Posted on 09/09/2005 10:00:53 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
US adopts tough stand ahead of nuclear talks with North Korea
Fri Sep 9, 7:22 PM ET
The United States adopted a tough stand ahead of talks aimed at ending North Korea's nuclear weapons program, saying it would not compromise on the hardline communist state's request to maintain peaceful atomic activities.
"Our opposition has been very clear on this. What North Korea has to do is get out of the nuclear business," said Christopher Hill, the chief US negotiator to the six-party talks due to resume in Beijing on Tuesday.
"Nuclear weapons, nuclear programs are not something that one should leave in an ambiguous state," he said.
Hill also said there was little need for North Korea to maintain civilian nuclear power plants as South Korea had agreed to a plan to supply electricity to its northern neighbor "within some two and a half to three years" as part of inducements to lure Pyongyang to abandon its atomic weapons.
But Asian diplomats said the United States might leave open the possibility of North Korea developing nuclear power plants in the future if it disbanded all atomic programs and rejoined the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, an international regulatory regime.
"It's all about first abandoning existing programs, then gradually gaining the confidence of the international community and later having peaceful programs with full transparency under strict guidelines," a diplomat said.
North Korea's position on the issue is unclear, he said.
The nuclear talks including host China, the United States, the two Koreas, Russia and Japan were adjourned on August 7 after Washington rejected Pyongyang's demand for its "unconditional right" to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.
The United States says the Stalinist state should not exercise that right as Pyongyang has acknowledged using its civilian nuclear program in the past as a cover for making weapons.
North Korea "has had trouble keeping peaceful programs peaceful," Hill said Friday, referring to a 1994 deal known as the Agreed Framework that turned sour.
The deal ended a previous North Korean nuclear weapons showdown, with the United States agreeing to provide fuel for North Korea until an international consortium built light-water nuclear reactors to generate power.
Washington contends the North reneged on that deal by mounting a secret program to enrich uranium, an allegation that triggered the current crisis in 2002.
The North has always denied a uranium-based program. But it raised the stakes in February by declaring that it had produced nuclear weapons and would manufacture more.
The upcoming meeting is expected to focus on concluding a basic agreement in which North Korea has to agree to abandon its nuclear weapons in return for security guarantees, diplomatic recognition, energy aid and other assistance to reintegrate the reclusive state into the international economy.
One of the key points of the so-called "statement of principles" being negotiated "is that any disarmament or any abandoning of nuclear weapons has to be verifiable," Hill said.
Details on any verification system would have to be hammered out later, he said.
Once a political statement was agreed upon, "the negotiations to lay out the implementation could be speeded up because, in effect, these strategic decisions will have been made," he said
North Korea returned to the talks in late July after a 13-month boycott, wooed partly by a direct security guarantee from the United States and amid warming ties with its southern neighbour.
Although the United States and North Korea have no diplomatic ties, they have stepped up direct contacts unseen in recent years in an apparent bid to forge a deal, officials said.
N. Korea has been making threats to cut some of economic ventures with S. Korea and loudly condemning U.S.-S. Korea joint war game, while also refusing further humanitarian food aids from international community, probably becasue U.S. is now serious about linking food aids with progress in N. Korean human right situation. They now say they would rather want agricultural development program instead of food aids. It may be also their ploy to get all their food aids from S. Korea and China, which do not attach such strings to their aids.
Sorry to many of you whose name had been dropped from my Korea ping list for last few weeks. I was away from home, and did not carry my usual ping list with me.
Glad to see you back.. ;o)
Nice situation report.
No one has been covering the Korea news much while you were away.
Glad you're back pinging again ;~ )
I used to have a button that said:
LET THE RED B@STARDS STARVE!!!!!!!!!!!
I think that pretty much sums up my position about NK.
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.