09-151.pdf

Pak tried to draw out the complete UNC position on the issue by
politely and repeatedly asking: “Please tell me all that you want to tell
me.” The Pueblo’s mission was referred to as “the most flagrant
violation of the armistice agreement” in the first such statement the
author has seen by a Korean People’s Army general. The crew were
labelled “aggressors and criminals.”
Admiral Smith reiterated that the Pueblo was in international
waters all the time, made no resistance and violated no law. His remark
that the Pueblo did not belong to the UNC was exploited by the North
Koreans, who later insisted that these private talks were actually
US-North Korea bilateral negotiations rather than talks between MAC
senior members. When Admiral Smith asked for the names of the dead
and wounded, Major General Pak declined and said: “I have not yet
been instructed to inform your side of it.” The general urged the UNC
to admit the intrusion and make an apology. Remarkably, both Downs
(1999) and Lee (2001a) point out that the discussions in the closeddoor
sessions were devoid of the usual propaganda, in sharp contrast
to the above accounts of the MAC. Lee argues that since there were no
people who could hear the propaganda, it would have no effect to
make any propaganda but just waste time. 174
At the second meeting held on February 4, Major General Pak
complained that the US not only failed to apologize for the intrusion
by the Pueblo but also threatened North Korea by deploying “war
ships, fighters and bombers in the East Sea [the Sea of Japan].” The
general told the American representative to “eliminate the atmosphere
174_ Downs, op. cit., pp. 128-9; Kim, op. cit., 2003, p. 186; Lee, op. cit., 2001(a), pp.
19, 29-30, 32-3; Lerner, op. cit., p. 143; Swedish Group NNSC, ibid., pp. 1-2:
ibid., p. 3. Original quotation marks.
212 Peace-keeping in the Korean Peninsula