• Military

• WMD Menu                           

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

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Prospect of Six-Party Talks to Depend on U.S. Attitude

Korean Central News Agency of DPRK

    Pyongyang, July 7 (KCNA) -- The U.S. should sincerely accept the DPRK's proposal of "reward for freeze" as it is the most realistic one to break the present deadlock caused by differing stands, mutual mistrust and differences in the mode of thinking between the DPRK and the U.S. over the nuclear issue and stop demanding the DPRK scrap its "nuclear program" first and stop opting to apply to the DPRK the same "method" it applied to other country, urges Rodong Sinmun Wednesday in a signed commentary. The overall review of the recent six-party talks showed that although various proposals and suggestions were made and the talks proceeded in a sincere atmosphere and some elements helpful to the talks' progress were found, no substantial success was made in the efforts to make a breakthrough toward the settlement of the nuclear issue as the DPRK and the U.S. failed to wipe out the bilateral mistrust and misunderstanding, the commentary says, and goes on:
    It was fortunate and noteworthy that the U.S. accepted the principle of "words for words" and "action for action" as requested by the DPRK, not mentioning the "CVID," though it had persistently insisted on it at the previous talks from an insincere stand. A scrutiny into the U.S. "proposal" made at the recent talks, however, suggests that it is still asserting that the DPRK should dismantle its "nuclear program" first and insisting on the CVID. Its "proposal" means that it would discuss what it should do only when the DPRK has completely dismantled its nuclear weapons in a unilateral manner. This is, in essence, little different from the above-said demand raised by the U.S. to the DPRK so far over the nuclear issue.
    The so-called "landmark proposal" made by the U.S. is an unfair one as it lacks any commitment to observe the principle of "words for words" and "action for action." Particularly, it advanced the "three-month period for preparations" for the dismantlement of nuclear facilities which is nothing but a far-fetched assertion lacking scientific and realistic nature. This was what the U.S. side used to disarm a country in Mideast last year.
    The U.S. is mistaken if it seeks to get something from the DPRK by applying to the DPRK the same method it applied to other country. If the U.S. seriously examines the DPRK's proposal and commits itself to renounce its hostile policy toward the DPRK and opts to make reward for freeze on the principle of "words for words" and "action for action," that will serve both the purpose of settling the nuclear issue and the interests of the U.S.
    The progress of the talks and the prospect of the solution to the issue will depend on the U.S. attitude.