U.S. Stance on North Korea Clear: No Compliance, No Nuclear Energy
20 September 2005
First step must be end to nuclear weapons programs, U.S. officials say
By Jane A. Morse
Washington File Staff Writer
Washington -- The ink is barely dry on the joint statement signed September 19 by North and South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the United States, but press reports already are circulating about conflicting interpretations of the agreement.
Specifically, reports have come out that North Korea is expecting the agreement to produce for them a light-water reactor for a civil nuclear power program.
"The text of the agreement says that we'll discuss a light-water reactor at an appropriate time," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters at United Nations Headquarters in New York on September 20.
"[L]et's remember," she said, "that North Korea is not a member of the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty], North Korea is not in good standing in the NPT, they have not agreed to IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] safeguards, and they are running a military program that is clearly outside of the international obligations that they undertook when they were a member of the NPT."
"Our position is it's pretty clear what everybody signed up to," Adam Ereli, the State Department's deputy spokesman, told the press during a briefing September 20. "[A]ll the parties agreed to getting rid of nuclear weapons and nuclear programs on the Korean Peninsula." (See related article.)
North Korea committed to abandoning all its nuclear weapons programs, Ereli said. Only after North Korea's nuclear weapons programs are dismantled, only after North Korea has returned to the NPT and only after North Korea complies with the safeguards spelled out by the IAEA will the provision of light-water reactors for civil programs be considered, he said.
North Korea has demanded a light-water reactor to help reduce the country's severe shortage of electrical power. Light-water reactors are considered safer than gas-graphite ones because they produce less in the way of byproducts that can be used in nuclear weapons. The gas-graphite reactor Pyongyang now operates has produced weapons-useable plutonium.
"[T]here's clearly a strong degree of consensus about what we all agreed to, and that's stated in the joint statement," Ereli said. (See related article.)
The delegations for the Six-Party Talks are expected to reconvene in November to discuss issues of implementation and verification for the September 19 agreement.
Ereli said that "as we move forward in implementing those principles … there are going to be differences …. I think what's important is that we have stated clearly and unanimously what we're all working toward." The spirit guiding the whole process, he said, is "a common interest in denuclearizing the peninsula and finding a common approach to that goal."
The spokesman added: "It's very clear what our position is: that no state should be providing nuclear cooperation with North Korea until its return to the NPT, has complied with IAEA safeguards, and has eliminated all its … nuclear weapons and nuclear programs and verification has taken place."
South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the United States all provided final statements for the agreement that were "very clear and explicit about the sequencing" and "leave no room for ambiguity that 'an appropriate time' " to discuss civil nuclear programs for North Korea "means after dismantlement and verification, after returning to the NPT, and after complying with IAEA safeguards," Ereli said.
For more information, see U.S. Policy Toward North Korea.
The text of chief U.S. negotiator Christopher Hill's statement and other key documents from the Six-Party Talks are available on the State Department Web site.
(The Washington File is a product of the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
