KCNA dismisses proposed "exchange of statements or letters" as untrustworthy
Pyongyang, January 25 (KCNA) -- High-ranking officials of the U.S. State Department were reported to have said that there is no possibility today any treaty of non-aggression would pass congress. They even hinted that it would be possible for the U.S. to provide security guarantee to North Korea if it dismantles its "nuclear weapons programs" by exchanging letters or official statements. The DPRK's stand toward this matter is that neither official statement nor message can assure it of non-aggression and those are not to be trusted at all because the present U.S. administration backtracked from a series of agreements reached between the two countries in the past.Of course it is universally recognized norms of international law that countries exchange government statements or letters to put their rights and commitments stipulated between them into force and they should own national responsibilities for honoring them.
For example, the U.S. administration signed the DPRK-U.S. Agreed Framework in 1994 and the then President Clinton sent a letter of assurances to the DPRK. This was a national measure taken by the U.S. President and its administration exercising their authority. So this could be described as one of the nature of international law.
The U.S. had the national responsibility to honor its international commitments to the last.
However, the Bush administration has systematically violated the international commitments stipulated in the letter of assurances and the AF in breach of the norms of international law related to national responsibilities. It went the length of stopping the supply of heavy oil to the DPRK since last December, the last commitment it had been honoring, thus reducing the AF to a dead document.
This wanton violation of international law eloquently proves that the Bush administration is chiefly to blame for scrapping the AF. It also showed to the world how the "world's only superpower" abandoned its commitments made before the international community.
The Bush administration has unilaterally backpedaled its international commitments, asserting that the preceding president committed a "mistake". So, there is no guarantee that the next administration would not break the promise made by the present administration to the DPRK.
Bush's personal letter of assurances or a joint statement cannot be trusted as they may gather dust anytime without being ratified by congress. So, it is quite senseless to expect any peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and any improved relations with the U.S. depending on them.
After the advent of the Bush administration the U.S. unilateralism has reached the extremes. Under this situation the DPRK wants a legal document signed between the DPRK and the U.S., as independent and equal entities, according to international law which can root out hostility forever, not a document whose binding force may disappear with the change of a regime.
The U.S. is well advised to ponder over why the DPRK withdrew from the NPT and why it adamantly insists on concluding a non-aggression treaty between the two countries.
