Seoul, defying U.S., backs North on use of nuclear power
Seoul, defying U.S., backs North on use of nuclear power - Asia - Pacific - International Herald Tribune
Seoul, defying U.S., backs North on use of nuclear power
By Choe Sang-Hun International Herald Tribune
FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 2005
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
Seoul, defying U.S., backs North on use of nuclear power
By Choe Sang-Hun International Herald Tribune
FRIDAY, AUGUST 12, 2005
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
SEOUL: South Korea objected Thursday to a vital American stance in deadlocked nuclear disarmament talks on North Korea, saying that the North should be allowed to run a nuclear program so long as it is for peaceful use.
The South Korean view defies Washington's insistence that North Korea end all of its nuclear programs without exception and creates a breach in U.S. efforts to insure that South Korea, Japan, China and Russia stand united behind the United States when six-nation talks on ending the North's nuclear weapons ambitions resume in Beijing in the week of Aug. 29.
In an interview with an Internet portal, Unification Minister Chung Dong Young of South Korea unveiled an initiative intended to break the nuclear deadlock.
He said Washington and its allies should grant North Korea the right to build its own reactors for power generation, while terminating a Western-financed $4.6 billion project to provide the North with two light-water reactors.
Such an initiative met lukewarm reaction from analysts, because it runs counter to the wishes not only of the United States but also of North Korea. Analysts say North Korea will not settle for any deal that does not revive the light-water reactor project.
Whether North Korea should have the right to keep peaceful nuclear programs was a main sticking point in six-nation talks that ended without agreement in Beijing last week after 13 days of marathon negotiations.
North Korea wants Washington to build two power-generating nuclear reactors, while Washington says such a plan was "simply not on the table."
"We believe that the North has the right to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, such as for agricultural and medical use and for generating electricity," Chung said in an interview with Media Daum, an Internet news portal.
A day earlier in Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief U.S. negotiator to the North Korean nuclear disarmament talks, stood firm in opposition to such a proposal. He said North Korea's demand for a civilian nuclear program was undermined by its track record of violating international treaties that banned it from using such a nuclear program for weapons development.
"This is a country I think that had trouble keeping peaceful energy peaceful," Hill said.
In February, North Korea declared that it had built nuclear weapons because of "hostile" U.S. policies, including a plan to invade the North. North Korea, an energy-starved, isolated country, insists that it has the sovereign right to develop peaceful nuclear power, even if it abandons its nuclear weapons in return for a set of diplomatic and economic rewards.
"This is the part where we disagree on with the United States," Chung said. "We believe that if North Korea returns to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and subjects itself to safeguards agreements and inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency, North Korea should have the rights as an NPT member country."
Such a comment matches perfectly with the North Korean demand. But Chung said North Korea should not expect to get two light-water reactors promised under a 1994 agreement with the United States. Washington killed that accord when it accused the North in late 2002 of running a secret uranium-enrichment program.
In July, South Korea agreed with Washington to terminate the light-water reactor project in Shinpo, a town in northeastern North Korea. Seeking a breakthrough, it then proposed to supply North Korea with 2,000 megawatts of electricity, the same amount of energy the pair of reactors would generate.
But that proposal was left in limbo during the six-nation talks when North Korea demanded light-water reactors, rather than relying on a supply of South Korean electricity.
"North Korea would never accept a proposal that would leave its economy depending on a lifeline from the South," Paik Hak Soon at the Sejong Institute of South Korea said. "For the North, reviving the light-water project will be a proof that the United States is indeed allowing it a sovereign right to keep a peaceful nuclear project."
Paik said a settlement was unlikely unless the United States allowed the North to have peaceful nuclear programs, on condition that the North rejoins the nonproliferation treaty and accepts rigorous nuclear inspections.
In the past week, U.S. and South Korean officials offered conflicting interpretations on whether North Korea demanded completion of the reactors in Shinpo.
"During the talks, North Korea has never demanded that they be provided with light-water reactors," Deputy Foreign Minister Song Min Soon, the main South Korean delegate to the nuclear talks, said in an interview with the SBS television network late Wednesday. "North Korea was simply asking for the right to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes, for example through a light-water reactor."
Hill said the North Koreans "want light-water reactors and no one else wants them to have light-water reactors." He added: "Or I should say no one else is prepared to pay for them to have light-water reactors."
Although scientists believe that the light-water reactor cannot easily be used to make weapons-grade fuel, U.S. officials want to take no chances with a country that has converted an old Soviet-designed research reactor into a weapons-making device.
The United States is taking different approaches in dealing with the nuclear threats of North Korea and Iran. While insisting that North Korea drop even its civilian nuclear power program, Washington is endorsing a European proposal that accepted such a program in Iran, so long as it remained under close supervision.
In the Beijing talks, the six nations tried to work out a set of principles on how to end North Korea's nuclear weapons development. They were discussing providing diplomatic ties and security guarantees and lifting trade restrictions if that impoverished country gave up its nuclear development.
"We are hoping that if we can get through these principles, we can get going with an actual agreement in September, or the latest in October, and see if we can finally put this terrible problem to bed," Hill said on Wednesday, trying to strike an upbeat note.
Brian Knowlton contributed reporting from Washington.
posted by Marcel at 7:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home