Left Flank

Image via Wikipedia

Joshua at OFK must be one of the few intelligible pundits on the planet who still seriously takes the CIA at its word. From Total Wonkerr: «Too bad there isn't some international agency with the capacity to provide an independent assessment of this sort of thing…»

Well, perhaps ACW can give us some technical details?

Despite early press reports that the fuel channels atop the Al Kibar reactor core were identical to Yongbyon, I and others — including Geoff Forden, Cheryl Rofer and Richard Wendland — see some pretty significant differences that suggest Al Kibar might have been quite a bit smaller than its North Korean cousin.

To be clear, I don't doubt that Al Kibar was a reactor and, although I think the evidence of North Korean involvement is less impressive than early press reports suggested, that's my working hypothesis too.

But I don't understand the claim that Al Kibar is a copy of Yongbyon in the strict sense — in particular, I don't understand how the IC concluded that Al Kibar is the same size as Yongbyon.

Noah Schachtman is still calling it a 'mystery'.

So, there's something to wait for. If, that is, you don't just believe the CIA!

We're back to this golden North Korean oldie!

"(We) will further strengthen our war deterrent capabilities in response to U.S. attempts to initiate nuclear war," the prickly state's communist party newspaper Rodong Sinmun said in a commentary.

The North, with one of the world's largest standing armies, usually threatens to bolster its deterrent, often taken to be a reference to its nuclear arsenal, when it feels international powers are not treating it properly.

North Korea has been cooperating on another part of the deal with China, Japan, Russia, South Korea and the United States by starting to take apart its ageing nuclear facility that produces arms-grade plutonium, government officials have said.

In a separate report in its official media on Friday, North Korea said it has slowed the pace of disablement because it does not feel that other parties have supplied aid in a timely manner.

I can imagine it's very cold right now in Pyongyang!

It's as surprising that Pyongyang missed another deadline on December 31, 2007, as it would be fitting that 2008 will be the year the Bush administration gets Pyongyang to denuclearize.

PRC's Air China might be the first critic of the North Korean regime to take action against the recalcitrant delayer.

"It's been pushed back until March as related preparatory work is still going on," said Air China spokesman Wang Yongsheng, without elaborating. "On Air China's side, preparations are basically complete.

"There are no political reasons," he added.

Wang said Air China still saw much potential in the route, which would make Pyongyang a Star Alliance destination, the airline grouping led by Singapore Airlines, Lufthansa and United Airlines which Air China recently joined.

"Flying to Pyongyang is basically a tourist route. The main customers will be Chinese. Very few North Koreans come to China on holiday," he said. "We have a lot of confidence the route will make money."

Isolated North Korea permits only a tiny number of foreign visitors a year who must travel with an approved travel agency on tightly controlled tours.

But Chinese can visit with relative ease, and many ethnic Koreans who live across the border in China go regularly on business trips.

Previously, China Southern Airlines has flown to Pyongyang. It stopped flights in 2006 soon after North Korea carried out a nuclear test, though it was not clear if Beijing ordered the airline to drop the route.

Now that's how you repay shenanigans - with your own insult!

Meanwhile, back in the Land of Increasing Incompetence - also known as the Bush administration:

In early December, President Bush took the unprecedented step of sending a personal letter to Kim, whom he once denounced as a «tyrant,» urging him to denuclearize. The United States and its allies have dangled promises of removing North Korea from the list of «terror-sponsoring» nations as well as assistance in rebuilding the economy.

But Daniel Pinkston, a nuclear expert in Seoul for the International Crisis Group, said the U.S. has an unrealistic expectation that North Korea will follow the example of Libya's Moammar Kadafi -- who renounced nuclear ambitions and state sponsorship of terrorism in exchange for economic aid.

«They are not going to deliver on their part of the bargain on a gentleman's agreement to give them economic assistance. They are going to wait to see the money in the bank,» Pinkston said.

He also said that the Yongbyon facilities being dismantled are not the most important elements of the nuclear program. «They might be giving up obsolete junk that needs to be dismantled anyway,» he said.

The dismantling work is also behind schedule. Some of the delays are technical. For example, the U.S. experts insisted on higher safety standards than did the North Koreans in the handling of nuclear material. But other delays are the result of foot-dragging.

Last week, a North Korean Foreign Ministry official, Hyun Hak-bong, was quoted as telling Chinese and South Korean officials that his country would «adjust» the pace of dismantlement because of a «delay in the implementation of economic compensation obligations.»

One could get the notion both Pyongyang and Washington enjoy stalemate!

Skepticism is greeting Israeli satellite photos of the Dayr az Zawr construction site its air force bombed on September 6. The Washington Post continues to match skepticism with misleading headlines:

Some nuclear experts urged caution in interpreting the photos, noting that the type of reactor favored by North Korea has few distinguishing characteristics visible from the air. Unlike commercial nuclear power reactors, for example, a North Korea-style reactor lacks the distinctive, dome-shaped containment vessel that prevents the release of radiation in the event of a nuclear accident.

«You can look at North Korea's [reactor] buildings, and they look like nothing,» said John E. Pike, a nuclear expert and director of GlobalSecurity.org. «They're just metal-skinned industrial buildings.» The proximity of the building to a water source also is not significant by itself, Pike said.

But Brannan, of ISIS, combed through a huge amount of satellite imagery to find a site along the Euphrates that matches a reactor's specifications as well as descriptions of the attack site. The compound's distance from populated areas was a key detail, since reactors are usually isolated from major urban populations.

The site is also close to an irrigated area, which would explain statements by some officials privy to details of the attack that the facility was located near orchards. A small airstrip about two miles away could have been used to transport personnel to the site.

Jeffrey Lewis (via FP Passport) is skeptical about that connection to water.

The problem here is that North Korea?s reactors are gas-cooled. You see, if there is a pump , the reactor can not be, as David Sanger and Mark Mazzetti reported, ?modeled on one North Korea has used to create its stockpile of nuclear weapons.? (A careful reader in the comments points out that the pump could be for a secondary cooling tower like the one at Yongbyon, a possibility that I neglected.)

So, one of the two stories is dead wrong. It either is either water-cooled or it resembles the reactor at Yongbyon, which is gas-cooled.

Now, in addition to light-water reactors, a heavy water reactor, like Iran is building at Arak, would have pumps. No one, however, seems to be suggesting an Iran-Syria link. I am not sure why ? perhaps the pump drew H₂0 from the river.

It's clear the problem here is political-the truth might just be too inconvenient to accept.

Ambassador Christopher Hill discusses his last gig in Beijing, and there's not much controversial to add - except about his love for the Red Sox - until the last few minutes. Hill endorses the argument, that the Koreans did not play a role in their own division. And then, he talks briefly about why the US has abandoned its previous diplomatic strategy, CVID or bust.

I might not be commenting on what could be released at the latest installment of the Six Party talks, or the DPRK-ROK summit, but I do have 3-D video of Yongbyon (via Verification). Allow ample time to download before viewing.

I don't comment until the Dead Man sings! Or, is that, Fat Ladies don't talk?