Category: Regions

  • STRATFORD: China and the Enduring Uighurs

    STRATFORD: China and the Enduring Uighurs

    By Rodger Baker

    On Aug. 4, four days before the start of the Beijing Olympics, two ethnic Uighurs drove a stolen dump truck into a group of some 70 Chinese border police in the town of Kashi in Xinjiang, killing at least 16 of the officers. The attackers carried knives and home-made explosive devices and had also written manifestos in which they expressed their commitment to jihad in Xinjiang. The incident occurred just days after a group calling itself the Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP) claimed responsibility for a series of recent attacks and security incidents in China and warned of further attacks targeting the Olympics.

    Chinese authorities linked the Aug. 4 attack to transnational jihadists, suggesting the involvement of the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM), which Beijing has warned is the biggest terrorist threat to China and the Olympics. Despite the Chinese warnings and TIP claims and the intensified focus on the Uighurs because of the Aug. 4 attack, there is still much confusion over just who these Uighur or Turkistani militants are.

    The Uighurs, a predominately Muslim Turkic ethnic group largely centered in China’s northwestern Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, have their own culture, language and written script distinct from their Han Chinese counterparts. Uighur ethnic nationalists and Islamist separatists have risen several times to challenge Chinese control over Xinjiang, but the Uighur independence movement remains fractured and frequently at odds with itself. However, recent evolutions within the Islamist militant Uighur movement, including growing links with transnational jihadist groups in Central and Southwest Asia, may represent a renewed threat to security in China.

    Origins in Xinjiang
    Uighur nationalism traces its origins back to a broader Turkistan, stretching through much of modern day Xinjiang (so-called “East Turkistan”) and into Central Asia. East Turkistan was conquered by the Manchus in the mid-1700s and, after decades of struggle, the territory was annexed by China, which later renamed it Xinjiang, or “New Territories.” A modern nation-state calling itself East Turkistan arose in Xinjiang in the chaotic transition from imperial China to Communist China, lasting for two brief periods from 1933 to 1934 and from 1944 to 1949. Since that time, “East Turkistan” has been, more or less, an integral part of the People’s Republic of China.

    The evolution of militant Uighur separatism — and particularly Islamist-based separatism — has been shaped over time by both domestic and foreign developments. In 1940, Hizbul Islam Li-Turkistan (Islamic Party of Turkistan or Turkistan Islamic Movement ) emerged in Xinjiang, spearheading a series of unsuccessful uprisings from the 1940s through 1952, first against local warlords and later against the Communist Chinese.

    In 1956, as the “Hundred Flowers” was blooming in China’s eastern cities, and intellectuals were (very briefly) allowed to air their complaints and suggestions for China’s political and social development, a new leadership emerged among the Uighur Islamist nationalists, changing the focus from “Turkistan” to the more specific “East Turkistan,” or Xinjiang. Following another failed uprising, the Islamist Uighur movement faded away for several decades, with only minor sparks flaring during the chaos of the Cultural Revolution.

    In 1979, as Deng Xiaoping was launching China’s economic opening and reform, there was a coinciding period of Islamic and ethnic revival in Xinjiang, reflecting the relative openness of China at the time. During this time, one of the original founders of Hizbul Islam Li-Turkistan, Abdul Hakeem, was released from prison and set up underground religious schools. Among his pupils in the 1980s was Hasan Mahsum, who would go on to found ETIM.

    The 1980s were a chaotic period in Xinjiang, with ethnic and religious revivalism, a growing student movement, and public opposition to China’s nuclear testing at Lop Nor. Uighur student protests were more a reflection of the growing student activism in China as a whole (culminating in the 1989 Tiananmen Square incident) than a resurgence of Uighur separatism, but they coincided with a general movement in Xinjiang to promote literacy and to refocus on religious and ethnic heritage. Amid this revival, several Uighur separatist or Islamist militant movements emerged.

    A critical moment occurred in April 1990, when an offshoot of the Uighur Islamist militant movement was discovered plotting an uprising in Xinjiang. The April 5 so-called “Baren Incident” (named for the city where militants and their supporters faced off against Chinese security forces) led Beijing to launch dragnet operations in the region, arresting known, suspected or potential troublemakers — a pattern that would be repeated through the “Strike Hard” campaigns of the 1990s. Many of the Uighurs caught up in these security campaigns, including Mahsum, began to share, refine and shape their ideology in prisons, taking on more radical tendencies and creating networks of relations that could be called upon later. From 1995 to 1997, the struggle in Xinjiang reached its peak, with increasingly frequent attacks by militants in Xinjiang and equally intensified security countermeasures by Beijing.

    It was also at this time that China formed the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), enlisting Central Asian assistance in cracking down on Uighur militants, many of whom had fled China. In some ways this plan backfired, as it provided common cause between the Uighurs and Central Asian militants, and forced some Uighur Islamist militants further west, to Pakistan and Afghanistan, where they would link up with the Taliban, al Qaeda, and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), among others.

    Among those leaving China was Mahsum, who tried to rally support from the Uighur diaspora in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey but was rebuffed. Mahsum and a small group of followers headed to Central Asia and ultimately Afghanistan, where he established ETIM as a direct successor to his former teacher’s Hizbul Islam Li-Turkistan. By 1998, Kabul-based ETIM began recruiting and training Uighur militants while expanding ties with the emerging jihadist movement in the region, dropping the “East” from its name to reflect these deepening ties. Until the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, ETIM focused on recruiting and training Uighur militants at a camp run by Mahsum and Abdul Haq, who is cited by TIP now as its spiritual leader.

    With the U.S. attack on Afghanistan in October 2001, ETIM was routed and its remnants fled to Central Asia and Pakistan. In January 2002, Mahsum tried to distance ETIM from al Qaeda in an attempt to avoid having the Uighur movement come under U.S. guns. It did not work. In September 2002, the United States declared ETIM a terrorist organization at the behest of China. A year later, ETIM experienced what seemed to be its last gasps, with a joint U.S.-Pakistani operation in South Waziristan in October 2003 killing Hasan Mahsum.

    A Movement Reborn?
    Following Mahsum’s death, a leaderless ETIM continued to interact with the Taliban and various Central Asian militants, particularly Uzbeks, and slowly reformed into a more coherent core in the Pakistan/Afghanistan frontier. In 2005, there were stirrings of this new Uighur Islamist militant group, the Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP), which established a robust presence on the Internet, posting histories of the Uighur/Turkistan people in western China and Central Asia and inspirational videos featuring Mahsum. In 2006, a new video surfaced calling for jihad in Xinjiang, and later that year there were reports that remnants of ETIM had begun re-forming and moving back into far western Xinjiang.

    It was also around this time that Beijing began raising the specter of ETIM targeting the Olympics — a move seen at the time as primarily an excuse for stricter security controls. In early January 2007, Beijing raided a camp of suspected ETIM militants near the Xinjiang border with Tajikistan, and a year later raided another suspected camp in Urumchi, uncovering a plot to carry out attacks during the Olympics. This was followed in March by a reported attempt by Uighur militants to down a Chinese airliner with gasoline smuggled aboard in soda cans.

    Publicly, the Uighur militant issue was quickly swept aside by the Tibetan uprising in March, leaving nearly unnoticed an anti-government protest in Hotan and a series of counterterrorism raids by Chinese security forces in late March and early April that reportedly found evidence of more specific plots to attack Beijing and Shanghai during the Olympics.

    In the midst of this security campaign, TIP released a video, not disseminated widely until late June, in which spokesman Commander Seyfullah laid out a list of grievances against Beijing and cited Abdul Haq as calling on Uighur Islamist militants to begin strikes against China. The video also complained that the “U.S.-led Western countries listed the Turkistan Islamic Party as one of the international terrorist organizations,” an apparent reference to the United States’ 2002 listing of the ETIM on the terrorist exclusion list.

    In addition to linking the TIP to the ETIM, the April video also revealed some elements of the movement’s evolution since the death of Mahsum. Rather than the typical rhetoric of groups closely linked to the Wahabi ideology of al Qaeda, TIP listed its grievances against Beijing in an almost lawyer-like fashion, following more closely the pattern of Hizb al-Tahrir (HT), a movement active in Central Asia advocating nonviolent struggle against corrupt regimes and promoting the return of Islamic rule. Although HT officially renounces violence as a tool of political change, it has provided an abundance of zealous and impatient idealists who are often recruited by more active militant organizations.

    The blending of the HT ideologies with the underlying principles of Turkistan independence reflects the melding of the Uighur Islamist militancy with wider Central Asian Islamist movements. Fractures in HT, emerging in 2005 and expanding thereafter, may also have contributed to the evolution of TIP’s ideology; breakaway elements of HT argued that the nonviolent methods espoused by HT were no longer effective.

    What appears to be emerging is a Turkistan Islamist movement with links in Central Asia, stretching back to Afghanistan and Pakistan, blending Taliban training, transnational jihadist experiential learning, HT frameworks and recruiting, and Central Asian ties for support and shelter. This is a very different entity than China has faced in the past. If the TIP follows the examples set by the global jihadist movement, it will become an entity with a small core leadership based far from its primary field of operations guiding (ideologically but not necessarily operationally) a number of small grassroots militant cells.

    The network will be diffuse, with cells operating relatively independently with minimal knowledge or communication among them and focused on localized goals based on their training, skills and commitment. This would make the TIP less of a strategic threat, since it would be unable to rally large numbers of fighters in a single or sustained operation, but it would also be more difficult to fight, since Beijing would be unable to use information from raiding one cell to find another.

    This appears to be exactly what we are seeing now. The central TIP core uses the Internet and videos as psychological tools to trigger a reaction from Beijing and inspire militants without exposing itself to detection or capture. On July 25, TIP released a video claiming responsibility for a series of attacks in China, including bus bombings in Kunming, a bus fire in Shanghai and a tractor bombing in Wenzhou. While these claims were almost certainly exaggerated, the Aug. 4 attack in Xinjiang suddenly refocused attention on the TIP and its earlier threats.

    Further complicating things for Beijing are the transnational linkages ETIM forged and TIP has maintained. The Turkistan movement includes not only China’s Uighurs but also crosses into Uzbekistan, parts of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and spreads back through Central Asia all the way to Turkey. These linkages may have been the focus of quiet security warnings beginning around March that Afghan, Middle Eastern and Central Asian migrants and tourists were spotted carrying out surveillance of schools, hotels and government buildings in Beijing and Shanghai — possibly part of an attack cycle.

    The alleged activities seem to fit a pattern within the international jihadist movement of paying more attention to China. Islamists have considered China something less imperialistic, and thus less threatening, than the United States and European powers, but this began changing with the launch of the SCO, and the trend has been accelerating with China’s expanded involvement in Africa and Central Asia and its continued support for Pakistan’s government. China’s rising profile among Islamists has coincided with the rebirth of the Uighur Islamist militant movement just as Beijing embarks on one of its most significant security events: the Summer Olympics.

    Whatever name it may go by today — be it Hizbul Islam Li-Turkistan, the East Turkistan Islamic Movement or the Turkistan Islamic Party — the Uighur Islamist militant movement remains a security threat to Beijing. And in its current incarnation, drawing on internationalist resources and experiences and sporting a more diffuse structure, the Uighur militancy may well be getting a second wind.

    Tell Stratfor What You Think

    This report may be forwarded or republished on your website with attribution to www.stratfor.com

  • Ahmadinejad’s upcoming visit to Turkey important: report

    Ahmadinejad’s upcoming visit to Turkey important: report

    Tehran Times Political Desk

    TEHRAN, August 05 (ISNA) – Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan has described President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s upcoming visit to Turkey as “vitally important,” according to ISNA news agency.

    “The visit is vitally important and side issues can not overshadow it,” Babacan has said in a meeting with his Portuguese counterpart Luis Amado.

    According to Turkish media, Ahmadinejad will start visit to Istanbul on August 14 for a 3-day visit.

    Turkish President Abdullah Gul will be staying in Istanbul at that time of the visit to meet Ahmadinejad.

    The Turkish media has said it is expected that Iran’s nuclear case to feature as the main topic of the talks. Other issues like bilateral relations and energy cooperation will be discussed.

    AA END ISN

  • Cash Transfers To Armenia Jump To New High

    Cash Transfers To Armenia Jump To New High

     

     

     

     

     

    By Emil Danielyan

    Cash remittances sent home by Armenians working abroad jumped by 57.5 percent to $668.6 million in the first half of this year, helping Armenia to sustain robust economic growth and finance its massive trade deficit.

    The figure released to RFE/RL by the Central Bank of Armenia (CBA) on Tuesday is equivalent to 15 percent of the country’s first-half Gross Domestic Product. It measures only the amount of remittances processed by Armenian commercial banks. Comparable sums are believed to enter the country through non-bank transfer systems.

    The bank transfers, most of them coming from Russia and the United States, already rose by 37 percent to a record-high level of $1.32 billion last year. The latest CBA data put them on course to set a new record in 2008.

    The multimillion-dollar remittances have been a key source of revenue for a considerable part of Armenia’s population ever since the economic collapse of the early 1990s that forced hundreds of thousands of people to go abroad, mainly to Russia, in search of employment. Economists agree that they have also been a major factor behind Armenia’s economic growth, significantly boosting domestic consumer demand and the booming construction and services sectors. According to official statistics, the Armenian economy expanded by 10.3 percent in the first half of 2008 and is thus on track to register a double-digit growth rate for the seventh consecutive years.

    The remittances have also been the main source of financing for the country’s widening current-account trade deficits. Official figures for the first half show the trade imbalance skyrocketing by 66 percent to $1.39 billion on the back of a 40 percent surge in imports. Armenian exports, by contrast, fell by about one percent to $520 million.

    The rising amounts of money sent by migrant Armenian workers to their relatives are also thought to have been instrumental in the more than 90 percent nominal appreciation of the Armenian national currency, the dram, against the U.S. dollar registered in the past five years. The dram’s strengthening stopped late last year, possibly due to the start of Armenia’s dramatic presidential race and the resulting political turmoil. The process resumed in May, with the dram gaining more than 2 percent in additional value against both the dollar and the euro since then.

  • The Sultan’s Nose – Caricatures from Turkey

    The Sultan’s Nose – Caricatures from Turkey

    Exhibition at the Museum der Weltkulturen Frankfurt
    August 9, 2008 to November 16, 2008
    
    Organizer:
    DiYALOG in cooperation with the Museum der Weltkulturen and
    Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation
    
    Museum of World Cultures, Schaumainkai 37, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
    
    On August 8, on the occasion of the Book Fair, the Museum of World
    Cultures in Frankfurt will open the exhibition "The Sultan's Nose -
    Caricatures from Turkey."
    
    This exhibition has been initiated and organized by the Turkish Cultural
    Initiative DIYALOG in cooperation with the Museum of World Cultures, the
    Turkish branch of the Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation, and with support from
    the Organizing Committee of the Frankfurt Book Fair 2008.
    
    Since the debate on the Muhammad caricatures that were published in
    Denmark, Europeans have been engaged with the question of caricature and
    humour in the Muslim world. Presenting a selection of old and new examples
    of Turkish caricatures, the exhibition aims to show the central role
    satire has played as a form of socio-political argument since the time of
    the Ottoman sultans in Turkey.
    
    The exhibition includes work by caricaturists who are regarded as
    classics in Turkey, first during the late Ottoman period and moving
    forward to the 1950s with work by graphic artists like Turhan Selçuk
    and Tan Oral. Simultaneously, the exhibition shows for the first time
    in Germany a selection of works by today's generation of Turkish
    caricaturists. Works come from saucy and/or satirical political daily
    newspapers and magazines such as "LeMan," "Penguen" and "Uykusuz."
    
    The exhibition will be accompanied by a publication on the history of
    Turkish caricatures. The book is published by Istanbul University Press
    and the Berlin publisher Dagyeli in a bilingual German-Turkish edition.
    
    Full publication information:
    
    "Die Nase des Sultans - Karikaturen aus der Türkei"
    Istanbul Bilgi University Press and Dagyeli Publishers, Berlin
    ISBN 978-3-935597-68-5
    Price: 28 Euros
  • Has China got a terrorist problem?

    Has China got a terrorist problem?

    From
    August 5, 2008

    The Uighur attack in the northwest was shocking but not a precursor to a bigger outrage

    The Olympics will open on Friday inside a triple ring of steel. Anti-terrorism precautions have been an unavoidable feature of the Games since the PLO massacre of Israeli athletes at Munich in 1972, but China has taken things to extremes.

    It has mobilised 110,000 police and other security forces in Beijing itself, plus 1.4 million security “volunteers” with Red Guard-style armbands and no fewer than 300,000 spy cameras. The security bill for Beijing alone exceeds £3 billion. Outside the capital, cities hosting Olympic events will be patrolled by 34,000 troops, surface-to-air missiles guard key sites, and 74 military aircraft, 48 helicopters and 33 naval vessels have been placed on high alert. While insisting that none of this will dampen the “festive atmosphere”, the Chinese official in charge dourly insists that “safety is the main symbol for success of the Games”.

    Not a rat will scurry Chinese streets undetected – and that, charge those few dissidents who have not already been arrested or shipped out of town, is the real purpose. The Communist Party is obsessed, they say, not by terrorists, but by fear that demonstrations by law-abiding citizens will mar the image of China’s “harmonious society”. “One world, one dream” is the slogan, and woe betide anyone whose dreams deviate from the party line. Far from redeeming its pledge that to be awarded the Olympics would improve respect for human rights, China has seized the excuse for a crackdown. By po-facedly lumping together as “terrorist threats” not just separatist movements in Tibet and Xinjiang, but the nonviolent though eccentric “Falun Gong evil cult” and “common citizens who are discontented”, Chinese officialdom reinforced the cynics’ case.

    It would carry cynicism too far to say that this week’s brutal attack, almost certainly by Uighur militants, on a border police garrison in the far northwestern frontier city of Kashgar was nicely timed to still such criticism. Killing 16 police, it has badly shaken the nation and compels fresh examination of China’s assertion that it has a serious terrorist problem in the predominantly Muslim Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, and that Uighur separatists have the Olympics in their sights. The attack is also a big embarrassment, given the massive security clampdown that China has mounted in recent months across this, its largest province.

    But it does not, however shocking, prove Beijing’s point. The fact that this was the deadliest terrorist incident on Chinese soil for a decade and that the attackers were arrested indicates, to the contrary, that violence in Xinjiang is ill-organised. Nor does it prove, contrary to Chinese assertions since 9/11, that the Uighurs are a fount of Islamist terrorism, inspired by if not linked to al-Qaeda. The truer analogy is between Xinjiang and Tibet.

    Both these vast terrains are officially classed as “autonomous regions”. To walk the streets of Kashgar or Khotan, the scene of demonstrations earlier this year, is to sense immediately how much more they have in common with Kabul than with China proper. In both, that autonomy is mocked by heavy-handed Han Chinese domination of government and economic life: not for nothing does Xinjiang, only sporadically under Chinese control until it was conquered by the Qing dynasty in the 16th century, mean “New Dominion”.

    The Uighurs have been at odds with the Chinese for centuries. Like the Tibetans, they fear becoming a minority in their own land, where officially encouraged Chinese migration under the slogan “Go West”, accelerating over the past decade with the aggressive development of Xinjiang’s rich oil and mineral resources, has lifted the Han Chinese from 5 per cent to 40 per cent of the population. Like the Tibetans, the 8.5 million Uighurs of Xinjiang are treated as second-class citizens; a US congressional committee records that in 2006, the Xinjiang Communist Party reserved 800 out of 840 Civil Service job openings for Han Chinese – using the excuse that “the cultural level of the people here is quite low”. Their mosques are closed or razed at will; their traditional homes are being demolished in the name of modernisation; and they fear, with some reason, that their language and culture are being reduced to the level of tourist attractions.

    A decade ago these discontents spasmodically erupted in attacks by separatists, chief among them the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM). A few Uighurs did train with al-Qaeda – 22 ended up in Guantanamo. But their purchase in Xinjiang was marginal even then, and the Chinese security presence has, by most expert reckoning, reduced ETIM to fewer than 100 fighters. The Uighurs are a disgruntled lot, but they are not by and large Islamists and they are realistic enough to recognise independence as a pipedream.

    China does not have a terrorist problem, in Xinjiang or anywhere else. It might not even have a nationalist problem in Xinjiang if it gave Uighurs a fairer deal. Beijing needs to wake up, smell the kebabs, and acknowledge the Uighurs’ right to be themselves. The threat to the Olympics is minimal.

  • U.S. military indiscriminately killed civilians in the Korean War

    U.S. military indiscriminately killed civilians in the Korean War

     

     

    By CHARLES J. HANLEY and JAE-SOON CHANG, Associated Press Writers 1 hour, 26 minutes ago

    SEOUL, South Korea – South Korean investigators, matching once-secret documents to eyewitness accounts, are concluding that the U.S. indiscriminately killed large groups of refugees and other civilians early in the Korean War. military

    A half-century later, the Seoul government’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission has more than 200 such alleged wartime cases on its docket, based on hundreds of citizens’ petitions recounting bombing and strafing runs on South Korean refugee gatherings and unsuspecting villages in 1950-51.

    Concluding its first investigations, the 2 1/2-year-old commission is urging the government to seek U.S. compensation for victims.

    “Of course the U.S. government should pay compensation. It’s the U.S. military’s fault,” said survivor Cho Kook-won, 78, who says he lost four family members among hundreds of refugees suffocated, burned and shot to death in a U.S. Air Force napalm attack on their cave shelter south of Seoul in 1951.

    Commission researchers have unearthed evidence of indiscriminate killings in the declassified U.S. archive, including a report by U.S. inspectors-general that pilots couldn’t distinguish their South Korean civilian allies from North Korean enemy soldiers.

    South Korean legislators have asked a U.S. Senate committee to join them in investigating another long-classified document, one saying American ground commanders, fearing enemy infiltrators, had adopted a policy of shooting approaching refugees.

    The Associated Press has found that wartime pilots and declassified documents at the U.S. National Archives both confirm that refugees were deliberately targeted by U.S. forces.

    The U.S. government has been largely silent on the commission’s work. The U.S. Embassy here says it has not yet been approached by the Seoul government about compensation. Spokesman Aaron Tarver also told the AP that the embassy is not monitoring commission findings.

    The commission’s president, historian Ahn Byung-ook, said the U.S. Army helped defend South Korea in the 1950-53 war, but also “victimized” South Korean civilians. “We feel detailed investigation should be done by the U.S. government itself,” he said.

    The citizen petitions have accumulated since 1999, when the AP, after tracing Army veterans who were there, confirmed the 1950 refugee killings at No Gun Ri, where survivors estimate 400 died at American hands, mostly women and children.

    In newly democratized South Korea, after decades of enforced silence under right-wing dictatorships, that report opened floodgates of memory, as families spoke out about other wartime mass killings.

    “The No Gun Ri incident became one of the milestones, to take on this kind of incident in the future,” said Park Myung-lim of Seoul, a Korean War historian and adviser to the truth commission.‘s Yonsei University

    The National Assembly established the 15-member panel in December 2005 to investigate not only long-hidden Korean War incidents, including the southern regime’s summary executions of thousands of suspected leftists, but also human rights violations by the Seoul government during the authoritarian postwar period.

    Findings are meant to “reconcile the past for the sake of national unity,” says its legislative charter.

    The panel cannot compel testimony, prosecute or award compensation. Since the commission may shut down as early as 2010, the six investigators devoted to alleged cases of “civilian massacre committed by U.S. soldiers” are unlikely to examine all 215 cases fully.

    News reports at the time hinted at such killings after North Korea invaded the south in June 1950. But the extent wasn’t known. Commission member Kim Dong-choon, in charge of investigating civilian mass killings, says there were large numbers of dead — between 50 and 400 — in many incidents.

    As at No Gun Ri, some involved U.S. ground troops, such as the reported killing of 82 civilians huddled in a village shrine outside the southern city of Masan in August 1950. But most were air attacks.

    In one of three initial findings, the commission held that a surprise U.S. air attack on east Wolmi island on Sept. 10, 1950, five days before the U.S. amphibious landing at nearby Incheon, was unjustified. Survivors estimate 100 or more South Korean civilians were killed.

    In clear weather from low altitude, “U.S. forces napalmed numerous small buildings, (and) strafed children, women and old people in the open area,” the commission said.

    Investigator Kang Eun-ji said high priority is being given to reviewing attacks earlier in 1950 on refugees gathered in fields west of the Naktong River, in North Korean-occupied areas of the far south, while U.S. forces were dug in east of the river. One U.S. air attack on 2,000 refugees assembled Aug. 20, 1950, at Haman, near Masan, killed almost 200, survivors reported.

    “There were many similar incidents — refugees gathered in certain places, and there were air strikes,” she said.

    The declassified record shows the Americans’ fear that enemy troops were disguising themselves as civilians led to indiscriminate attacks on “people in white,” the color worn by most Koreans, commission and AP research found.

    In the first case the commission confirmed, last November, its investigators found that an airborne Air Force observer had noted in the “Enemy” box of an after-mission report, “Many people in white in area.”

    The area was the village of Sanseong-dong, in an upland valley 100 miles southeast of Seoul, attacked on Jan. 19, 1951, by three waves of Navy and Air Force planes. Declassified documents show the U.S. X Corps had issued an order to destroy South Korean villages within 5 miles of a mountain position held by North Korean troops.

    “Everybody came out of their houses to see these low-flying planes, and everyone was hit,” farmer Ahn Shik-mo, 77, told AP reporters visiting the apple-growing village. “It appeared they were aiming at people.”

    At least 51 were killed, the commission found, including Ahn’s mother. Sixty-nine of 115 houses were destroyed in what the panel called “indiscriminate” bombing. “The U.S. Air Force regarded all people in white as possible enemy,” it concluded.

    “There never were any North Koreans in the village,” said villager Ahn Hee-duk, a 12-year-old boy at the time.

    The U.S. itself said there were no enemy casualties, an acknowledgment made Feb. 13, 1951, in a joint Army-Air Force report on the Sanseong-dong bombing, an unusual review undertaken because Korean authorities questioned the attack. military

    Classified for a half-century, that report included a candid admission: “Civilians in villages cannot normally be identified as either North Koreans, South Koreans, or guerrillas,” wrote the inspectors-general, two colonels.

    The Eighth Army commander, Lt. Gen. Matthew Ridgway, held, nonetheless, that Sanseong-dong’s destruction was “amply justified,” the AP found in a declassified document. Today’s Korean commission held otherwise, recommending that the government negotiate for U.S. compensation.

    A U.S. airborne observer in that attack, traced by the AP, said it’s “very possible” the Sanseong-dong mission could be judged indiscriminate. George P. Wolf, 88, of Arlington, Texas, also said he remembered orders to strafe refugees.

    “I’m very, very sorry about hitting civilians,” said the retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, who flew with the 6147th Tactical Control Squadron.

    The day after the Sanseong-dong attack, the cave shelter at Yeongchun, 120 miles southeast of Seoul, came under repeated napalm and strafing attacks from 11 U.S. warplanes.

    Hundreds of South Korean civilians, fearing their villages would be bombed, had jammed inside the 85-yard-long cave, with farm animals and household goods outside.

    Around 10 a.m., Cho Byung-woo, then 9, was deep in the narrow, low-ceilinged tunnel when he heard screams up front, and saw choking fumes billowing inside. Air Force F-51 Mustangs dropped napalm firebombs at the cave’s entrance, a declassified mission report shows.

    “I ran forward and all I could hear were people coughing and screaming, and some were probably already dead,” Cho recalled, revisiting the cave with AP reporters. His father flung the boy out the entrance, his hair singed. Outside, Cho saw more planes strafe people fleeing into surrounding fields.

    He and other survivors said surveillance planes had flown over for days beforehand. “There was no excuse,” Cho said. “How could they not tell — the cows, the pieces of furniture?”

    Survivors said the villagers had tried days earlier to flee south, but were turned back at gunpoint at a U.S. Army roadblock, an account supported by a declassified 7th Infantry Division journal.

    Villagers believe 360 people were killed at the cave. In its May 20 finding, the commission estimated the dead numbered “well over 200.” It found the U.S. had carried out an unnecessary, indiscriminate attack and had failed — with the roadblock — to meet its responsibility to safeguard refugees.

    The commission also pointed out that Ridgway — in a Jan. 3, 1951, order uncovered by AP archival research — had given units authority to fire at civilians to stop their movement.

    Five months earlier, the U.S. ambassador to South Korea confidentially informed Washington that the U.S. Army, fearing infiltrators, had adopted a policy of shooting South Korean refugees who approached its lines despite warnings. Ambassador John J. Muccio’s letter was dated July 26, 1950, the day U.S. troops began shooting refugees at No Gun Ri.

    American historian Sahr Conway-Lanz reported his discovery of the declassified Muccio letter in his 2006 book “Collateral Damage.” But the Army had learned of the letter earlier, during its 1999-2001 No Gun Ri investigation, and had not disclosed its existence.

    The Army now asserts it omitted the letter from its 2001 No Gun Ri report because it discussed “a proposed policy,” not an approved one. But the document unambiguously described the policy as among “decisions made” — not a proposal — at a high-level U.S.-South Korean meeting, and AP research found declassified documents in which U.S. commanders in subsequent weeks repeatedly ordered troops to fire on refugees.

    In a May 15 letter to Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the then-vice speaker of Seoul‘s National Assembly, Lee Yong-hee, called on Congress to investigate whether the Army intentionally suppressed the Muccio letter in its inquiry.

    Since targeting noncombatants is a war crime, “this is a matter of deep concern to the Korean people,” wrote Lee, whose district includes No Gun Ri.

    Lee, who has since lost his leadership position as a result of elections, suggested a joint U.S.-Korean congressional probe. Frank Jannuzi, the Senate committee’s senior East Asia specialist, said its staff would seek Pentagon and State Department briefings on the matter.

    In 2001, the U.S. government rejected the No Gun Ri survivors’ demand for an apology and compensation, and the Army’s report claimed the No Gun Ri killings were “not deliberate.”

    But at a Seoul on May 15 with survivors of No Gun Ri and other incidents, their U.S.-based lawyers pointed out that powerful contrary evidence has long been available. news conference

    “The killings of Korean civilians were extensive, intentional and indiscriminate,” lawyers Michael Choi and Robert Swift said in a statement.

    In its 2001 report, the Army said it had learned of other civilian killings by U.S. forces, but it indicated they would not be investigated.

    ___

    Associated Press investigative researcher Randy Herschaft in New York contributed to this report.