Text Only | Disarmament Diplomacy | Disarmament Documentation | ACRONYM Reports

Disarmament Documentation

'What is clear is that in no case the DPRK would freeze its nuclear activities unless it is rewarded,' North Korea on the future of six-party talks, December 9

'Spokesman of DPRK Foreign Ministry on Issue of Resumption of Six-Way Talks,' Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) of the DPRK (Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea, North Korea), December 9, 2003.

Pyongyang, December 9 (KCNA) -- A spokesman for the Foreign Ministry of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea today gave the following answer to a question put by KCNA as regards a wide range of opinions worldwide on the issue of the resumption of the six-way talks: The DPRK's principled stand on the resumption of the six-way talks has been known well on various occasions and it remains unchanged.

It is the life and soul to rely on the method of a package solution based on the principle of simultaneous actions in the settlement of the nuclear issue and it is the core issue upon which the DPRK and the United States should agree.

Focussing on this matter, we have, in fact, made many concessions so far for an early resumption of the six-way talks.

As the U.S. feels uncomfortable with the conclusion of a non-aggression treaty between the DPRK and the U.S., we clarified that we are ready to accept the proposal for giving "written security assurances" made by President Bush if it presupposes the U.S. co-existence with the DPRK in peace and acceptance of our proposal for a simultaneous package solution to the nuclear issue. And we expressed a magnanimous view that if the U.S. is concerned over the phraseology of simultaneous actions, we can accept an expression favored by the U.S. as long as there is no change in its content.

Through a New York contact channel on Nov. 1 we directly conveyed to the U.S. side our stand to resume the second round of the six-way talks early in December.

This stand of ours, we believe, has been properly conveyed to the U.S. side through a series of channels in the meantime.

We have so far expected that the U.S. administration would answer our magnanimity with good faith. According to what is now afloat and what we hear, the U.S. stood is greatly disappointing us.

The U.S. seems to work hard to completely eliminate our nuclear deterrent force by giving just a piece of paper called "written security assurances." In fact, it is no more than a commitment.

It is unthinkable for us to allow ourselves to be disarmed believing in the lukewarm commitment of the U.S., the hostile partner, under the present situation where the U.S. forces are still present in south Korea and putting spurs to the arms buildup targeted against the DPRK in south Korea and around the Korean peninsula, to say nothing of the belligerent relationship between the DPRK and the U.S. that has lasted for over half a century.

Moreover, the U.S. has just legislated on the research into the manufacture of smaller nukes leveled at the DPRK and made a huge budgetary allocation for it.

It is the consistent goal set by the DPRK from long ago to denuclearize the Korean peninsula. But we are compelled to have a nuclear deterrent force today. This is entirely attributable to the U.S. nuclear threat.

If the U.S. stand to reason, it should have completely removed the military threat to the DPRK in a verifiable and irreversible manner before the latter moved.

We, however, proposed a package solution based on the principle of simultaneous actions as the basic way of settling the nuclear issue, prompted by the fair and aboveboard intention to build confidence through the simultaneous practical actions on the part of the two sides. Our stand is not confined to this.

Our stand is to agree upon the first-phase action by making "words for words" commitment at the next round of the six-way talks at least if the U.S. is not in a position to accept our proposal for a package solution at one time.

To this end, measures such as the U.S. delisting the DPRK as a "terrorism sponsor", lift of the political, economic and military sanctions and blockade and energy aid including the supply of heavy fuel oil and electricity by the U.S. and neighbouring countries should be taken in exchange for the DPRK's freeze of nuclear activities. This would lay a foundation for furthering the six-way talks.

What is clear is that in no case the DPRK would freeze its nuclear activities unless it is rewarded. We have already clarified this proposal to all sides to the talks by various methods.

There is no reason whatsoever for the U.S. not to accept the principle of simultaneous actions if it sincerely wants to co-exist with the DPRK peacefully.

The resumption of the six-way talks in the future entirely depends on whether an agreement will be reached on the DPRK-proposed first-phase step or not.

Source: Korean Central News Agency (the official agency of the Government of the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea), http://www.kcna.co.jp/index-e.htm.

Back to the Top of the Page