U.S. Department of State
Daily Press Briefing
Briefer: JAMES P. RUBIN
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #70
FRIDAY, MAY 28, 1999, 1:15 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)
...................
QUESTION: Do you have any updated information on Dr. Perry's visit to North Korea? How about the meeting with Kim Jung-Il?
MR. RUBIN: Dr. Perry, Ambassador Sherman and rest of the delegation did meet with a wide variety of senior North Korean officials, including those from high-ranking political, foreign affairs and defense circles. We do not have a full read-out. He's expected to phone Secretary Albright shortly.
We do believe the delegation was well received and was afforded the opportunity to hear authoritative North Korean views. The delegation met with a range of senior officials from political, foreign affairs and defense circles, and thereby heard authoritative views. There was no meeting with Kim Jung-Il. A meeting with Kim Jung-Il was not a prerequisite for the visit. The evaluation of Dr. Perry's trip will therefore not hinge on that one question.
After briefing the Secretary and others, Dr. Perry will meet with South Korean and Japanese officials in Seoul tomorrow, on May 29.
QUESTION: Did the North Koreans give any explanation why Kim Jung-Il was not available for a meeting?
MR. RUBIN: I wouldn't be able to get into that kind of detail until we've had a full report.
QUESTION: Is the US disappointed that such a meeting did not happen?
MR. RUBIN: No. What we've said is that we thought the trip should go forward based on what we expected. We said that such a meeting would be desirable. But we do believe that the meetings that were held were sufficient for Dr. Perry to get authoritative views.
QUESTION: I'm not suggesting that you think the trip went badly, because - but are you - is the US disappointed in light of the fact that you said and made a specific point to say that it would be desirable for such a meeting to happen?
MR. RUBIN: Right. And that desire was not fulfilled.
QUESTION: Does the team have any speculation or any guess on what this vast tunnel complex is about?
MR. RUBIN: I think there's been some reporting that is less than accurate on this subject. The US team reported that the underground site at Kumchang-ni is an extensive, empty tunnel complex. A fuller technical analysis is underway to determine as best we can what the site might have been intended for.
Based on what we know thus far, there is no basis to conclude that North Korea is in violation of the agreed framework. Obviously, we need to await further results.
With respect to the suggestion that there are a whole bunch of sites around, let me say we demonstrated in our successful negotiation with North Korea on multiple access - meaning more than one time -- to Kumchang-ni that we are prepared to pursue our concerns until we achieve results. We would do so again if we had similar suspicions.
The underground portion of the site is a large, empty tunnel complex. Construction was unfinished and no equipment was present. It was at a stage of construction prior to the time when any relevant equipment, other than construction equipment, would be expected to be present.
QUESTION: I've forgotten what the deal was. The US inspectors can come, what, every six months or so?
MR. RUBIN: We expect to go back on a number of occasions; we have the right to return. I believe there's another scheduled visit. But in anticipation of an outcome such as this preliminary one, we wanted to insure future visits so that we could fully remove our suspicions about the intended use of the site. So we will return next May for another visit, per our agreement with North Korea, and for subsequent visits to fully remove our suspicions.
QUESTION: (Inaudible.)
MR. RUBIN: North Korea, yes.
QUESTION: So the delegation has finished their work in Kumchang-ni and Dr. Perry went to North Korea. So what's the next timetable?
MR. RUBIN: I think we need to assess fully the results of the technical work that was done by the mission to Kumchang-ni; and then after Dr. Perry has consulted with Secretary Albright and the President, we may have more to say about North Korea. But those are the next steps right now.
QUESTION: You say you have to wait for the result. Are you saying that you're holding any material from the site?
MR. RUBIN: I'd rather not get into any details. I've given you a general conclusion that we've been prepared to make, based on the work. A more detailed description of what we have found and what judgments we make about what we have found has to wait for a full evaluation.
QUESTION: Jamie, this is the obvious question: presumably the people who went to the site asked the North Koreans why they were digging large tunnels underground. Perhaps you don't have an answer, but did they report what the North Koreans --
MR. RUBIN: Our view has not been to focus on what North Korea says things are for. Our view is to focus on what the facts on the ground and the deeds are in countries like North Korea. So I am sure they had views as to what they said it was for; but the focus of our attention and the reason why we want on-site inspection is because we're not so interested in what they say these things are for, we're a lot more interested in what we think its capabilities might be.
QUESTION: Jamie, in light of this grand non-discovery, is the US at all embarrassed or worried that the North Koreans, after having stalled and stalled and stalled and protracted the negotiations over visiting this site, may have pulled the wool over your eyes?
MR. RUBIN: Well, no, I think what I'm trying to explain to you is that this site was in such an advanced state of construction that it was our judgment that they were not going to be in a position to have had a massive technological facility there that they were going to be able to take apart before we got there. We have other ways of monitoring the site. We discovered the site by our national technical means, and the inspectors were able to confirm the state and the status and the timetable that would have been required for the site to become something. So I don't see how any wool could be pulled over our eyes when there wasn't any wool.
QUESTION: But that's exactly the point. You said this was an advanced state, and they got there and basically it's just a hole in the ground - a big one.
MR. RUBIN: So I don't understand your point. The fact of the matter is we were concerned about the site, okay? We were concerned about what the future might hold for that site. We think being on the ground gives us a lot of advantages in determining the state of the site. And letting the North Koreans know that we're going to go back there every year has a powerful impact on what some intentions might be for the future of the site.
So obtaining access through visits has both informational value in the visit that takes place, and deterrent value in the visits that are going to take place.
QUESTION: I guess I'm trying to ask, this was always referred to as the suspect nuclear site. Were these suspicions founded?
MR. RUBIN: Well, again, I'm not going to make judgments about the final findings of this group. But what we are talking about here is sites that could be used for purposes that we're concerned about. Having access to those sites on a regular basis can affect what - change what could to would; meaning that what they could be used for might not be what they would be used for.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: Jamie, are you saying that they determined that it could not have, in the past, contained any significant --
MR. RUBIN: Again, it's a hole in the ground. It's a construction site for something. They wanted to see the size of the construction, the types of equipment that might be associated with the construction site. But it's a construction site. The advance - when you go down M Street and you go left on 23rd, you see this big hole in the ground -
(Laughter.)
--and what they will put on top of the hole is what we're all waiting for so we can go to the restaurant.
(Laughter.)
QUESTION: The North Koreans, however, are not worried about the US building a nuclear site at the corner of 23rd and M.
MR. RUBIN: That's why we want to be able to go there every year. Yes, I think we've exhausted this.
...................
(The briefing concluded at 2:05 P.M.)
[end of document]
NEWSLETTER
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|