and omit revealing anything that could pose a security risk to US or allied forces. I apologize for any confusion I may inadvertently have caused.

"the case for negotiation, and for offering the North a face-saving way out"

What case? There isn't any case. There is just a pious wish it would all go away. A face saving way out? They don't want a way out, with face or without. They are winning, you nimnuts, getting away with it. What would they need to back out of?

No, it is not "too late", and it is not getting any earlier, either. If we do nothing, they will have 100 bombs in ten years, and have sold dozens to terrorists. You can pay to deal with the problem now, or you can pay to deal with it later, but pay you will. And the climb on the likely damage in lives is about double every two years. Not one off, as long as you care to wait, until it double up to "the US is destroyed".

I am familiar with this line of thought of course.

It is delusional. It is wrong and does not understand the Chinese communist view and their use of regimes such as N. Korea, Iraq, Iran and others as counterbalance to the US. It is not in the Chinese communist interest to "reign in" N. Korea and indeed it is inherent in their overall strategic plans for proliferation of this sort to continue. It is also part of their operating strategy to play both sides of the fence, or at least pretend to, and encourage the belief in the viewpoint you have articulated.

That's all there is too it but wishful thinking can make people take leave of ther senses.

I am familiar with this line of thought of course.

Oh, "of course".

That's all there is too it but wishful thinking can make people take leave of ther senses.

Whatver yu say.

"Agreed. N Korea has no interest in ceasing, and China has absolutely no reason to or need to try to stop them. N Korea IS in China's best interest."

China is not N.Korea's "director". Yes they are neighbors, and there are connections, however, N.Korea has been a child of Soviet Communism since 1948. Stalin was their leader and director. China's number one priority is to prevent million upon millions of starving N. Koreans from flooding into their country.

In 1950 Stalin signed a pact with China over N.Korea, check out what that pact said, what the agreement was.

IT was RUSSIA that Clintons, Carter and Bill Richardson made the agreement for the US to adopt N.Korea, NOT CHINA!!!!

It was PUTIN that sent the mental "Il" horses for his birthday, not anyone from China.

Yes it would be preferably to put so much diplomatic pressure on China they remove Kim themselves. But no, we are not currently putting that pressure on China. The clock is running. China responds to the modest level of pressure we are actually willing to employ vs. them and vs. the north by expressing concern to our face and laughing behind our backs. The only thing that will make China choose to remove Kim themselves is a real and present fear that we will remove him military otherwise. They do not want to be in the position of losing their client and reputation, nor in the position of going to war for a nutjob when they will lose. Right now, they don't think we will use force because of their threats, that we will touch trade because of the business lobby, that we will embargo the north because of South Korean sentiment. They look at the whole board and they think we won't do anything hard enough to shake their position. They think they can continue to proliferate, ramp the number of nukes in the hands of proxies into the tens then hundreds, and then out to delivery nutjobs, and we will sit and discuss how hard the problem is but not do a blessed thing.

Good points in this article, thanks for the post. My opinion says that if the Chinese cuts off NK entirely, then Kim simply keeps his nukes and invades the South.

China does not want the "refugee" problem and all that but from everything I am reading, it really is not that big a deal. I don't think China would have to join in the fight when/if the the North invaded the South. The drain on American human resources and money would be incredible. China wins that way.

I feel China will simply do nothing.

"so why rationally does NK build these weapons?"

They build nukes so that we (the US) and the international community can continue to be blackmailed. Kim can also sell bombs to other semi-rogue nations for billions who will arm the terrorists and eventually take down our country.

My theory says this: Kim is simply waiting to invade and conquer South Korea until after the election. If Bush wins, Kim invades because he can't sustain his massive army for another 4 more years. If Kerry wins Kim gets more blackmail money and with it, repeats the cycle of more weapons and bomb building. i don't even think he'll waste a bomb on testing when he already has at least 1-2 bombs.

When Kim invades and we send our carrier fleet close to the theatre, I would Kim to use his nuclear arsenal nuke it. To me it is not a question of "if" Kim invades, it's a question of when. China would not mind a new "socialist" united Korea to trade with.

Then, China then attacks Taiwan knowing our carrier fleet is crippled and secures Taiwan.

Everything I have read shows South Korea being much more prepared defensively then preparing for invasion. The terrain eliminates a lot of the tech advantage the US/South joint attack force has.

The Bush doctrine applied in 1991. Unfortunately, that was one year before Clinton got elected and everyone decided to focus on stopping ethnic conflicts that had nothing to do with national security.

It might be a good idea to keep your answers to these questions (when you get them) off of a public web site. Otherwise, freepers could end up serving as an intelligence service for all kinds of bad people.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.