Dear All

The current major crisis over East Timor is something
I believe needs immediate discussion from all of us - or maybe some
of you disagree ??

Forget the colonial and recent past - how does the rest of the world
resolve this problem ??

Just because the East Timorese voted overwhelmingly for independence
<80%?> certainly does not mean that they will achieve it without
the outside help of Australia in particular.

My Australian wife believes that the absence of US interest
in this matter can only be beneficial to a solution
- given the US shambolic performance in Vietnam

Finally when Timor is independent Australia will have
to renegotiate <with an independent friendly country>
its many and various "deals" with Indonesia
over the Timor Sea

There is also a dangerous religious element to
this problem between a mainly Catholic East
Timor and a Muslim Indonesia - yes I have seen
about the massacre reported today in the UK
of priests and nuns

God bless you but more importantly East Timor
because at the moment without Australian intervention
only God can

As Big Gough <Whitlam> once said
in November 1975

"God save the Queen
but nothing will save the Governor General"


Regards Christopher Mawhood
known elsewhere as "Pommie Chris"

PS no ads from me but just email me for details
of free submissions to the internet if you wish

-----Original Message-----
From: Brendan Whyte <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 09 September 1999 05:14
Subject: Korean border 5


>Can someone comment on whether the UN or the North Korean line (if either)
>conforms to the Law of the Sea?
>
>*********************************
>From Korean Herald (S.Korea)   www.koreaherald.co.kr :
>Tue 7 Sept 1999
>
>West Sea maritime border with North Korea emerges as long-term bone of
>contention
>
> In late June, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Hong Soon-young was
>severely reproved by some opposition lawmakers and the news media for
>expressing willingness to negotiate over the maritime border in the West
>Sea with North Korea.
> Hong's remarks at the National Assembly were made immediately after the
>bloody gun battle along the Northern Limit Line (NLL), in which a North
>Korean torpedo boat was sunk and 30 North Korean soldiers were believed to
>have died in the midst of Pyongyang's renewed claims over the five islets
>scattered within the disputed waters.
> About three months have passed since then, and now the so-called NLL issue
>has become not only the subject of inter-Korean negotiations but also a
>long-term bone of contention between the involved parties, including the
>United States.
>  In fact, North Korean Vice Foreign Minster Kim Gye-gwan, upon his
>arrival in Berlin on Sunday for talks with the United States over
>Pyongyang's missile issue, hinted that he would raise the NLL issue in the
>upcoming talks.
> It was back in 1973 when North Korea first took up the issue, while
>refusing to acknowledge the hitherto tacitly approved NLL.
>  Actually, the NLL was unilaterally imposed by the United Nations Command
>(UNC) months after the signing of the armistice in July 1953, ironically
>for the purpose of preventing further advances by the South Korean military
>at the time, analysts here said.
>  The rival Koreas failed to agree on a maritime demarcation line in the
>armistice, but Pyongyang tacitly agreed to put five islets just south of
>the NLL under the UNC's control. South Korea has since regarded the line as
>an effective border with the North on the West Sea.
> The controversial de facto border runs between the five South Korean
>islets - Paengnyong, Taechong, Sochong, Yongpyong and Woo - and the North
>Korean mainland. As the line slants sharply toward the North, compared with
>the extension of the demarcation line on land, Pyongyang has demanded the
>line be redrawn far south of the current one.
>   At 11 meetings between North Korean generals and the UNC since the June
>15 skirmish, Pyongyang pushed for the border issue, while demanding it be
>discussed between the North and the United States, not the UNC or South.
>   However, Seoul, jointly with Washington, has refused to discuss
>anything about redrawing the line with Pyongyang, citing the landmark
>Inter-Korean Basic
>     Agreement concluded in 1992. The treaty stipulates that "the maritime
>non-aggression zones shall be identical with those which have been under
>the jurisdiction of each side," until the South and North set the line
>through discussions at the joint military commission, which is not in
>operation yet.
>  With respect to the issue, meanwhile, the South Korean Defense Ministry
>and Construction and Transportation Ministry claimed Sunday that North
>Korea virtually acknowledged the NLL when it failed to raise any objection
>to the new, NLL-based FIR (flight information region) of South Korea,
>declared by the International Civil Aviation Organization in 1997.
> Despite the Seoul government's claims based on past practices, some
>experts here said the South can ill afford to unconditionally enforce the
>NLL, as the UNC neither informed Pyongyang of the establishment of the
>unilaterally-set line nor did Pyongyang acknowledge it.
> They based their argument on the international law of the sea, which
>stipulates that a country can have territorial waters of up to 12 nautical
>miles from its mainland.
> "As the contested five islets in the West Sea are all included in the
>Northern territory in accordance with the law, the South's claim on the
>islets may be hard to verify," said an internationally renowned expert on
>maritime law at a recent closed-door seminar, speaking on condition of
>anonymity.
>
>                    Updated: 09/07/1999
>                    by Kim Ji-ho Staff reporter
>**********************************************************
>
>From www.kcna.co.jp  (North Korean News Agency):
>
>Tue 7 Sept 1999
>KCNA on military demarcation line at West Sea of Korea
>
>    Pyongyang, September 7 (KCNA) -- The South Korean warhawks are letting
>loose a string of provocative remarks after a
>special communique of the general staff of the Korean People's Army on
>proclaiming the Military Demarcation Line at the West
>Sea of Korea was announced on September 2. The "Ministry of National
>Defence" and the "joint chiefs of staff headquarters"
>of South Korea, insisting on the brigandish "northern limit line",
>threatened that they "would take a strong retaliation against the
>north if it intrudes into the line".
>    This is an unpardonable downright challenge to the special communique
>of the KPA general staff.
>    The Military Demarcation Line at the West Sea of Korea which was set by
>us this time is a most just and absolute one which
>fully accords with the requirement of the Korean armistice agreement and
>the international law.
>    Nevertheless, the South Korean warhawks are insisting on their
>unilateral "northern limit line." This reveals their bellicose
>attempt to trigger off more incidents at the West Sea.
>    This is illustrated by the bellicose utterances of a spokesman for the
>"national congress for new politics" that if the north
>ignores the "northern limit line" it "would have to pay a dear price as it
>did in the past incident at the West Sea".
>    We clearly warn the South Korean warhawks once again that if they
>intrude into the military demarcation line at the West
>Sea of Korea proclaimed by the DPRK to commit provocations, we would
>exercise the decisive strong self-defence right by
>various means and methods.
>    The South Korean side will be held wholly responsible for all the
>consequences arising therefrom.
>    No one will survive within our self-defensive firing range.
>    The South Korean authorities must be aware of this and recognize the
>north-drawn military demarcation line at the West Sea
>of Korea without fail.
>***************************************************************************
>
>Brendan Whyte
>University of Melbourne
>
>





%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%