21 October 1999
Text: Chairman Gilman Oct. 21 Asia Society Speech on North Korea
("America's North Korea policy is at the crossroads") (2460)
America's policy toward North Korea should be multilateral in nature,
based on conditional reciprocity, and supported by strength and
military deterrence, according to House International Relations
Committee Chairman Benjamin Gilman.
"Deterrence is the foundation upon which any negotiations with the
DPRK (Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea) must take place," Gilman
said in an October 21 speech to the Asia Society. "Diplomatic
initiatives towards North Korea should be accompanied by sharp-edged
deterrence and a firm military commitment to protect our troops and
our allies from the burgeoning North Korean missile threat."
Gilman warned that North Korea "is arguably the world's largest
proliferator of ballistic missiles and enabling technology --
primarily to Pakistan and Iran," and said that such sales of hardware
and technology "are not motivated by ideology, but provide a
significant source of hard currency."
Gilman also questioned North Korea's commitment to the 1994 Agreed
Framework between the United States and North Korea, which established
an international consortium to provide 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil
and two Light Water Reactors to North Korea in return for North
Korea's commitment to engage in dialogue with South Korea and to halt
its gas graphite nuclear reactor program.
"There is renewed concern that North Korea may still be pursuing a
nuclear program," Gilman said. "It is alleged that the DPRK may be
seeking a parallel program based on highly enriched uranium. If true,
this strongly suggests that North Korea never intended to curb its
nuclear ambitions despite the agreement."
Gilman also expressed concern about the distribution of food aid in
North Korea, noting that a recent GAO report says food monitors have
been allowed to visit only 10 percent of actual food distribution
sites.
"Our aid is supposed to be monitored to prevent diversions to the
party elite and the military. But according to the GAO report, food
aid has not been effectively monitored," he said.
Other troubling allegations concerning North Korea include kidnapping
and other terrorist acts, human rights abuses, narcotics trafficking,
and counterfeiting, according to Gilman.
Gilman urged the Administration to work toward "permanently reducing
tensions, finding a permanent peace on the peninsula, and the
development of North-South dialogue."
"America's North Korea policy is at the crossroads," Gilman said. "We
have an unique opportunity to go down a different road with North
Korea. But North Korea must be our fellow traveler as we venture down
this new path."
Following is the text of Gilman's speech, as prepared for delivery:
(begin text)
Benjamin A. Gilman
Chairman, House International Relations Committee
Speech to the Asia Society
October 21, 1999
Introduction
Thank you, Don. It is an honor to be introduced by someone with your
depth and breadth of experience concerning the two Koreas.
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It is a pleasure to be with you. I
want to thank the Asia Society for inviting me to share some thoughts
about North Korea.
Our meeting comes at a very interesting time in US-DPRK relations. As
you may know, I have introduced legislation on North Korea -- HR 1835
the North Korea Threat Reduction Act; the Speaker has asked me to
chair a North Korea Advisory Group which includes Chairmen Floyd
Spence, Porter Goss, Sonny Callahan, and Chris Cox. Former Secretary
of Defense Bill Perry has just concluded his report to the President
on his review of our policy towards North Korea as required by last
year's legislation.
In fact, last week, Dr. Perry appeared before our House International
Relations Committee to give his report. Many of you are aware of his
conclusions by now. Today, without question, North Korea constitutes
one of our nation's greatest foreign policy challenges. The Democratic
Peoples' Republic of Korea (DPRK) is the country most likely at this
point to involve the United States in a large-scale regional war over
the near term.
Five years after the advent of the 1994 Agreed Framework with North
Korea and the beginnings of our policy of engagement, North Korea has
become the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid in East Asia. Our
nation will send over $270 million in aid to North Korea this year
alone. We have provided almost $750 million to the DPRK since 1995. It
is estimated that this figure will grow to over $1 billion in the year
2000.
Our nation is now arguably North Korea's main benefactor and despite
this influx of aid, North Korea remains a significant threat to our
nation's security interests.
North Korea remains a vestige of the Cold War, a country ostensibly
lost in time. Despite the drastic changes in China, the former Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe -- and the world in general -- North Korea
remains virtually the same as it has been during the 51 years of its
existence.
The DPRK is a nation isolated, paranoid and tightly controlled by a
Stalinist government. Regrettably, the stakes for U.S. interests on
the Korean peninsula are very high and North Korea cannot be ignored.
North Korea and the United States
The U.S. and the DPRK do not maintain formal diplomatic relations. We
have no embassy in their capital in Pyongyang and they have no embassy
in Washington. North Korea is one of ten countries with which the US
has no official diplomatic ties.
In spite of this, Washington and Pyongyang are engaged in a number of
fora addressing issues of mutual concern including the North Korean
nuclear weapons program; the development and proliferation of
ballistic missiles; the recovery and repatriation of remains from the
Korean War; and the provision of food aid to ease North Korea's
continual shortage. Let me focus your attention on some of these
issues.
The Agreed Framework and KEDO
The key element of engagement between the U.S. and the DPRK is the
Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO). KEDO -- as it
is known -- is the international consortium organized to provide
500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil (HFO) and two Light Water Reactors
(LWR) to North Korea under the 1994 Geneva Agreed Framework negotiated
in hopes of ending North Korea's nuclear weapons program.
The Agreed Framework has been an issue of some controversy since its
inception in 1994 due to concerns about North Korea's commitment to
the agreement and our ability to verify compliance.
There is renewed concern that North Korea may still be pursuing a
nuclear program. It is alleged that the DPRK may be seeking a parallel
program based on highly enriched uranium. If true, this strongly
suggests that North Korea never intended to curb its nuclear ambitions
despite the agreement.
Missiles
The most controversial issue these days on the Hill regarding North
Korea is its missile program. North Korea is arguably the world's
largest proliferator of ballistic missiles and enabling technology --
primarily to Pakistan and Iran. These transfers are destabilizing to
South Asia and the Middle East.
The sales of hardware and technology are not motivated by ideology,
but provide a significant source of hard currency. In fact, it is the
DPRK's largest export.
As you will recall, in August, 1998, North Korea test fired -- without
notice -- a Taepo-Dong I ballistic missile over Japan and into
international waters, significantly enhancing North Korea's threat to
U.S. forces in Japan, Alaska and Hawaii.
North Korea is now in the process of developing the Taepo Dong II
which has intercontinental range and is capable of striking the United
States. This will be the third new type of missile deployed since
1993. It poses a clear and present danger to our national security and
allows North Korea to create a "balance of terror" in Northeast Asia.
Our greatest fear is that North Korea will combine its covert nuclear
weapons program with its intercontinental ballistic missile program --
and our policy will have failed to prevent it.
Food Shortage
One of the most well-known things about North Korea is its chronic
food shortage. The DPRK first appealed for international food aid in
September, 1995. In response, the United Nation's World Food Program
(WFP) has issued several appeals for donations from the international
community. It is our understanding that North Korea has been on
sustained high levels of food assistance longer than any other country
in WFP history.
Last year, the U.S. responded with donations totaling $173 million --
500,000 tons -- derived from PL-480 Title II Food For Peace program
and the Section 416 wheat buy. This year the United States will supply
upwards of $180 million dollars in food assistance -- roughly 600,000
tons.
North Korea is running a food deficit in excess of 1 million tons per
year. Food is rationed and many supplement their diet with food
"substitutes" such as tree bark and roots.
At my request, the General Accounting Office recently completed a
major study of our food assistance program in North Korea. Our aid is
supposed to be monitored to prevent diversions to the party elite and
the military. But according to the GAO report, food aid has not been
effectively monitored. Food monitors have been allowed to visit only
10% of actual food distribution sites. This means that 90% of the
sites where food is distributed have not been visited by a food
monitor. This runs counter to US policy.
POW/MIA
The Department of Defense POW/ Missing Person Office is currently
conducting research and recovery operations in North Korea.
Shockingly, North Korea still holds prisoners of war from the Korean
War and may be holding live Americans against their will. We must get
to the ground-truth about this issues of live Americans soon.
Other Problem Areas
There are other issues of concern as well. North Korea remains on the
State Department's list of sponsors of State Terrorism. Though they
have not been implicated in any acts of terrorism since 1988 -- when
they blew up a civilian airliner, they are providing haven for members
of the Japanese Red Army and have been implicated in the kidnapping of
a number of Japanese citizens for use in their intelligence apparatus.
The lack of respect for human rights in North Korea and the lack of
attention paid to the issue is troubling. The DPRK is the world's most
repressive regime. It brutally oppresses the fundamental human rights
of its people and sends many of them to languish in political prison
camps. We have heard reports that over 200,000 are in political camps.
North Korea has been implicated in the production and trafficking of
narcotics and is suspected of being a major counterfeiter of U.S.
dollars. In fact, their counterfeit $100 bill is one of the best and
one of the major reasons that the US had to redesign our $100 bill.
Current Situation in US-DPRK relations
Though I have tremendous respect for Bill Perry, his testimony did not
dissuade us of the concern we have about North Korea. Regrettably, it
seems the Korean peninsula continues to teeter on the brink of crisis
and probably will continue to do so.
I am still concerned about the prospects for permanently reducing
tensions; finding a permanent peace on the peninsula; and the
development of North-South dialogue.
The White House's policy towards North Korea has been the subject of
fierce criticism from within the Congress and beyond. Pundits
especially denounce the fact that communist North Korea is the largest
recipient of U.S. foreign aid in East Asia considering the increasing
threat it poses to our national security.
Critics claim that the White House rewards North Korea's bad behavior;
encourages brinkmanship; and its strategy does not require sufficient
levels of reciprocity -- such as economic and agricultural reform in
exchange for food aid.
Though I am sure Dr. Perry's recommendations will be given a fair
hearing, the Administration's policy towards North Korea will be in
constant danger of collapse because of North Korea's recalcitrance and
provocative activities -- from their drug smuggling to their missile
program.
Policy
One of the hallmarks of a healthy democracy is a vigorous, open,
highly- contested and never ending debate about the future of the
direction of its policies abroad. Fortunately, I think we have that.
With that in mind, I'll give you a few of my ideas about guiding
principles for North Korea policy. In general, I believe that our
policies must be firm; that they do not undermine our fundamental
security; that they are willing to undertake tough measures in the
face of North Korean belligerence; and that they do not encourage in
any way the DPRK to miscalculate our nation's resolve.
Specifically, I believe any policy must be directed and implemented by
a senior special envoy; be multilateral in nature; based on
conditional reciprocity; and supported by strengthened military
deterrence.
First, the Clinton Administration must retain a senior,
high-visibility presidential envoy to implement the results of the
policy review.
It is critical that American policy be communicated to the DPRK
leadership at the highest levels to avoid the possibility of
misinterpretation and the consequences of miscalculation in time of
crisis.
Second, the U.S. must not go it alone with North Korea. The
Administration must continue to work closely with Tokyo, Seoul and
others to implement a coordinated, coherent multilateral policy.
I believe that North Korea's willingness to talk in Berlin was in no
small part due to the firm stance of the allies over the missile
launch. I would like to see more of this in response to North Korean
misbehavior.
Third, any new North Korea policy should be based on conditional
reciprocity. In other words, benefits provided by one party would be
derived from specific, verifiable actions by the other.
Finally, the United States must ensure that deterrence and military
superiority remain front and center of our policy towards North Korea.
Deterrence is the foundation upon which any negotiations with the DPRK
must take place.
The Administration must make the development and deployment of Theater
Missile Defense a priority for the Korean peninsula. Diplomatic
initiatives towards North Korea should be accompanied by sharp-edged
deterrence and a firm military commitment to protect our troops and
our allies from the burgeoning North Korean missile threat.
America's North Korea policy is at the crossroads. We have an unique
opportunity to go down a different road with North Korea. But North
Korea must be our fellow traveler as we venture down this new path.
The road will be bumpy and Pyongyang's cooperation and goodwill will
be needed to make this important journey a success. But, I think you
will agree, it is a journey that we should embark upon.
Thank you very much.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
