Foreign Ministry Spokesman Demands Clarification of S. Korea's Nuclear Issue
Korean Central News Agency of DPRK
Pyongyang, October 6 (KCNA) -- A spokesman for the DPRK Foreign Ministry gave the following answer to a question put by KCNA Wednesday in connection with the snowballing suspicion of south Korea's secret nuclear experiments raised in the process of the recent inspection of them:
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) made an inspection of a clandestine laser-aided uranium enrichment experiment that had been made in south Korea in 2000 in the wake of its disclosure in September last. IAEA said it would report the results of the inspection to its board of governors slated to be held in November. The case, however, is not confined to this.
It was disclosed in an unbroken chain that south Korea conducted secret nuclear experiments in the 1980s and the 1990s.
In this regard the international community is becoming increasingly suspicious about whether south Korea has pursued a clandestine nuclear weapons program although it declared its willingness to stop the program in the 1970s.
One or two inspections were enough to increase this suspicion. However, it is only the United States which is zealously defending south Korea, saying that there is nothing to worry about what it did as it was no more than experiments for the purpose of research, even before the results of inspection are available.
It seems that the U.S. has inward trouble or seeks an ulterior aim while defending the criminal.
What should not be overlooked is that senior officials of the IAEA in charge of the case are making remarks intended to hush it up as early as possible while downplaying the gravity of the case quite contrary to the stand they had taken on the case right after its disclosure.
They might be influenced by the U.S.
The DPRK can not but remain vigilant against this, given the precedent in which IAEA had applied double-dealing standards when dealing with the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula in the past, away from the principle of impartiality.
The point at issue is not how many grams of nuclear substance south Korea has extracted through the experiments or what was the concentration of enrichment.
The gravity of the situation lies in that south Korea has pursued in secrecy the nuclear weapons program at the tacit connivance of the U.S. and with its cooperation and has now full access to the nuclear weapons development technology.
This can not but be a serious challenge to the efforts to denuclearize the Korean peninsula.
At the six-party talks that had been held so far the parties concerned set the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula as their goal. This meant making the whole peninsula including both the north and the south nuclear-free.
The reality proves that the nuclear issue of south Korea should be discussed and clarified at multi-lateral negotiations in the future if any discussion is to be made on the issue of denuclearization of the peninsula.
Moreover, given the fact that south Korea is under the U.S. nuclear umbrella the DPRK is of the view that it would not be possible for it to take part in any effort for a solution to the nuclear issue with confidence unless the nuclear issue of south Korea is settled understandably.
If the U.S. keeps asserting that the DPRK must scrap its nuclear program first, defending south Korea as ever, in disregard of this hard reality, this would be little short of applying its double standards concerning the nuclear issue and throwing an insurmountable roadblock in the way of solving the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula.
The present reality strongly urges the DPRK to increase its nuclear deterrent force but it is exercising its utmost patience.
The DPRK will closely follow up with the international community the results of the IAEA's inspection and approach toward their settlement.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
