Despite its strong denial of any involvement and expressions of sympathy for lost fellow Koreans, fingers are being pointed at North Korea over the tragic sinking of the 1,200-ton South Korean corvette Cheonan in the West Sea or Yellow Sea on the night of March 26.
"A North Korean torpedo attack was the most likely cause for the sinking of a South Korean warship last month," an unnamed US military official told CNN on April 26. Up to 46 of the ship's 104 sailors were killed in the sinking.
Apparently, North Korea is being set up as the fall guy in an incident that is so mysterious that a Los Angeles Times April 26 story datelined Seoul was headlined, "James Bond Theories Arise in Korean Ship Sinking".
So far, no hard evidence has been produced linking North Korea
to the disaster. However, this has not stopped media and experts from holding the North responsible. The South Korean daily Chosun Ilbo wrote on April 29, "It is difficult to imagine a country other than North Korea launching a torpedo attack against a South Korean warship."
Revealing circumstantial evidence Is it possible that North Korea carried out the daring act of torpedoing a South Korean corvette participating in a US-South Korean war exercise? The answer is a categorical no. The circumstantial evidence is quite revealing, showing who is the more likely culprit.
Mission impossible There are four important points that make it clear that a North Korean submarine did not sink the South Korean corvette.
Fact 1.North Korean submarines are not stealthy enough to penetrate heavily guarded South Korean waters at night and remain undetected by the highly touted anti-submarine warfare units of the American and South Korean forces. A North Korean submarine would be unable to outmaneuver an awesome array of high-tech Aegis warships, identify the corvette Cheonan and then slice it in two with a torpedo before escaping unscathed, leaving no trace of its identity.
Fact 2. The sinking took place not in North Korean waters but well inside tightly guarded South Korean waters, where a slow-moving North Korean submarine would have great difficulty operating covertly and safely, unless it was equipped with AIP (air-independent propulsion) technology.
Fact 2: The disaster took place precisely in the waters where what the Pentagon has called "one of the world's largest simulated exercises" was underway. This war exercise, known as "Key Resolve/Foal Eagle" did not end on March 18 as was reported but actually ran from March 18 to April 30.
Fact 3: The Key Resolve/Foal Eagle exercise on the West Sea near the Northern Limit Line (NLL) was aimed at keeping a more watchful eye on North Korea as well as training for the destruction of weapons of mass destruction in the North. It involved scores of shiny, ultra-modern US and South Korean warships equipped with the latest technology.
Among the fleet were four Aegis ships: the USS Shiloh (CG-67), a 9,600-ton Ticonderoga class cruiser, the USS Curtis Wilbur (DDG-54), a 6,800-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer, the USS Lassen, a 9,200-ton Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer and Sejong the Great, a 8,500-ton South Korean guided-missile destroyer.
The four surface ships are the most important assets of the two navies, and have multi-mission platforms capable of conducting various tasks, such as anti-submarine warfare. There is every likelihood that they were supported by nuclear-powered US submarines and a South Korean "Type 214" submarine that uses AIP technology.
The sinking of the Cheonan has made headlines around the world. If indeed it was a US accident, it is an embarrassing indictment of the accuracy of the expensive weapons systems of the US, the world's leading arms exporter. It has also cost the Americans credibility as the South's superpower guardian. Ironically, this has made North Korean-made weapons more attractive on the international market.
The South Koreans and the Americans charging the North Koreans with the sinking of the naval vessel in South Korean waters only highlights the poor performance of their expensive Aegis warships, as well as the futility of the US-South Korean joint war games and the US military presence in Korea.
Fact 4: Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg said on March 30 that he doubted there was North Korean involvement in the sinking: "Obviously the full investigation needs to go forward. But to my knowledge, there's no reason to believe or to be concerned that that may have been the cause."
General Walter Sharp, US Forces Korea (USFK) commander, also saw no link between North Korea and the sinking. In an April 6 press conference, he said: "We, as Combined Forces Command and the ROK [Republic of Korea] Joint Chief of Staff, watch North Korea very closely every single day of the year and we continue to do that right now. And again, as this has been said, we see no unusual activity at this time."
No motivation for vengeance There have been misplaced reports that the sinking was an act of retaliation for a naval skirmish in November last year "in which the North came off worse", as reported by the Times of London on April 22.
As a North Korean navy officer, Kim Gwang-il, recalled on North Korean television on Armed Forces Day, April 25: "[In that incident] a warship of our navy single-handedly faced up to several enemy warships, to guard the NLL ... [The North's warship] inflicted merciless blows on them in a show of the might of the heroic Korean People's Army (KPA) Navy."
The first duty of the KPA is to prevent war while jealously safeguarding the territorial air, sea and land of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, as this safeguards the peace and security of the Korean Peninsula.
The Korean People's Army Navy would not attack South Korean or American warships unless provoked, since these vessels carry innocent soldiers on the high seas. True, the KPA Navy would be justified in torpedoing a US Aegis ship or a nuclear-powered submarine if one were caught red-handed. But the KPA Navy would not stoop to infringing on South Korean waters to attack a South Korean ship at random, unless it had returned there after committing hostile acts against North Korea.
Friendly fire Seven facts indicate friendly fire as the most likely cause of the naval disaster. It may be no exaggeration to say that the South Korean president and his military leaders have shed crocodile tears over the dead South Korean sailors.
A torpedo could have been launched from any of the American or South Korean warships or warplanes taking part in the Foal Eagle exercise alongside the hapless Cheonan.
The four Aegis ships and most South Korean warships carry Mark 46 torpedoes, which have improved shallow-water performance for anti-submarine warfare and anti-ship operations.
General Sharp had issued on March 4 a five-point safety message warning that "a single accident can undermine the training benefits you will receive during KR/FE '10. Remain vigilant and engaged."
It appears that Sharp's warning came true, and the US repeated the kind of friendly fire incident for which it is notorious in Iraq and Afghanistan.
After the ship disaster happened on the night of March 26, Sharp promptly cut a visit to Washington to testify at congress to fly back to Seoul, according to the March 30 edition of Kyonggi Ilbo.
President Barack Obama then called his South Korean counterpart on April 1, ostensibly to express condolences over the ship disaster, but also to offer him the privilege of hosting the next nuclear security summit in 2012, as was reported by Joong Ang Ilbo on April 14.
Obama made this offer one week before he and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a nuclear arms reduction treaty in Prague, and two weeks before the 2010 nuclear security summit took place in Washington.
When Obama announced his decision to select South Korea as host of the next major nuclear security summit in 2012, Agence France-Presse reported that "the announcement surprised many". Most observers presumed that Russia would lead the next meeting.
The most plausible explanation is that Obama offered South Korea the summit due to an overriding need to mollify otherwise possible South Korean resentment at the friendly fire sinking, while covering up the US's involvement in a friendly fire torpedo attack. Most probably, Sharp reported to Obama the potentially disastrous consequences of the public discovering the true nature of the incident. This would likely lead to a massive wave of anti-American sentiment and put Obama and South Korean President Lee Myung-bak in an extremely awkward situation.
Obama must have felt relieved at the South Korean president's ready acceptance of his offer of compensation. One article carried in the April 14 edition of Joong Ang Ilbo was headlined "Veep Biden Says LMB [Lee Myung-bak] Is Obama's Favorite Man". The comment was made by Biden on April 12, one day before the nuclear summit.
Sharp unexpectedly attended the April 3 funeral of a South Korean rescue diver, Han Ju Ho, who died while participating in the search for missing sailors from the corvette. Sharp was seen consoling the bereaved family in an unprecedented expression of sympathy.
Joong Ang Ilbo reported on April 27 that the South Korean government would deal strictly with rumors rampant on the Internet that a collision with a US nuclear submarine had caused the sinking.
The best solution is for the South Korean government team investigating the ship disaster to find an old mine responsible. It is easy to falsely accuse North Korea, but public pressure will mount for military reprisals against North Korea, which will promptly react by turning Seoul into a sea of fire in less than five minutes. North Korea would not flinch from using nuclear arms in the event of US involvement.
Kim Myong Chol is author of a number of books and papers in Korean, Japanese and English on North Korea, including Kim Jong-il's Strategy for Reunification. He has a PhD from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's Academy of Social Sciences and is often called an "unofficial" spokesman of Kim Jong-il and North Korea.
(Copyright 2010 Kim Myong Chol.)
김명철, “천안함 미군 오폭 확률높다”
<아시아타임즈>기고, “북 잠수함 어뢰공격으로 침몰은 불가능”
이동원 기자
북한 정보에 정통해 김정일 위원장과 북의 ‘비공식 대변인’으로 불리기도 하는 김명철 조미평화센터 소장이 천안함 침몰에 대해 “미군 오폭 가능성”을 제기해 논란이 일고 있다.
김명철 소장은 홍콩에서 발행되는 <아시아타임즈>에 기고한 5월5일자 기사 <평양, 천안함 침몰에서 미국역할에 주목>(Pyongyang sees US role in Cheonan sinking)에서 “북한이 천안함 침몰에 개입하지 않았다며 강하게 부인하고 사망한 한국병사들에 대해 ‘동족의 구성원으로서’ 조의를 표했음에도 불구하고, 3월26일 밤 서해에서 발생한 1200톤급 천안함의 비극적 침몰의 원인으로 북한이 지목되고 있다”면서 몇 가지 정황증거를 제시하며 천안함 침몰의 ‘북한 어뢰공격설’에 대해 “불가능”하다고 일축했다. (기사 원문 www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/LE05Dg01.html)
김 소장은 첫 번째 정황증거로 “북한 잠수함들은 물샐틈없는 한국 수역의 방어망을 뚫고 대단하다고 알려진 한미연합군의 대잠전투부대의 탐지 능력을 피할 정도의 잠행능력은 없다”며 “북한 잠수함들이 막강한 최첨단 이지스함대의 허를 찔러 천안함을 확인하고 흔적을 남기지 않고 무사히 빠져나오기 전에 어뢰를 발사해 초계함을 두동강내기란 불가능 할 것”이라고 밝혔다.
그는 이에 대해 “천안함 침몰은 북한 수역이 아니라, 느린 북한 잠수함이 AIP(air-independent propulsion, ‘대기중의 공기에 의존하지 않는 추진체계’라는 뜻으로 원자력이 아니면서도 기존 디젤 잠수함보다 길게 잠항시간 연장이 가능한 추진방식) 기술을 장착하지 않는 한 은밀하고 안전하게 움직이기가 매우 어려운 한국 수역에서 일어났다”고 덧붙였다.
김명철 소장은 두 번째 정황증거로 “천안함 침몰은 펜타곤의 표현의 의하면 ‘세계에서 가장 규모가 큰 모의전쟁훈련’이 벌어지고 있던 바로 그곳에서 일어났다”며 “키 리졸브/ 폴 이글 훈련으로 알려진 이 전쟁연습은 언론에 알려진 대로 3월18일에 끝나는 것이 아니라 실제로 3월18일부터 4월30일까지의 일정으로 진행 중이었다”고 설명했다.
그는 또한 “서해 북방한계선(NLL) 인근 해상에서 벌어진 키 리졸브/ 폴 이글 훈련은 북한에 대한 강한 경계태세 유지와 함께 북한의 대량살상무기 제거를 위한 훈련이었다”고 규정하고 “훈련에는 최첨단 기술이 적용된 미국과 한국의 수많은 최신예 무장함선이 참가했다”면서 주요 전투함선을 소개했다. 이들 가운데 가장 핵심을 이루는 4척의 이지스함들은, 배수량 9600톤의 미해군 타이콘데로가급 순양함인 샤일로호(CG-67), 6800톤의 미해군 알레이 버크급 미사일구축함인 커티스 윌버호(DDG-54), 9200톤의 미해군 알레이 버크급 미사일구축함 라센호(DDG-82)와 8500톤의 한국군 미사일 구축함 세종대왕호 등이다.
김 소장은 “이 네 척의 함선은 대잠수함작전 수행 등 다양한 임무가 가능한 다목적 체계를 탑재한 양국 해군의 가장 중요한 자산들”이라며 “이 함선들은 미군 핵잠수함과 AIP 기술을 사용하는 한국군의 ‘214급’ 잠수함 등의 지원을 받고 있을 것”이라고 분석했다.
김명철 소장은 세 번째 정황증거로 3월30일 제임스 스타인버그 미 국무부 부장관의 “(진상규명을 위한 충분한 조사가 필요하지만) 내가 아는 한 (북한의 개입이) 원인이라고 믿거나 우려할 어떠한 이유도 없다”는 발언과 월터 샤프 주한미군 사령관이 4월6일 기자회견에서 ‘북한과 천안함 침몰 사이에는 어떠한 관련도 없다’면서 “한미연합사와 한국군 합동참모본부는 연중 매일매일 북한을 면밀하게 감시해 왔으며 지금 현재도 그러하다. 현재 특이한 움직임은 없다.”고 한 발언 등 미국 고위관계자들의 공식발언들을 제시했다.
김 소장은 오히려 “한국 수역에서 군함이 침몰한 것을 두고 한국과 미국이 북한에게 책임을 지우는 것은, 고가의 이지스함들의 초라한 대응능력과 함께 한미합동전쟁훈련과 한국에 미군주둔이 쓸모없음을 두드러지게 한다”고 설명했다.
그는 “이런 사실들이 천안함 침몰의 원인이 아군끼리의 오폭임을 강하게 보여준다”면서 “어뢰는 불운한 천안함 근처로 폴 이글 훈련에 참가하던 미국 또는 한국군 전투함선 또는 전투기에서 발사됐을 것”이라고 주장했다.
김명철 소장은 이에 대해 “네 척의 이지스함과 대부분의 한국군 전투함선에는 대잠수함과 대함 작전용으로, 수심이 얕은 근해 작전 능력이 개선된 마크 46 어뢰가 탑재되어 있다”며 “이라크와 아프가니스탄에서 악명높은 아군끼리의 오폭사고가 재발된 것”이라고 덧붙이고, <경기일보> 3월30일자 보도를 인용해 “3월26일 밤 발생한 침몰사고 후 월터 샤프는 의회 증언을 위한 워싱턴 방문을 즉시 중단하고 서울로 돌아왔다”는 점도 이를 뒷받침한다고 밝혔다.
그는 특히 한국이 2012년 차기 핵안보정상회의를 유치한 것에 대해 오바마 대통령이 4월1일 천안함 사건과 관련해 애도를 표하는 형식으로 전화해 한국에 개최를 제안한 것이 천안함 침몰사고와 직접적인 관련이 있다며 “오바마가 자칫 생길지도 모르는 한국 국민들의 분노를 달래는 것과 함께 미국과 관련된 아군간 어뢰오폭 사건을 은폐시키기 위한 최우선적 필요로 인해 한국에 회의 개최를 제안했을 수 있다”고 주장했다.
김 소장은 이와 관련해 “그의 보상제안에 대해 (한국 대통령이) 재빠르게 수락하자 안도했을 것”이라며 핵안보정상회의 하루 전인 4월12일 조지프 바이든 미 부통령이 “이명박 대통령은 오바마가 가장 좋아하는 사람”이라고 말한 부분도 이와 같은 맥락이라고 제시했다. 그는 이와 함께 샤프 사령관이 4월3일 천안함 실종 수병 수색에 참여했다 숨진 것으로 알려진 한국군 해군 잠수요원 한주호 준위 장례식에 전례없이 참석해 조의를 표했던 것에도 의문을 제기했다.
그는 천안함 침몰 사고와 관련한 향후 전망에 대해 “한국정부의 공동수사팀에게 최상의 해결책은 천안함 침몰을 오래된 기뢰탓으로 돌리는 것”이라며 “근거없이 북한을 비난하는 것은 쉽겠지만, 북한에 대한 군사적 보복을 요구하는 여론의 압력이 높아질 것이고, 이는 5분안에 서울을 불바다로 만들어 버릴 북한의 즉각적인 대응을 부를 것”이라고 관측하고 “북한은 미국이 개입된 이 사건에 핵무력을 사용하는 것에 주저하지 않을 것”이라고 밝혔다.
김명철 소장은 <김정일의 통일전략> 등 북미 관계를 주제로 한 다수의 책과 논문을 한국, 일본, 미국 등에서 발표해 많은 주목을 받기도 했다.
