The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer in Washington.

MR. MacNeil: And I'm Robert MacNeil in New York. After tonight's News Summary, the head of the FDA explains the decision to suspend silicone breast implants. Following President Bush's visit to Korea, we examine the pressures to end the cold war between North and South, and then Business Correspondent Paul Solman begins a four-part series on the complex relations between the United States and Japan. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. MacNeil: 1991 was a sales bust for American automakers, the worst in nearly a decade. Today two of the big three released their final auto and truck sales figures for the year and both were down sharply, Ford 13.6 percent and Chrysler 14.7 percent. GM, which last month announced plans to close 21 plants, is expected to report its figures later today or tomorrow. A group called the Economic Strategy Institute had even worse news for the auto industry. It issued a report saying the big three were collapsing and being replaced by Japan. The group is funded by labor unions, foundations, and businesses, including Ford and Chrysler. Its president, Clyde Prestowitz, spoke in Washington.

CLYDE PRESTOWITZ, Economic Strategy Institute: Detroit is a dying industry, that is, the big three are gradually going out of business. They are going the way of consumer electronics, the VCR, the television, the advanced ceramics machine tool and other industries that we've seen die in the U.S. over the past 20 years.

MR. MacNeil: The report called for the U.S. government to give tax credits on the purchase of U.S. made cars. And it said Japan should increase the number of U.S. made parts in Japanese cars manufactured in this country. Japan's prime minister today pledged to do all he could to help the ailing U.S. auto industry sell cars in his country. President Bush will hold talks with Japanese leaders on trade issues tomorrow. He'll be accompanied by the chairman of the big three automakers. Earlier today, President Bush held talks with South Korean President Noh Tay Woo. They discussed trade and security issues. The President also called on North Korea to open its nuclear facilities to international inspection. He did so in a speech to South Korean lawmakers in Seoul.

PRES. BUSH: Today, the prospects for real peace on this peninsula are brighter than at any point in the past four decades. And yet, paper promises won't keep the peace. I call on North Korea to demonstrate its sincerity to meet the obligations it undertook when it signed the non-proliferation treaty six years ago.

MR. MacNeil: The President also visited U.S. troops along the demilitarized zone dividing North and South Korea before winding up his two-day visit there. Later in the program we'll focus on the Korean story.

MR. LEHRER: The Food & Drug Administration today asked doctors to stop silicone gel breast implants. FDA Commissioner David Kessler also said manufacturers should stop shipping the devices, pending a review of new safety information. He said he would reconvene an advisory panel within 45 days to make permanent recommendations. A spokesman for Dow Corning, which manufactures gel implants, said 30 years of use and testing has established reasonable safety. But he said his company would adhere to the moratorium. We'll talk to Dr. Kessler about today's decision right after this News Summary.

MR. MacNeil: The president of the former Soviet republic of Georgia fled today reportedly to Armenia. His flight came after a bloody 16-day uprising by rebels who claimed he'd established a dictatorship. James Mates of Independent Television News filed this report from the Georgian capital, Tblisi.

MR. MATES: As dust fell yesterday evening, the final and decisive bombardment of Georgia's parliament building was underway. From our vantage point, mortar and artillery shells could clearly be seen smashing into President Gamsakhurdia's bunker and another government held building next door. Fires were spreading through several parts of the parliament complex. Tracer fire lit up the city for most of the night. By morning, it was clearly all over, an opposition soldier triumphantly carrying the Georgian flag into President Gamsakhurdia's fortress under the square outside where once the fiercest fighting had raged opposition troops celebrated with champaign and then with automatic gunfire to the obvious annoyance of some senior men trying to maintain discipline. A line of prisoners was marched to the opposition headquarters, searched, and moved quickly to a prison below. They later told their captors how President Gamsakhurdia had finally decided to abandon his stronghold and thus his capital at around 3 in the morning, taking many of his men with him. Back at the parliament, fire started and the overnight bombardment raged out of control, the Tblisi Fire Service struggling to prevent even more senseless destruction of this historic capital.

MR. MacNeil: Tensions between Russia and Ukraine escalated today. The two are feuding over control of the former Soviet navy's Black Sea fleet. The dispute could threaten the commonwealth agreement signed by 11 former Soviet republics. Edward Stoorten of Independent Television News reports on the dispute.

MR. STOORTEN: The birth of a new European military power, that at least is what this ceremony will lead to if the Ukrainian government achieves what it wants. These were among the first Soviet troops to accept the change of master and swear allegiance to the Ukrainian republic. But 40 percent of the one million, three hundred thousand members of the armed forces being asked to do this are Russian, and they face being shipped back to Russia if they refuse. The Ukrainian government action has provoked angry protests from Moscow. Marshall Shiposhnikov, commander in chief of the former Soviet forces, appeared on Russian television to accuse the Ukrainians of creating a critical situation. The Ukrainians do want Soviet hardware as well as Soviet men and above all, they want the Black Sea fleet. The Russians say it's theirs and that the Ukrainian attempt's to raise the republic's flag over the Port of Sebastopol violates the agreements already reached on military forces.

MR. MacNeil: The new head of the United Nations today ordered 50 truce observers to the Yugoslav republic of Croatia. But Sec. Gen. Butros Galley said he would not send a proposed 10,000 member peacekeeping force until he was certain the cease-fire would hold. Truce observers from the European Community continued to monitor that cease-fire. It entered its fourth day today, with only minor violations reported.

MR. LEHRER: State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher said today the United States may support a U.N. resolution condemning Israel for last week's expulsion of 12 Palestiniansfrom the occupied territories. A resolution is now before the U.N. Security Council. Israeli negotiators arrived in Washington this morning for the third round of Middle East peace talks. They are scheduled to begin tomorrow. But Arab delegations have suspended plans to attend to protest the Israeli expulsions. But a Palestinian spokesman said they might reverse the decision if the U.N. issued a strong condemnation.

MR. MacNeil: That's our summary of the news. Now, it's on to breast implants, new thinking in Korea, and Japanese-American stereotypes. NEWSMAKER - FDA

MR. LEHRER: Our lead story tonight is the Food & Drug Administration's moratorium on silicone breast implants. Today the head of the agency asked surgeons to stop using the implants until new information can be evaluated. We'll talk to that man, FDA Commissioner Dr. David Kessler, in a moment. But first, we hear from two women with two different views on the issue. They were part of an Elizabeth Brackett report we first aired in November.

MS. BRACKETT: Fifty-nine-year-old Ann Marcou, the founder of Why Me, a hotline for breast cancer patients, had a double mastectomy 15 years ago. After losing a prosthesis while swimming, Marcou decided it was time for implants. She remembers the surgery well.

MS. MARCOU: Oh, dear, it was like a miracle. I can still remember the doctor coming in the morning after the surgery and taking the bandage off and I looked at my chest and I said, oh, my God, and burst into tears. It is a very moving experience.

MS. BRACKETT: Why did you cry?

MS. MARCOU: I think, I just, I can still tear up on it, just thinking that I could have my breasts back again, that I didn't have to have this hollow nothing on my chest. Well, the scars are there, but you have something more than the scars.

MS. BRACKETT: About 1,000 women a month call the Why Me cancer hotline. Many calls are from women who are having a hard time confronting their cancer. Marcou says if silicone gel implants are not available, it will make women fear cancer surgery even more.

MS. MARCOU: I think women who have a very strong breast issue are going to think twice. They can have a lumpectomy, but not all women are good candidates for a lumpectomy. And if they think that that can't be done for them, for instance, if they have a large tumor, then they can still fall back on knowing that they can have a recreated breast and feel that their life can go on normally from there. Many women don't feel that they're going to have a normal life unless they can have a normal figure.

MS. BRACKETT: This is the type of implant that is used more often today by plastic surgeons. It has a textured silicone covering and it's filled with a silicone gel. Many of the women who have gotten sick after surgery say they think it was because the silicone leaked out of their implants and caused an adverse reaction in their body. Almost 3/4 of breast implant surgery is done for cosmetic reasons. Another 1/4 is done for medical reasons, usually after a woman has lost a breast to cancer. Most women are happy with their implants, according to a national survey sponsored by plastic surgeons. But that was not the case for 32 year old Melanie Croft.

MELANIE CROFT: [Crying] After what I've gone through now for the last two years [pausing, crying], if he had told me before it could possibly leak, then I wouldn't have done it.

MS. BRACKETT: Croft had silicone gel implants inserted three years ago. She had long been unhappy because one of her breasts was smaller than the other. But shortly after the surgery, she began having health problems she had never had before.

MELANIE CROFT: I've had a lot of arthritis type problems. I was diagnosed with connective tissue disease, chronic fatigue syndrome. There's days I couldn't get out of bed. I had immune problems. I was always sick. I mean, it wasn't just like I got a cold. I would get bronchitis. I was in and out of the hospital twice with the stomach flu. I had ear problems. I have lung problems, which I still have severe lung problems. I had burning in the joints. I had hip problems where it was hard to walk.

MS. BRACKETT: For two years, Croft went to doctor after doctor. No one connected her many symptoms to her breast implants. After seeing another woman's story on television, Croft began to think her implants could be the problem. She had her implants removed six months ago and says she is beginning to feel better.

MS. BRACKETT: Do you think these implants should be taken off the market?

MS. CROFT: If they're going to make a decision, if they're going to keep implants on the market, which I feel they shouldn't, but if they're going to, I think these women need the information. I think they have to know about people like myself that are sick that have never been sick before in their life.

MR. LEHRER: Now to Dr. Kessler, the Commissioner of the U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Dr. Kessler, welcome. Now, you've asked doctors to voluntarily quit doing silicone gel breast implants, is that right?

DR. KESSLER: That's correct. We've asked not only doctors to stop using them, we've asked manufacturers to stop distributing them. Most importantly, I think we gave important information to patients to wait until we can reconvene our advisory panel so that new information that's been available to the agency for only the last couple of weeks can be thoroughly examined.

MR. LEHRER: Now, it is voluntary though. A doctor is still free to perform this operation if he or she wants to.

DR. KESSLER: The agency called for a moratorium. I certainly don't think it would be in the interest of a physician or a manufacturer to go ahead during this moratorium and do that. What would happen if something happened? It certainly wouldn't be in the interest of the physician to do that.

MR. LEHRER: But as a practical legal matter, you didn't take action today that prohibited anybody from doing anything, is that right?

DR. KESSLER: That's correct.

MR. LEHRER: It was a --

DR. KESSLER: It was a moratorium.

MR. LEHRER: A request?

DR. KESSLER: Yes.

MR. LEHRER: A request. Okay. Now, what information is it that you received in the last couple of weeks that has changed things for you?

DR. KESSLER: There were -- we became aware several weeks ago of two court cases involving these products. And when we became aware of these court cases, we asked the manufacturer to submit documents that were submitted to the court, to us. We've reviewed those documents and they really heighten our safety concerns.

MR. LEHRER: What are those safety concerns?

DR. KESSLER: Well, the real issue, the documents cover a period 1975 to 1985, and they really deal with the issue of leakage of silicone material from the gel inside the envelope.

MR. LEHRER: And causing what kinds of problems?

DR. KESSLER: Well, just the kinds of --

MR. LEHRER: Like the lady that we just saw?

DR. KESSLER: Absolutely. We have to take those kind of complaints that we're hearing from women seriously. We have to be, we have to listen to them. We've spoken to a number of rheumatologists. We've called them and we asked them, what are you seeing, and, in fact, there are some increasing case reports, not proof that connective tissue or autoimmune disease is caused, but certainly reason enough for concern.

MR. LEHRER: What disease did you just say?

DR. KESSLER: Oh, it's autoimmune or connective tissue, basically arthritis kind of symptoms.

MR. LEHRER: Have you had cases similar to the woman on the tape where once the implant was removed, she got better?

DR. KESSLER: Well, there certainly are reports of that. You know, the problem we have is now these devices have been on the market for 30 years and we really don't have good data. But we are hearing from women who are having problems. And we have to address it.

MR. LEHRER: Why is the data so bad if it's been on the market for 30 years and been used for 30 years?

DR. KESSLER: It's a good question and one of concern to me. One of the problems is these were on the market before there was a medical device law. A medical device law was first enacted in 1976, so these are, in fact, grandfathered devices.

MR. LEHRER: Grandfathered devices. When you say -- what, if the law had been in effect, what difference would it have made?

DR. KESSLER: The law today says before you go onto the market, you have to prove that the device is safe. You have to do all the testing. These devices were on the market before the enactment of a medical device law.

MR. LEHRER: So that process has never been gone through?

DR. KESSLER: No. And that's the process we're going, we're dealing with right now. Under the law, we can go back and deal with these grandfathered devices and we call for the data. And, in fact, it's now the same requirements. The manufacturer must show that these devices are safe, but the data simply is not there. And the data over the last couple of weeks heighten our concern.

MR. LEHRER: The burden of proof is on the manufacturer?

DR. KESSLER: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: Not on the doctors that are doing --

DR. KESSLER: No, not on the doctors, not on the FDA. If a manufacturer wants to sell a product, that manufacturer must prove that device is safe.

MR. LEHRER: Just to go back to it, you took no action today that prevents manufacturers from selling them right now.

DR. KESSLER: We've asked them not to distribute the device. I don't think we need to reach that question.

MR. LEHRER: Okay. Now, what happens now? You said you're -- there was an advisory panel already, had already been formed, is that right?

DR. KESSLER: Right.

MR. LEHRER: That you had gotten information from before?

DR. KESSLER: Right.

MR. LEHRER: All right.

DR. KESSLER: And what they said is the following. They looked at all the data back in November and they said there was not sufficient evidence to say that these devices are safe. And, in fact, that kind of evidence, let's talk a little about what that is.

MR. LEHRER: Not necessarily that they're dangerous, but just that they're not safe?

DR. KESSLER: That's correct. They said that there wasn't that kind of evidence. We don't know how long these devices last for. We don't know what leaks out of them. We don't know whether they interfere, how they interfere with mammography. We don't know what they do to the risk of cancer. We don't know what we just talked about, the risk of autoimmune disease. Those studies are underway. And it's going to take several years. The advisory committee said that they cannot approve those applications. But in the device laws, especially for grandfathered devices, this provision that allows devices to remain on the market if there is reason, if there is a public health need, and the advisory committee back in November said, yes, they thought there was a public health need for these devices. And the question we have is: Now that we have additional information, does that risk-benefit change? So we want to submit this information to the advisory committee.

MR. LEHRER: You've asked them to take another look at it.

DR. KESSLER: Exactly.

MR. LEHRER: Same advisory committee?

DR. KESSLER: Yes, sir.

MR. LEHRER: How big is it and who are these people?

DR. KESSLER: These are experts in a whole range of fields. They include surgeon, they include oncologists, cancer physicians. They include psychologists. They include ethicists.

MR. LEHRER: And how many people involved?

DR. KESSLER: There are about 15 people.

MR. LEHRER: And you've given them what kind of deadline?

DR. KESSLER: Well, we've called them today and we've asked them to convene within the next 45 days. They're going to have to study all these documents. We're going to have to make sure we have all the documents. These are essentially internal company memorandum that became available to us during the court cases. So there's a little work to do.

MR. LEHRER: Companies that manufacture these were forced through court action to submit various information, and that information you did not have until they had submitted to the courts, is that - -

DR. KESSLER: Exactly.

MR. LEHRER: Okay. Now, once this panel reconvenes, then how long will it be before they come up with another recommendation?

DR. KESSLER: Well, I think we will act expeditiously.

MR. LEHRER: What does that mean?

DR. KESSLER: I think that within days I would hope we would be able to have a recommendation. They make a recommendation to the FDA. The FDA has to make a final decision.

MR. LEHRER: Right. But how long do you think it'll take them to come up with a recommendation?

DR. KESSLER: Oh. I think it's just a matter of days for them to sit and go through the material. It may take longer, but we'll have to see.

MR. LEHRER: So this could be -- you're talking another two or three months, that quickly this thing could be resolved?

DR. KESSLER: The question of whether they should be made -- that public health need to answer that question, yes, I would certainly hope. Women deserve to have that question answered. These are important devices.

MR. LEHRER: So in the meantime, your advice to any woman who's considering such a thing is, don't do it, right?

DR. KESSLER: Just wait. I think that's the prudent thing. There's a term, as a physician, you know, first, do no harm.

MR. LEHRER: All right. What about women who are sitting tonight watching this program now who have already had such a thing, what should they do?

DR. KESSLER: First, they're going to hear a lot of allegations in the next couple of days, and we're going to present all the information to the advisory committee. I think what's important is for all women who've had implants, they should go and have periodic check-ups with their physician to make sure there are no problems such as rupture. A physician can -- sometimes a patient won't even know whether the device is ruptured and a physician can help detect that. The important point is if a woman is not experiencing any difficulties with the device, that woman should not, let me underline the word "not," have that, have those devices taken out. If the patient thinks they're having symptoms that may be associated with the device, they should talk to their doctor.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Dr. Kessler, thank you very much.

DR. KESSLER: Thank you.

MR. LEHRER: Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Still ahead tonight, changing attitudes in Korea and how Japanese and Americans see each other. FOCUS - KOREAN DIVIDE

MR. MacNeil: Next tonight, the remarkable thaw between longtime foes in North and South Korea. We'll examine the prospects for a reunification and as President Bush completes a two-day visit, we consider the changing role for the United States. First, a little background. At the end of World War II, allied troops liberated Korea from Japan and divided it at the 38th Parallel into two zones. Soviet troops controlled the area to the North, American troops the area to the South. The division was supposed to be temporary, with elections in unification to follow. But the cold war intervened and in 1948, rival governments were established. The North became the Communist People's Democratic Republic of Korea, the South the non- Communist Republic of Korea. And relations grew increasingly strained. In June of 1950, North Korean troops launched a surprise attack against the South. United Nations troops, mostly American, came to the aid of the South. Later, the Chinese Communists came in on the side of the North and the bloody Korean War was launched. In 1951, Gen. Douglas MacArthur wanted to pursue the Chinese into China, but President Truman disagreed and removed MacArthur from the Korean Command. In three years of battle, an estimated 2.4 million soldiers and 4.4 million civilians were killed or wounded. Fifty-four thousand Americans died and a hundred fifty-seven thousand were wounded. Finally, after much negotiation, an armistice was signed but never a peace treaty. Over the next 20 years, the South and North remained isolated from each other, separated by a two and a half mile demilitarized zone. In the '70s, there were fitful stabs and dialogue and a non-aggression pact, but little came of them. For its part, the South opposed improving relations because it feared that would lead to the withdrawal of the 40,000 U.S. troops stationed there.

SPOKESMAN: [in meeting] You've also tried to divert attention from the seriousness of your army's deployments.

MR. MacNeil: The bitterness and distrust left over from the war persisted, fueled by occasional flare-ups along the demilitarized 38th Parallel and acts of North Korean terrorism. In 1968, North Korean commandos tried to assassinate Pres. Park Chung He of South Korea. 1983, North Korean agents bombed a cemetery in Rangoon, Burma, killing 17 South Korean officials, including 4 cabinet ministers, and wounding several others. Four years later, terrorists bombed a South Korean airliner, killing 115 people aboard. A North Korean agent later confessed to the bombing. In spite of the tensions, limited attempts at dialogue were begun. Many South Koreans had family in the North. Those ties and the common culture naturally drew the two Koreas together, even while politics kept them apart. In the fall of 1988, following the success of the Seoul Olympics, South Korean President Noh Tay Woo came to the United Nations and appealed for help in reunifying the North and South.

PRES. NOH TAY WOO: [October 1988] [Speaking through Interpreter] We must transform the North-South Korean relationship so that we can reconnect every roadway with a major highway or a little path linking the two sides which remain disconnected now.

MR. MacNeil: In 1990, the collapse of the East European Communist Bloc and a Soviet decision they would no longer subsidize bilateral trade pressured the North to be more flexible. Kim Yoo Sung, the 79-year-old president of North Korea, reacted to the tidal wave of change by maintaining rigid control over the North's political and economic system. But economic problems at home caused him to reach out for new trading relations with Japan, the United States, and South Korea. The prospects of commercial ties with the South, whose economy was more than 10 times larger than that of the North, made the pressure for negotiations irresistible. As a result, in September 1990, North Korea's prime minister, Yong Hung Mook, went to Seoul for a historic prime ministers conference. It was the highest level contact ever between the two Koreas and the beginning of a series of meetings. After that, came small, symbolic steps, a North Korean soccer team crossed the border to play a South Korean team. Later, the two countries competed in table tennis, then a more important step, the North dropped its longstanding resistance to South Korea joining the United Nations and the two countries entered separately. In September last year, President Bush announced dramatic cutbacks in the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

PRES. BUSH: We will bring home and destroy all of our nuclear artillery shells and short range ballistic missile warheads.

MR. MacNeil: The announcement resulted in the removal of nuclear weapons from Korea, weapons which had long been a stumbling block to improved North-South relations. Finally, in December, the two sides signed a historic accord calling for reconciliation and a formal end to the Korean War. That was followed by another agreement to eliminate all nuclear weapons. Many details are yet to be worked out, but officials on both sides hailed the agreement as a major step towards eventual reunification.

MR. MacNeil: Before he left South Korea today, President Bush said the U.S. would cancel its annual war games with South Korea if the North does actually allow international inspectors to visit its nuclear facilities. Just how far the U.S. should go and how far the Koreas are likely to go towards unification are questions we turn to now. Kongdan Oh is an international policy analyst at the Rand Corporation. She joins us from member station KCET in Los Angeles. K.A. Namkung is the senior adviser for U.S.-Asia policy at the New York law firm Sherman and Sterling. Alan Romberg is a senior fellow of Asian studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. Mr. Romberg, today North Korea said it would accept the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. How important a move is that?

MR. ROMBERG: It potentially can be very important. They of course signed the nuclear nonproliferation treaty in 1985. What they've not done is signed an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency as required by the NPT to accept inspections. If they went ahead and actually accepted inspections and if, in fact, they also implemented the recent North-South agreement on nuclear issues, which includes a foregoing of nuclear reprocessing and enrichment, that would be a very significant step towards promoting peace and stability, and very much in the U.S. interest.

MR. MacNeil: Dr. Oh, how important do you think a step this is today? The North Korean ambassador in Vienna told the International Atomic Energy Authority it will sign this safeguards agreement this month.

DR. OH: I think this is maybe the most important step, one of the important steps toward really the dialogue and foundation, laying out the foundation for reunification. And I was predicting all the time since North Korea's facilities are discovered, that has been not a military card but a political card, so all these issues should be resolved by political arrangement. And I think that by signing the agreement truly that this political procedure is now starting toward the reunification.

MR. MacNeil: Do you agree with that, Dr. Namkung? Would this remove, if they followed through on this, would this remove what President Bush called today the greatest source of danger to peace in Northeast Asia?

DR. NAMKUNG: I agree with it and there are points of disagreement as well. I think that, indeed, the two historic accords signed in December between the two Koreas rest upon the signing of the IAEA in Vienna by the North Koreans. Without that signature, none of those accords would move forward. Now, the way is cleared for those two accords to be implemented in the months ahead. I do disagree that this step alone will open the door to a genuine relaxation of tensions on the peninsula. The nuclear accord signed by the two Koreas on the 31st of December is far more significant than this one. This is a mild solution to the problem, whereas, the accord signed by the two Koreas, themselves, is historically far more significant, assuming that the matter of inspections, which the two sides agree to work out, is worked out.

MR. MacNeil: When the cold war in Europe ended, the reunification of East and West Germany happened much more rapidly than most people expected. Is that going to happen in Korea?

MR. ROMBERG: Not in the same way at all. No, I don't think so. First of all, there had been great exposure between East and West Germany. The standard of living was not -- first of all was very high in East Germany, and the discrepancy between the East and the West was not so great. One of the interesting things, in fact, that's happened I think in South Korea in recent months is that as they've looked at the German experience, enthusiasm that some of them have for a rather quick reunification by absorption, which the North Koreans fear, actually waned. They saw this as potentially dangerous. They saw it as potentially very expensive, and so I think what we're going to find is that there is going to be a process of reconciliation, that the agreement of December 13th, which was referred to earlier, which talks about reconciliation, non-aggression and exchange and cooperation, potentially can lay a groundwork for a long-term process. And if that moves forward more quickly and there is more exchange across the border in terms of people and goods and so on, all to the good. But real reunification I think is probably sometime away.

MR. MacNeil: Do you agree with that, Dr. Oh, no sudden reunification has happened in Germany?

DR. OH: Well, yes, basically I agree with what Mr. Romberg just laid out, but whether I agree whether that kind of thing will happen or not, that thing is that you have to be prepared for the even the collapse of North Korea, because the North Korean situation is pretty bad. But at the same time, if you want to be very planned and prepared planner for the desirable form of unification, I think the East and West German style unification is not very desirable for South Korea, because of two economies and maybe the past political relationship has been pretty bad. We have to build first a stage of reconciliation and cooperation before going into the political reunification.

MR. MacNeil: Do you agree with Dr. Oh that there could be a collapse of the North Korean economy?

DR. NAMKUNG: Oh, absolutely not.

MR. MacNeil: No?

DR. NAMKUNG: I've been to North Korea twice now in the past 12 months and I think that the society is far more stable and has long-term prospects for survival, albeit perhaps under some kind of evolution over the next fifteen to twenty years. But the possibility of a collapse is very much out of the question.

MR. MacNeil: How do you view the collapse issue?

MR. ROMBERG: I don't know that I'd say it's out of the question. I think that the predictions of imminent collapse of the North Korean economy are off the mark. I agree with Tony on that.

MR. MacNeil: Want to come back on that, Dr. Oh?

DR. OH: Well, when I say that you have to be prepared for the kind of scenarios of collapse scenario is that not necessary that I'm saying that North Korea is just about to collapse because of their economic situation, but at the same time, we have to think about their political situation as well. As we know that Kim Sung, the semi-god, who ruled North Korea for the last four decades is going to be 80 this year and the succession politics is very complicated one, because in a socialist regime he appointed his biological son to be his successor, and I think it will be very hard to replace semi-god kind of authoritative, charismatic leader like Kim Sung, when Kim Jung Yel try to be the next successor. So in that case, there is a lot of chances that politically the country is going through some instable stage.

MR. MacNeil: How long -- I'm sorry -- finish your sentence. I'm sorry.

DR. OH: Yeah. So collapse not only based upon economic situation but as well as some sort of political instability that I can anticipate in the future.

MR. MacNeil: Dr. Namkung, how long will the North, you say it's relatively stable, how long will it, can it remain a Communist state and a dictatorship or a socialist state?

DR. NAMKUNG: Well, let me remind you that at one time the republic of Korea also underwent this kind of evolutionary process from a highly authoritarian, highly regimented society.

MR. MacNeil: Quite recently, in fact.

DR. NAMKUNG: Yes, to one that is considerably more democratic now, and that, secondly, I should point out to Dr. Oh that the last royal dynasty in Korea, the Yee dynasty, lasted 600 years. So monarchies are not necessarily fading to a quick disappearance in the Korean cultural context. And let me also point out that despite all of the talk of economic troubles, and these are real troubles, if you look at President Kim's New Year's address of a few days ago, he frankly acknowledges that there are problems there. This is one of the model developing country cases. They have taken under -- albeit a Stalinist command type economy -- they've taken this economy as far as it'll go in terms of the efficient mobilization of resources by bureaucrats and by officials. They've taken that model as far as it will go and now they're prepared to open up. As you may know, they've just announced the opening of a special economic zone in the Northeast sector of North Korea, and opened and are now inviting foreign investors with 83 industrial projects requiring $887 million in foreign --

MR. MacNeil: Similar in the Shanghai area of China.

DR. NAMKUNG: Exactly, very much similar to that, similar to Dalyen, where the Japanese have invested heavily. Clearly, they're coming out and they've been planning this for some time. I predict that North Korea will undergo an evolutionary process of change.

MR. MacNeil: What, Mr. Romberg, do you think United States policy should be now? Should it be encouraging reunification to make one Korea? What should it be doing? Because there's going to be a post cold war problem for U.S. policy there, as well as in Europe, isn't there?

MR. ROMBERG: Yes, I think there will be, but U.S. policy has stated it is [a] to support reunification under terms acceptable to both parts of Korea. The U.S. has also supported both of the agreements in December, the reconciliation non- aggression agreement, and the nuclear agreement. I think the concern on the part of the United States at this point though, and until this nuclear issue is satisfactorily resolved, is not to lose sight of the importance of that issue. I think that the U.S. will be looking for implementation, as I said before, of both the agreements between the North and South, and with IAEA, and --

MR. MacNeil: To interrupt you for a moment, the reporting from Korea as the President was arriving there seemed to suggest that American officials, at least in his traveling with him, thought that the South Koreans were under, were putting less importance on the full implementation of the nuclear agreement than the Americans were, in the rush of elation or whatever it was, getting all these agreements, they weren't as concerned to dot all the "i's." Is that the case, that the U.S. was more worried about it than the South Koreans were?

MR. ROMBERG: Well, I think that there may have been some ambivalence or lack of clarity in the South Korean position. They did reach the agreement on reconciliation and non-aggression first. They then subsequently reached the agreement on nuclear issues. As I understand it, and I haven't actually seen the reporting, at the press conference that President Noh Tay Woo and President Bush gave, both of them indicated that full implementation of both the IAEA Accord and the North-South nuclear accord were a requirement for moving ahead in both South Korean relations as well as American relations with North Korea. I'm not suggesting they won't necessarily move ahead to implement, but I think that that will be a key for American policy as we look to the future. Once that's out of the way, I think the U.S. has indicated that we have a number of other problems to look at. The way would be open for a potentially considerably improved relationship between the United States and North Korea.

MR. MacNeil: What do you see the future of the U.S. role and how long will 40,000, approximately 40,000 U.S. troops be needed there?

DR. NAMKUNG: The second half of your question is much more difficult. The first half is easier. I think that the -- I tend to be an optimist in these matters. I think that we will proceed at pace with the inspections and resolution of these issues, and that we will begin to see a normalization of relations between the U.S. and the DPRK. How long that will take we have a road map in the case of Vietnam, we'll undoubtedly need one for the case for North Korea, how long that will take I don't know. But my own scenario for the future is that at some point the two Koreas will learn to live with one another as they've so dramatically demonstrated over the last several weeks and that the need for U.S. troops will be no longer there.

MR. MacNeil: What do you feel, Dr. Oh, about U.S., evolving U.S. policy and the need for U.S. troops there?

DR. OH: Well, certainly the cold war is completely gone in many senses, that the current armed forces that are stationed in Korea certainly has to be changed. And as Tony indicated, this should be in along with the North-South situation and evolution of the North Korean policies towards South Korea. But, nonetheless, what I can anticipate, the newly emphasized importance of the U.S. forces in Korea, even in a very reduced size, is that still the Korean Peninsula is still politically very important spot in Northeast Asia, is located between still a very hardline socialist country, which is the People's Republic of China, as well as some how very uncertain economic power, both political and military role in the international community. It is not fully evaluated that is Japan, so between these two very important countries, the role of the Korean Peninsula will be still very important as a sort of a forward base for the United States. So I should say the current U.S. forces should definitely go through some adjustment, but evaluating the U.S. role in Korea should be much more cautious and along with all over Northeast Asian regional situation.

MR. MacNeil: Alan Romberg, to conclude, what kind of a power can Korea ultimately project? I looked up the population today and it has something like about half the population of Japan, if you combine the two parts of Korea. I mean, can it ultimately become with its enormous economic success and everything, a rival to Japan in the area?

MR. ROMBERG: I'm not sure I would put it in those terms, although you should note that the rivalry between Japan and Korea is, indeed, longstanding. But Korea certainly will be a very significant power in Asia, and I think we'll have influence beyond the region. They supported the U.S., for example, in the Gulf War. Their view of the world, their vision, is not limited to their own neighborhood. So I think that economically it is a very successful story and will continue to be and play a major role politically and diplomatically as well. Militarily, I would not see it expanding its role beyond its immediate neighborhood.

MR. MacNeil: Mr. Romberg, Dr. Namkung, and Dr. Oh in Los Angeles, thank you. SERIES - CULTURE CLASH

MR. LEHRER: President Bush goes to Tokyo tonight, tomorrow Japanese time. It presents a most appropriate time to rerun a series on Japanese-American relations that we first broadcast last spring. It's called "Culture Clash," and over the next four nights our business correspondent, Paul Solman of public station WGBH in Boston, will examine the ups and downs of our complex relationship with the Japanese.

ANNOUNCER: [CADILLAC AD] For 41 years, Cadillac has defended our shores as America's luxury sales leader. Now, from out of the land of the rising sun comes the luxury cars of rising prices, but Cadillac fights back.

MR. SOLMAN: This TV ad played all over the South. And though they meant it in jest, the Cadillac dealers of the South were forced to pull the ad within two days after being criticized for reviving an American stereotype of the evil Japanese. On the other hand, Pearl Harbor's not our only stereotype. For years, there's been a competing image of Japan as a source of great and exotic wisdom, and more recently, of economic salvation. Arriving at a private airport just outside New York City, here comes one of Japan's most powerful men and according to those who romanticize Japan one of America's economic saviors, the chairman and co-founder of the Sony Corporation, Akio Morita. He was lionized on American TV as far back as 1972 when Morley Safer profiled him for 60 Minutes.

MORLEY SAFER: At a time when most of the American electronics industry has moved to Japan to have its products made there but labeled here, Morita is bringing jobs back to this country.

MR. SOLMAN: Nineteen years later, Sony has built nine U.S. factories employing 8500 American workers. Last year, Akio Morita was bound for Dophan, Alabama, with his wife to celebrate another anniversary, Sony's 30th year of manufacturing in America. We went along for the ride and to see the positive image of the Japanese these days. The Moritas weren't about to disappoint us. As we made our wy South to Dophan in Sony's most luxurious corporate jet, Morita confided that he was troubled by Americans who in the spirit of the Cadillac ad are reviving our dark image of the Japanese.

AKIO MORITA, Sony Corporation: We feel basically America is strong. Why America show such a weakness and treats us so emotionally?

MR. SOLMAN: Good Japan, bad Japan, both stereotypes have been around for years and have remained remarkably similar over time, even though the U.S.-Japan relationship has flip flopped dramatically. In this World War II propaganda film directed by Hollywood's Frank Capra you see the negative stereotype at perhaps its most vivid, the Japanese as fanatics.

ANNOUNCER: [PROPAGANDA FILM "KNOW YOUR ENEMY - JAPAN"] As iron ore is melted in furnaces to remove impurities, so in Japan humanitarian impurities are burned out of the child. As the steel is shaped by beating and hammering, so is the boy hammered and beaten into the shape of the fanatic Samurai.

MR. SOLMAN: To Americans in the 1940s, the Japanese had other unsavory personality traits as well, sneakiness, for example.

ANNOUNCER: [PROPAGANDA FILM] Judo or Jujitsu is the act of giving in, making your opponent losing balance, then trip him, choke him, hit, chop, poke, or kick his vital spots. Jap diplomats think in terms of Judo. For example, make an offer of peace just before you intend to attack.

MR. SOLMAN: When we went from black and white to color, the image turned lurid. Often it was yellow as in Yellow Peril. Adm. Yamamoto was yellow for having launched a cowardly sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. Finally we saw the Japanese as two-faced, the mimic with the menacing soul. Put it altogether and you had a deep racial stereotype. If the Nazis were vile, the Japanese were sub-human, a rung down on the evolutionary ladder. But, remember, the image of the bad Japan has alternated with the positive stereotype, and the same traits that we condemned during the war became associated with the good Japan as soon as the war was over. Here is Leatherneck, a magazine of the U.S. Marine Corps, first issue after the Japanese surrendered. Already right here on the cover the stereotype was undergoing a transformation from menacing ape to cute, if somewhat irritable monkey.

MR. SOLMAN: By the early '80s, the same Japanese fighting techniques Frank Capra had denounced during the war were being extolled as martial arts.

[KARATE KID SEGMENT]

MR. SOLMAN: Mr. Miagi of The Karate Kid movies was becoming an American role model. In print, the image of Japan was becoming positive as well. By the mid '80s, Americans had become infatuated with the Japanese way of business and had made these and other books best sellers. By now, Japan has come to be seen as economically invincible, and therefore, threatening once again. And the same values we'd come to see so positively, self-sacrifice, hard work, learning from others, are being seen as negative once more. Some Americans even think we're back at war, only this time we're losing.

JUNE COLLIER, National Industries, Inc.: We're being bought. We're not being invested in. We're being bought, and along with buying goes control. The Japanese want to control this country. Let's just face it -- it's cheaper to buy us than it is to burn us.

MR. SOLMAN: June Collier is CEO of a large auto parts company in Montgomery, Alabama. She says she won't even taken an order from a Japanese manufacturer.

MS. COLLIER: They don't play fair. They are ruthless. They will break companies in this country.

MR. SOLMAN: You really believe that?

MS. COLLIER: I don't believe it. I know it.

MR. SOLMAN: Collier may be extreme, but her views have received plenty of attention -- on CBS's 48 Hours, on CNN, and shows across the country. At her Alabama plant, many of Collier's employees are similarly hostile to the Japanese.

JAY LEWIS, National Industries, Inc.: I am glad there are Japanese over here. I want 'em to come here. I want 'em to spend their money on seeing our wonderful tourist attractions, then I want them to take their suitcases and their Nikons and go home.

MR. SOLMAN: Collier has taken these fears national, barnstorming the country in her private jet. Her latest worry is that Japan's strangle hold on the semiconductor industry, key to modern military technology, could be sold to a country other than America.

MS. COLLIER: They asked me on a show what I thought about that and I said, well, you know, I guess I'd be forced to say, well, gentlemen, you're right, totally right. But we have a few semiconductors left. We may have to give 'em back to you from 60,000 feet.

MR. SOLMAN: Sixty thousand feet meaning --

MS. COLLIER: [pointing downward and making noise] Pttt.

TV COMMERCIAL ANNOUNCER: Imagine, a few years from now, it's December and the whole family's going to see the big Christmas tree in Hirohito Center.

MR. SOLMAN: For the past few years, the road has been getting more dangerous. Advertisers like the Cadillac dealers or Pontiac here have already played heavily to a renewed surge of anti- Japanese feeling.

TV COMMERCIAL ANNOUNCER: Go ahead, keep buying Japanese cars.

MR. SOLMAN: Bad Japan, good Japan. In the past, the images alternated, the bad Japan displacing the good and vice versa. Both images are clearly part of the American psyche. But these days the two images seem to co-exist in a sort of struggle for American hearts and minds.

STANLEY GREENBERG, Pollster: Well, there's been a 20 point drop in positive attitudes toward the Japanese in the last three years.

MR. SOLMAN: Pollster Stanley Greenberg says Americans these days are more negative about the Japanese, as we've seen, but he says at the same time we're more admiring.

MR. GREENBERG: Right now Americans tend to associate most of the values that we think of as positive with the Japanese, hard working, good families, planning ahead, all of those things which Americans are supposed to have as part of their identity, Americans now seem to associate with the Japanese. So this plays itself out as almost a love-hate relationship. We see too much of ourselves in the Japanese to simply hate them. And that produces I think a lot of anxiety about how to deal with these relations.

MR. SOLMAN: In other words, as the final episode of the Bob Newhart Show illustrated in prime time last year, Americans are confused and ambivalent about the Japanese as perhaps never before.

JAPANESE ACTOR: [NEWHART SEGMENT] I'd like to buy your town and turn it into a golf course.

MR. SOLMAN: The new Japan poses as economic challenge, more profound some think than the military challenge of World War II, because Japan is now beating us at our own game on our own playing field. So we're more ambivalent than ever.

ACTOR: [NEWHART SEGMENT] Most of us were born here. Most of us will die here. No, Mr. Tagadashi, this is one town you cannot buy.

JAPANESE ACTOR: [NEWHART SEGMENT] I'll give you $1 million for each home.

ACTOR: Bring on the fricking bulldozers!

MR. SOLMAN: These days it's not a bulldozer but a stretch limo. We're finally ready to rejoin Sony's Akio Morita here in Dophan, where more than a thousand Alabamans work for him and as the Moritas arrive at the plant, the Americans here choose to shake not bite the hands that feed them. [employees greeting Moritas] The boss has come halfway around the world to visit the troops. No wonder they've rolled out the red carpet here in Dophan this morning. At close range, we're dressing up here for the traditional plant tour, the Moritas seem a lot more like kindly grandparents than invaders from the East. You're not likely to accuse these people of taking over America if you're part of the family. A model of efficiency this Sony factory makes all the audio and videotapes it sells in America, more than 1/4 million a day. Given the huge volume, the pace seems a little slow.

MR. MORITA: Many people say Japanese machine moves slow, but we feel steadiness is more important.

MR. SOLMAN: Slow but steady, committed fanatically to constant improvement, it's what we've come to admire about the Japanese, but as Sony celebrates its 30th birthday in America, it's also what some of us once again are beginning to fear. The anniversary gala is underway. The theme is mostly mardi gras, the revelers mostly Alabaman, the hosts almost all Japanese.

PARTY ANNOUNCER: Please welcome back to Dophan Mr. K. Fizawa.

MR. SOLMAN: Chosen by lottery, the king and queen of the day shift arrive with a flourish. But -- and here's the key point -- there's no question who's the real royalty in this castle. Appearances notwithstanding, Sony Land is not exactly the magic kingdom. The queen of the day shift was laid off for two years in 1985. And both she and the king say working for the Japanese can be awfully tough.

CARL CROZIER: Well, you would want to impress the Japanese to show them that the Americans can produce a superior quality product, and we can and we do.

MR. SOLMAN: But that's sometimes tough to do to impress them?

MR. CROZIER: Oh, yes, yes. They make it tough.

MR. SOLMAN: Because the Japanese want it their way. Everything here, from dance partners to entertainment to autographs from the boss is meticulously managed. In a scrapbook provided by the company, the Moritas' signatures roll smoothly off the line. Everyone is expected to conform and have their book signed. Then it's time for consensus and the company cheer. Morita's younger brother leads the troops in a banzai hurrah for the '90s. [company cheer] To us though the enduring image of the day is this one, the two faces of Akio Morita: in the flesh, a humble, diminutive figure barely visible behind the podium, on the screen a giant Orwellian icon towering over the room.

MR. MORITA: Our company is for you. You are company. Sony is your company.

MR. SOLMAN: Sony, more Western than most Japanese firms, still challenges our most basic notions of how to succeed in business. There's little room here for rugged individualism or even a spontaneous standing ovation.

SONY SPOKESMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, if you would at this time, will you join me in a standing ovation for Mr. Morita thanking him for our jobs and continued support. [round of applause]

MIKE YOSHINO, Harvard Business School: I think the Japanese are forcing a fundamental challenge to some of the fundamental beliefs and paradigms of the United States.

MR. SOLMAN: Harvard Prof. Mike Yoshino, Japanese by birth but culturally an American, believes Japan poses a threat to our very way of life.

MR. YOSHINO: The Japanese believe in group efforts, consensus, in a strong sense of discipline, and we, "weism", and which is really direct contrast to a rugged individualism and belief in the individual and individual freedom.

MR. SOLMAN: It's a challenge to our basic self-definition.

MR. YOSHINO: Yes, indeed. The only challenge then to American ideology comes from Japan and there, of course, results speak for themselves. And that I think to an average American is a rather uncomfortable thought.

MR. SOLMAN: So we're back where we started, with the two images of Japan. In a sense, we're uncomfortable with both of them, the bad Japan threatens our independence, the good Japan threatens our sense of who we are. 1941 wasn't just the year of Pearl Harbor, it was also the year Henry Loose of Time and Life Magazine announced the start of the so-called American century. Now, only 50 years later, people are saying that the American century is over, that economically the future belongs to Japan. And the worse we feel about our future, the more likely we are to blame the Japanese and revive the negative stereotypes of Pearl Harbor and the past. RECAP

MR. MacNeil: Again, the main stories of this Monday, U.S. automakers reported 1991 sales figures that were the worst since 1983. The federal government called on doctors to stop using silicone gel breast implants until more information on their safety is available. And tonight the U.S. joined a unanimous U.N. Security Council resolution strongly condemning Israel for deporting 12 Palestinians from the occupied territories. The action came on the eve of new Mideast peace talks in Washington. Good night, Jim.

MR. LEHRER: Good night, Robin. We'll see you tomorrow night with Part 2 of Paul Solman's series on Japan, among other things. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.