South Korean leader claims US hardliners discussed attacking North
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Aides to South Korea's new president were engaged in an intense damage control exercise yesterday after he suggested that senior hardliners in the Bush administration had discussed attacking North Korea.
Comments by president-elect Roh Moo Hyun, who campaigned on an anti-American platform, caused consternation in Washington, which is stepping up its diplomatic drive to solve its conflict with North Korea. Speaking on South Korean television, Mr Roh said that during his election campaign "US hardliners, people in very responsible positions in the US administration, were talking about the possibility of attacking North Korea and the possibility of war". His remarks prompted the White House to issue a reminder that President Bush wanted a peaceful solution.
Mr Roh's spokesman accused the foreign press of misinterpreting his words, saying the president-elect – who is due to be sworn in next month – was referring to media reports.
In 1994, when Bill Clinton was in office, the United States drew up plans to bomb North Korea's nuclear complex at Yongbyon – the location of an atomic reactor which officials in Pyongyang say will be in action within weeks.
But throughout the current confrontation, the US has appeared keen to find a peaceful solution, because it is eager to keep its crosshairs trained exclusively on Iraq and because of the risk of a major conflagration in the Korean peninsula.
The Americans underscored this yesterday by dangling more carrots in the direction of Kim Jong Il, the North Korean leader. After initially refusing to enter direct talks with the communist state, Washington now says it would hold talks with Pyongyang but only about how it should abandon its nuclear activities.
The American ambassador to South Korea, Thomas Hubbard, inched a little further forward by telling a television talk show in Seoul that if North Korea scrapped its nuclear programme, this would be met by "a broad approach" from the US that would entail "some economic co-operation" beyond food aid.
The Bush administration's eagerness to solve the dispute was also evident in the efforts of two other envoys, the assistant secretary of state, James Kelly – who was in Japan to talk about the crisis – and John Bolton, under-secretary of state, who was in Beijing.
North Korea wants a formal non-aggression pact from the United States. US officials say this is impossible, pointing out that Congress would not agree to it. But Washington indicated last week that it was willing to give Pyongyang a written guarantee that it will not invade.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments