• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

U.S. Department of State

Daily Press Briefing

INDEX
MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 1999
Briefer: JAMES P. RUBIN

NORTH KOREA
7-9	Four Party Talks / Bilateral Talks in Geneva / US-North Korean Development / Nuclear Capability / US-North Korea Multilateral Agreement
11	Food Supply Situation

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
DAILY PRESS BRIEFING
DPB #97
MONDAY, AUGUST 2, 1999, 12:30 P.M.
(ON THE RECORD UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)

................

QUESTION: Back to Asia and North Korea, tomorrow and Wednesday I understand there's going to be bilateral talks in Geneva ahead of the Four Party Talks. What exactly is going to be discussed in particular in the bilat between the US and the North Korean side?

MR. RUBIN: Well, we normally have bilateral discussions with all of the participants in the Four Party Talks, and so clearly, we would be talking about the importance of focusing on the substantive work of tension reduction on the Peninsula. We will be looking for small first steps that could be taken to reduce tensions on the Peninsula. Some of the bilateral discussions will be, obviously, focused on things that we're going to say in the larger group soon thereafter.

In addition, we will take the opportunity to make clear that we have strong concerns about a possible missile launch, and that we have been indicating to the North Koreans for some time. As you know, the Secretary in Singapore also pointed out the possibilities and the opportunities that exist for a more effective and greater relationship with North Korea, if we can work ourselves through these problems.

So I think the message to North Korea in the bilateral meeting will involve this positive potential for the future, as well as making clear our serious concerns about the missile test if it occurs.

QUESTION: Well, hasn't Japan --

MR. RUBIN: Do you want to follow up?

QUESTION: I just want to ask if you know which day that the US-North Korea talks is.

MR. RUBIN: The timing of these talks - the plenary begins on August 5 and will be proceeded by deputy preparatory meetings on the 4th. The bilateral --

QUESTION: (Inaudible.)

MR. RUBIN: Do you have a date on it? I think the 3rd, it looks like that will be on the 3rd; so that's two days.

QUESTION: Bilaterals with each of the --

MR. RUBIN: It's normal, customary to have ways to meet with the other three of the four.

QUESTION: I don't know if the Department has responded because I can't remember -- I've been away, and so have you, I guess - to Japan's threat to perhaps stop the economic assistance promised under the old agreement about North Korea turning off its nuclear program. Has State - (inaudible) - various ways. How do you feel about that way? That's a little bit --

MR. RUBIN: We've taken the view that we think that regardless of what serious consequences there might be for the potential for the US-North Korean development, if the North Koreans test we shouldn't cut off our nose to spite our face. The agreed framework has played a critical role in preventing North Korea from developing nuclear capability in large measure; that it has frozen these particular capabilities at Yongbyon; that, as you know, when we had concerns about another site that developed that enabled us to go an inspect that site and ensure that it won't be used for their nuclear weapons program.

So the agreed framework is a very important instrument that benefits the security of the United States and the countries in the region, and we would intend and want to see that program and agreement continued even if we have problems and serious concerns about the missiles.

QUESTION: So, Jamie, what would the serious consequences be, then?

MR. RUBIN: I think we've been very careful not to spell those out and I don't intend to change that today.

QUESTION: Have you spelled them out to the North Koreans in specificity?

MR. RUBIN: I don't intend to discuss that issue in any greater detail.

QUESTION: Do you have any reason to believe that you'll get any response from the North Koreans to the Perry framework tomorrow?

MR. RUBIN: If they know what's in - if they see what's their own interest, they will see that moving towards a better relationship with the United States based on better practices and better agreements on the missile side and on the nuclear side and on a number of other issues will bring great benefit to the people of North Korea. If their calculus is based on what is good for the people of North Korea, we believe that they will see the benefit of improving relations with us.

QUESTION: Have you got any heads-up that they were prepared to sort of address this issue?

MR. RUBIN: Which issue?

QUESTION: The issue of the presentation that Dr. Perry made.

MR. RUBIN: You're asking - please reformulate the question; I don't understand it.

QUESTION: Have you gotten any indication that when this bilateral meeting takes place on the 3rd that you will get any formal reply from the North Koreans to - (inaudible) --

MR. RUBIN: The first - I see -- I don't believe we see this as a dramatic meeting; but you never know.

QUESTION: I mean, do you think that the agreed framework, which is a multilateral agreement and also depends on the US and on Congress' funding certain aspects of it - do you think it would survive a second North Korean missile test?

MR. RUBIN: Well, we think that if the United States and the other countries do what's in the United States' and the other countries' interest, rather than, as I said, cutting off our nose to spite our face, they would see that the agreed framework serves America's interest and the world's interest by preventing North Korea from becoming a dangerous nuclear weapons state.

The fact that they may increase their missile capability doesn't change the fact that we wouldn't want them to become a nuclear weapons state. Arguably, it makes it even more important. So if the members of Congress and the other people involved make a calculation based on what's in the national security interest of our country, they would not want to throw the baby out with the bath water and lose the benefits that this agreed framework provides to us.

..............

(The briefing concluded at 1:00 P.M.)

[end of document]