Posted on 12/24/2002 2:26:35 PM PST by Ranger
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea could churn out enough plutonium to build up to 50 to 55 nuclear
weapons a year if all three of its frozen nuclear reactors entered operation in coming years, a U.S. government
official says.
The issue is critical to world security, partly because North Korea has been developing long-range missiles
possibly capable of delivering nuclear warheads.
Washington accuses Pyongyang of being the world's biggest peddler of missiles and missile production
technology. North Korea on Tuesday accused hawks in the United States of pushing the Korean peninsula to
the brink of nuclear war and said its armed forces were up to the task of defeating any enemy.
In a sign of the urgency the issue has taken on, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell spent a fourth straight
day pressing Japan and other countries to boost pressure on North Korea, State Department spokesman
Philip Reeker said.
"The secretary reiterated what we (have) said before -- that we are not anxious to escalate this problem but
we are not going to be blackmailed," he said. "If North Korea is looking for U.S. support, this is not the way to
do it."
The reclusive communist state's defence minister said his country had "modern offensive and defensive
means capable of defeating" any enemy. He spoke after U.S. defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on
Monday U.S. armed forces could fight two wars at the same time and win.
South Korea, which would be in the front line of any conflict on the peninsula and favours dialogue to end the
crisis, expressed frustration with its unpredictable neighbour.
"South Korea, the United States, Japan, China, Russia and the European Union are all strongly calling on
North Korea to abandon the nuclear program. But the North is not listening now," outgoing South Korean
President Kim Dae-jung told his Cabinet.
President-elect Roh Moo-hyun who was elected last Thursday on a campaign criticising the tough U.S.
stance on North Korea, met the ambassadors of China, Russia and Japan on Tuesday and spoke with
Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi by telephone.
WEAPONS POTENTIAL
North Korea, denounced by U.S. President George W. Bush as part of an "axis of evil" with Iraq and Iran,
set alarm bells ringing over the weekend by removing U.N. monitoring equipment at a nuclear reactor capable
of yielding weapons-grade plutonium.
Restarting a 5-megawatt plant at its Yongbyon complex, as Pyongyang has taken steps to do, would spin off
about 6 kg (13 pounds) a year of weapons-grade plutonium, said the U.S. official who declined to be
identified.
That would suffice for just one nuclear bomb, given the rule of thumb that it takes about 5 kg (11 pounds) of
plutonium per weapon. Yongbyon is about 55 miles (88 km) north of Pyongyang.
The output from two unfinished reactors -- a 50-megawatt unit at Yongbyon and a 200-megawatt plant at
nearby Taechon -- could be added to generate as much as a combined total of 275 kg (600 pounds) of
plutonium a year from all three plants, the official said, or enough for 50 to 55 weapons, depending on how
they are configured.
"It would take several years for them to complete construction of those reactors, but if they complete the
construction, that's the potential," said the official.
The United States has urged Pyongyang not to restart any of its frozen nuclear facilities. A State
Department official said on Tuesday it had no indication Pyongyang had gone beyond dismantling U.N.
monitoring devices to actually reactivate the 5-megawatt plant at Yongbyon.
Keeping the North from extracting bomb-grade plutonium from spent fuel rods has been a top U.S. foreign
policy priority for years -- one that brought the Clinton administration to the brink of war before a landmark
1994 nonproliferation deal.
By that time, Pyongyang had probably already recovered enough plutonium to produce two nuclear
weapons, the CIA has concluded.
Under the 1994 deal, North Korea agreed to freeze the 5-megawatt reactor plus the partially built 50- and
200-megawatt plants. Also frozen were a reprocessing facility and a fuel-rod fabrication plant at Yongbyon.
In exchange, Washington agreed to provide a $5 billion package to include two proliferation-resistant
light-water reactors and 500,000 metric tons of heavy fuel oil a year until the first light-water reactor was built.
REMOVING SEALS
The North began removing U.N. controls last weekend from its nuclear reactors and, perhaps most
ominously, from a large supply of weapons-grade fuel at Yongbyon.
In Vienna, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, said on Tuesday North
Korea was continuing to dismantle seals and disable surveillance devices meant to police its compliance with
deals to curb the spread of nuclear weapons.
"They have already done three facilities and now they are working on the fourth," IAEA spokesman Mark
Gwozdecky told Reuters.
North Korea says it has a right to possess nuclear weapons if it chooses and insists that Washington sign a
nonaggression pact as a basis for talks on their differences.
Pyongyang acknowledged to U.S. officials in October it had been pressing ahead with a secret
highly-enriched uranium program in violation of the 1994 agreement and other nonproliferation pacts. That
prompted a U.S.-led consortium to cut off fuel oil shipments to the North, which said it was resuming its nuclear
program to generate electricity.
Having taken possession of about 8,000 spent fuel rods, Pyongyong could separate enough plutonium for
about five nuclear weapons in six months to a year "or perhaps quicker" once it fired up the reprocessing
plant, said David Albright, a nuclear physicist who is president of the Institute for Science and International
Security.
p.s. QUICK, cynicom! What battleship was McArthur on when they the Marines landed on Inchon? And no fair peeking on Google for the correct answer.
In exchange, Washington agreed to provide a $5 billion package to include two proliferation-resistant light-water reactors and 500,000 metric tons of heavy fuel oil a year until the first light-water reactor was built.
I am confused..
This sounds like a good deal on the part of the Clinton administration. I hear some people making it sound as if we gave them the reactors in the first place.. but this article makes not that they already had them and we swapped them some "proliferation-resistant" facilities instead..
What's wrong with that? I would say billy bob krintoon actually got this one right.
Is there something I am missing here?
If not, why not?
Seems like a stupid thing to do if you ask me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.