|
Disarmament DocumentationBack to Disarmament Documentation Russia Announces DPRK Agreement To Participate In Six-Party Talks, July 31
I. Russian Foreign Ministry Statement, July 31'On the Meeting of Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia Yuri Fedotov with DPRK Ambassador to Moscow Pak Ui Chun', Russian Foreign Ministry Statement, Document 1747-31-07-2003, July 31; Russian Foreign Ministry website, http://www.mid.ru. On July 31, the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Yuri Fedotov received ambassador of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in Russia Pak Ui Chun at his request. Upon instruction from his leadership, the ambassador said the DPRK supports the holding of the six-parties talks with Russia's participation on settling the current complex situation on the Korean Peninsula and is taking active steps to carry them out. The Russian side expressed its satisfaction over Pyongyang's constructive decision. It stressed the need for a political settlement of existing problems via negotiations on the basis of securing a nuclear-free status of the Korean Peninsula and the security of the states located there. II. North Korean Foreign Ministry Statement, August 4'DPRK Foreign Ministry Spokesman on Six-Party Talks', Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), Pyongyang, August 4; KCNA website, http://www.kcna.co.jp. We have already clarified several times the stand that the DPRK will not stick to any format of talks if the US is ready to make a switchover in its policy towards the DPRK since it is essential for solving the nuclear issue between the two countries. At the recent DPRK-US contacts in New York, we put forward a bold proposal for starting six-party talks in Beijing without going through an unnecessary phase and holding the bilateral talks within their framework. It is an expression of our utmost magnanimity as the proposal has come from the stand to solve the nuclear issue between the two countries peacefully through dialogue in any case. The US side agreed to the DPRK-proposed six-party talks, giving up its persistent assertion that the DPRK should "scrap its nuclear program before dialogue". And it proposed to have DPRK-US contacts within the framework of the talks, at which the two sides will clarify each other's stand and discuss the issue. We have decided to take note of this proposal of the US side. As the multilateral talks are slated to take place as called for by the US side so far, the forthcoming talks will clearly show the world community whether the US has a true willingness to make a switchover in its policy towards the DPRK or not. III. Statement by UN Secretary-General, August 1'Secretary-General encouraged by prospect of early six-way talks on Korean issues', statement issued by the spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, UN Press Release SG/SM/8806, August 1. The Secretary-General is very encouraged by reports indicating a good prospect of early talks with the participation of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the United States, as well as China, Japan, Republic of Korea and Russian Federation. This format should enable its participants to address multilateral and bilateral issues of concern to them. The Secretary-General commends the recent efforts by the Government of China, as well as other countries, in overcoming the current impasse. He will continue to support this diplomatic approach. IV. Remarks by President Bush, August 1'Remarks by the President after meeting with his Cabinet, The cabinet Room, August 1, 2003'; The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. Question: Does your offer still stand for assistance to North Korea if they give up their nuclear program? And how can you deal with someone like Kim Jong-il, a man you don't trust? President Bush: Yes. Thank you for bringing that question up, because we had some, what we think as positive developments. As you know, we were very concerned about trying to enter into a bilateral agreement with Kim Jong-il because of the fact that he didn't tell the truth to previous administrations. And so we took a new tack, and that was to work with our - with China, primarily China, initially, to engage China in the process so that there is more than one voice speaking to Mr. Kim Jong-il. And thanks to the Chinese leadership - and we do applaud [President] Hu Jintao and his administration for agreeing to be a responsible party in the neighborhood in which they live - it looks like we'll have a multinational forum. What that really means is that more than the United States and China will show up to have a meaningful discussion with Mr. Kim Jong-il. That means Japan will be there. After all, Japan is an important part of the neighborhood. South Korea will be there. They've had a vested interest in having discussions and dialogues with Kim Jong-il. And Russia has agreed to join, which means there are now five nations in North Korea sitting at a table, all aimed at convincing - the discussions will be all aimed at convincing Mr. Kim Jong-il to change his attitude about nuclear weaponry. In the past it was the lone voice of the United States speaking clearly about this. Now we'll have other parties who have got a vested interest in peace on the Korean Peninsula. And so I would say the progress is being - is good progress. And we're upbeat about the fact that others are assuming responsibility for peace besides the United States of America. And we'll see how the dialogue goes. We fully understand the past. We are hopeful, however, that Mr. Kim Jong-il, because he's hearing other voices, will make the decision to totally dismantle his nuclear weapons program, that he will allow there to be complete transparency and verifiability. And we're optimistic that that can happen. V. Press Conference by US Undersecretary of State John Bolton, August 1John R. Bolton, US Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, Press Conference at the US Embassy in Tokyo, August 1. Question: Mr. Secretary, let me first congratulate you on the very specific result that you have produced in the course of your current trip - that is, North Korea has finally agreed to the multilateral talks that you have been proposing. Now, are you, at the end of your current trip, are you now more optimistic that North Korea will dismantle their nuclear development program completely, irreversibly, and verifiably, or are you still convinced that you will have to continue to exert pressure on them - the North Koreans - economically, politically, and militarily, and that the best way to achieve our goal is a regime change in Pyongyang? Undersecretary Bolton: Well, I think a final announcement of what exactly we've heard and the specifics of the North Korean response to what Secretary Powell and Dr. Rice presented to the Chinese almost two weeks ago now in Washington really will come from Washington later in the day today. But as I think we said yesterday, what we've heard so far - and we don't have specifics really - but what we've heard so far is very encouraging in terms of the acceptance of the American proposal on multilateral talks. Now having achieved the objective of convening these multilateral talks obviously the very, very hard work of the substantive discussion in a multilateral context now begins. I would simply recall that our objective remains the complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantlement of the North Korean nuclear weapons program. Question: Within the 24 hour period, you delivered a very blistering, strong, personal attack against North Korea's leadership as other members of the Bush administration apparently were working on bring together this deal, or this agreement with North Korea to hold the six-party multilateral talks. Was this part of a coordinated 'good cop, bad cop' strategy going on or is it perhaps an indication - as some people in the region suspect - of lack of coordination in Bush administration over North Korea policy? Undersecretary Bolton: Let me tell you that our coordination on North Korea policy is as intense as our coordination on our policy in any area that I have seen over the years. Believe me, the speech that I gave was fully cleared in ways that only those who understand the...clearance process can fully understand. I think that the important consequence here is that we have received such encouraging news about the prospects for multilateral discussions. As I said, I think that it is appropriate for a definitive word to come on that from Washington. But everything that I have heard today in various conversations with our Japanese colleagues reinforces what we thought and what we said through [State Department spokesperson] Richard Boucher in Washington yesterday - that we think there is strong reason to be encouraged. ... Question: Does Kim Jong-il's government in North Korea have a right to exist? Undersecretary Bolton: I think the government does exist. In the great world of characterization of foreign policy species within the American government, I'm a realist and that's the basis on which we and everyone else in the region and the world are dealing with it. ... Question: Now that North Korea has apparently accepted the six-way talks, will the North Korean regime get any security guarantee as proposed recently by South Korea? Undersecretary Bolton: Well, all that we think has happened here is that we've gotten encouraging signs that the North Koreans have agreed to sit down at a table with five other countries, and I don't think agreeing to what is, I think, a very common sense and logical way of dealing with the threat posed by the nuclear weapons program should lead to substantive changes in policy. I think we've been very clear, and I think Secretary Powell has said on several occasions, as has President Bush more directly: We have no intent to invade North Korea, and as Secretary Powell put it, we can find a way to put that on a piece of paper. But that's going to be - as with all of the other issues raised by the North Korean weapons program - that's going to be resolved in the context of the multilateral negotiations, if and when they begin. ... Question: The language of your speech yesterday was very striking. You referred to Kim Jong-il personally as a dictator. You described his country in one place as a hell. And President Bush as well, in the past, has spoken of his personal loathing for Kim Jong-il. Does this, then, imply that Kim Jong-il's government lacks moral legitimacy? Because that's the impression that some people have had. That may be the impression the North Koreans have had, and if they have received that impression, it may affect the trust they are willing to place in any guarantees that you may give them. Does it have moral legitimacy or not? Undersecretary Bolton: Well, I think that's a question that if I were in a think tank again, I would be prepared to address at length, but what I will say here is that in any multilateral negotiations that may proceed, we have a question of what the legitimacy of promises made by North Korea would be, based on their performance and violation of the 1994 Agreed Framework has shown, and it's one reason why, as I mentioned earlier, the question of verification and compliance has been central to the American position on the requirement that North Korea dismantle its nuclear weapons program. The American position for decades - for decades - has been the peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsula, presumably in a democratic form, and that remains the policy. ... Source: Bolton Cites 'Encouraging Signs' for N. Korea Talks, US Department of State, Washington File, http://usinfo.state.gov/usinfo/products/washfile.html, August 4. © 2003 The Acronym Institute. |