North Korea:  U.S. Demands Verifiable End to North Korean Nuclear Program

The United States will not hold formal talks with North Korea until the North “completely and verifiably” dismantles its nuclear weapons program, a senior U.S. official said this morning.

“It’s pretty hard to see how we can have conversations with a government that has blatantly violated its agreements,” Undersecretary of State John Bolton told a Washington conference on terrorism sponsored by the Hudson Institute.  Bolton said North Korea’s suspected uranium enrichment program is “a cause of grave concern” (Barry Schweid, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Nov. 1)

The United States has said it will not block the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, which oversees the Agreed Framework, from proceeding with a shipment of heavy fuel oil to North Korea this month (see GSN, Oct. 31).  White House officials said the shipment will be allowed to proceed because officials have not yet decided whether to terminate the shipments altogether.

“There are many aspects to the agreement and we need time to consult with our allies,” a senior State Department official said (Nicholas Kralev, Washington Times, Nov. 1).

North Korean Diplomacy

North Korea’s ambassadors to its two closest allies — Russia and China — spoke out yesterday, rejecting U.S. demands and proposing a nonaggression treaty, Agence France-Presse reported today (see GSN, Oct. 30).

North Korea has a right to develop nuclear weapons in response to U.S. aggression, said Pak Hui Chin, the ambassador to Russia (see GSN, Oct. 25).  Pyongyang revealed the existence of its nuclear weapons program when a U.S. delegation visited Pyongyang in early October (see GSN, Oct 17).

“We unambiguously told the U.S. presidential special envoy that, facing a growing nuclear threat from the U.S., we have the right to possess not only nuclear, but even more powerful weapons in order to defend our sovereignty and the right to survive,” news agencies quoted Pak as saying.  “If the U.S. tries to crush us with tough policy, we will retaliate to this with super toughness.”

While Pak reserved the right to develop nuclear weapons, he denied that North Korea has actually done so, calling U.S. allegations “groundless.”

Meanwhile, Russia said that it has no evidence that North Korea is developing nuclear weapons, but it admonished Pyongyang for failing to clearly reply to U.S. charges, officials said.  North Korea’s recent statements on the nuclear issue have contained “some ambiguity,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Losyukov said.

“Such ambiguity is very dangerous, because it leads to mutual suspicions and may negatively influence the situation on the Korean peninsula,” he said (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo.com, Nov. 1).

North Korea’s Ambassador to China Choe Kim Su today echoed Pak’s assertion on North Korea’s right to develop nuclear weapons, but he also reiterated calls from Pyongyang to create a U.S.-North Korean nonaggression pact.

“To sign a nonaggression treaty will be the most realistic and rational way to resolve security concerns,” Choe said during a rare press conference (Agence France-Presse, Nov. 1).

North Korea Speaks Out

The Korean Central News Agency, North Korea’s state-owned news service, again charged yesterday that the United States, not North Korea, has violated several international nuclear agreements, including the 1994 Agreed Framework and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

The NPT calls on non-nuclear states to abandon nuclear weapons projects in exchange for assurances that nuclear powers will not use such weapons.  The treaty also calls upon the nuclear states to reduce their arsenals, but the United States has decided to stockpile many nuclear weapons for an indefinite period and to develop new weapons, the agency said.

“By doing so, it erased the core of all international agreements on nuclear disarmament, including the NPT,” KCNA said.

The agency also called for a U.S.-North Korean nonaggression treaty, calling the proposal a “realistic and reasonable one.”

“The proposal is a realistic and reasonable one as it is the best measure to bridge over the current crisis.  It is also a just proposal because it is aimed to defend the destiny and the interests of the Korean nation, the peace on the Korean Peninsula and the rest of the world,” KCNA said.  “There is no reason for the U.S. styling itself the ‘world’s only superpower’ to fail to accept this just proposal if it has no intention to invade the D.P.R.K. [Democratic People’s Republic of Korea]” (Korean Central News Agency, Oct. 31).

U.S. Diplomatic Efforts

The United States also has launched a new round of diplomatic efforts in Northeast Asia, planning three visits by former and current U.S. officials to the region over the next two weeks (see GSN, Oct. 22).

Donald Gregg, a former U.S. ambassador to South Korea is scheduled to visit North Korea Nov. 2-6, according to the Korea Times (Bae Keun-min, Korea Times, Nov. 1).

U.S. Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith is scheduled to begin a two-day visit to Seoul Nov. 6, according to the South Korean Yonhap news agency.  While there, Feith is expected to meet with South Korean Defense Minister Lee Jun and Foreign Minister Choi Sung-hong (Yonhap/BBC Monitoring, Nov. 1).  U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is scheduled to travel to South Korea Nov. 10-12 to attend an international conference of foreign ministers, according to Yonhap.  Powell is also expected to meet with Choi and South Korean president Kim Dae-jung (Yonhap/Korea Times, Nov. 1).

“Fundamental” Differences Between Iraq, North Korea

U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage Wednesday defended the differing U.S. approaches to Iraq and North Korea, which are both feared to possess weapons of mass destruction.  There are “fundamental” differences between the two countries, he said (see GSN, Oct. 21).

Iraq has shown itself to be an “unrelenting enemy” of not only the United States, but also its neighbors and Israel, Armitage said during a radio interview.  Iraq is working hard to develop weapons of mass destruction and has used them both against its neighbors and its own people, he said.

“On North Korea, on the other hand, you’ve got a country which has had a rough equilibrium or stability on the peninsula for about 50 years,” Armitage said (U.S. State Department release, Oct. 31).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

United States I:  Poor Records Compromise Missile Readiness

Until recently the U.S. Air Force might not have been able to launch missiles from several of its silos in North Dakota because it kept poor track of its equipment and had inaccurate information on the readiness of its missile facilities, the Deseret News reported Tuesday (see GSN, Oct. 4).

A report from the Air Force Audit Agency blames poor training at Air Force Space Command and Utah’s Hill Air Force Base, where the faulty computer system was designed.  The report — produced in late 2001 but only released recently following a Freedom of Information Act request — says poor training led technicians to enter extensive misinformation into the computer system that tracked the status of missiles.

Investigators examined 2,863 records at three missile bases to determine that 991 records contained incorrect information.  In some cases, problems were so serious that an ordered missile launch might have been jeopardized.

“At Minot Air Force Base [in North Dakota], each launch facility must have 12 batteries to provide full functionality and mission capability,” the report says.  “However, all 150 launch facilities reviewed had inaccurate battery data recorded in the IMMP System.”

The Air Force had no sufficient formal training program in place for the Improved Maintenance Management Program.

“For example, training at Minot Air Force Base was a brief overview of the system (lasting approximately 30 minutes) combined with an on-the-job practice session,” the report says.

The Air Force has implemented a standardized training program and addressed errors, according to the report (Lee Davidson, Deseret News, Oct. 29).

Back to top

United States II:  B-2 Bombers Will Move Closer to Iraq

The United States plans to deploy nuclear-capable B-2 bombers to the United Kingdom and the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, Reuters reported today (see GSN, Sept 16).

The move would increase the weapons that Gen. Tommy Franks of U.S. Central Command has at his disposal for a potential attack on Iraq, according to Reuters (see GSN, Oct. 30).

“That’s what we want to give Gen. Franks,” said Col. Doug Raaberg, commander of the U.S. Air Force 509^th Bomb Wing in Missouri.  “The firepower he needs and the flexibility to do what he needs to do.”

An undisclosed number of bombers will relocate “when tasked” by higher-ranking officers, according to Raaberg.  The B-2 is capable of flying 6,000 miles carrying 40,000 pounds of bombs without refueling, he said (Jim Wolf, Reuters, Oct. 31).

The move comes more than a year after the U.S. Air Force purchased deployable shelters for the bombers.  Officials had intended to buy 12 shelters for deployed B-2s, but lowered the order to five earlier this year (see GSN, Aug. 13).  The shelters allow technicians to apply a coating that makes the B-2 harder to track.

The shelters are “not an umbrella for bad weather,” Raaberg said.  “They really are an oven” that gives the Air Force perfect conditions to work on the planes (Aerospace Daily, Oct. 31).

Back to top

North Korea:  U.S. Congressmen Call to End Agreed Framework

In reaction to Pyongyang’s recent acknowledgement that it has been working on enriching uranium, five members of the U.S. Congress yesterday called on President George W. Bush to end the 1994 Agreed Framework in which North Korea had consented to end its nuclear weapons program in exchange for energy assistance (see GSN, Oct. 29).

“First and foremost, it seems that since North Korea’s covert nuclear program is a blatant violation of the Agreed Framework, the accord is nullified,” the lawmakers said in a letter sent to the White House.  “In that regard, we strongly believe that the U.S. should cease support for the Korean Energy Development Organization and that U.S. fuel-oil shipments should be permanently terminated” (see GSN, Oct. 21).

Senators John Kyl (R-Ariz.), Jesse Helms (R-N.C.) and Robert Smith (R-N.H.) as well as Representatives Christopher Cox (R-Calif.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.) signed the letter.

The letter calls on Bush to use all available means, including economic sanctions and an end to the construction of two light-water nuclear reactors for North Korea under the framework, to force Pyongyang to comply with international obligations.

“We hope that the United States will be able to implement the full range of economic and diplomatic sanctions to compel North Korean compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty,” the letter says.

The United States should work with its allies “to prepare for a future beyond the current Stalinist regime in Pyongyang,” the lawmakers said in the letter.  “We see no viable alternative given the proven failure of subsidizing North Korea and of relying upon that country’s promises” (Bill Gertz, Washington Times, Oct. 31).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Refuses Weapons Discussions With Tokyo

North Korea yesterday refused to discuss its nuclear weapons program with Japan during talks on normalizing relations between the two countries (see GSN, Oct. 29).  Instead, officials said they want to conduct any discussions on ending the country’s weapons program directly with the United States, according to the Financial Times.

The normalization talks, which are being held in Kuala Lumpur and were scheduled to end today, got off to a difficult start yesterday and “not much progress” was made, said Katsunari Suzuki, head of the Japanese delegation.

“It will be a tough negotiation — like inserting an elephant through a needle,” Suzuki said (David Pilling, Financial Times, Oct. 30).

Back to top

United States:  Sandia Designs Mock Nuclear Bomb

Technicians at the Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico recently completed the design of a new mock nuclear bomb to allow U.S. Air Force crews to practice handling nuclear devices (see GSN, Oct. 10).

The simulated B61 weapons replace older training bombs that were not realistic enough, Sandia engineer Beth Connors said.  Air Force officials designed the model to be sufficiently rugged for crews to hang it from airplane wings many times.

“This trainer is going to see thousands of hours of use,” Connors said.

When the mock bomb is mounted on a wing, the pilot’s cockpit instruments register as if an actual bomb is attached.

A pilot “wants to hit all his buttons and have all his lights light up the way they really would if it was a ‘go to war’ scenario,” Connors said.

Sandia began work on the B61 model in 1998 and the National Nuclear Security Administration plans to produce 51 units by March 2003.

Sandia technicians have also developed and built a number of training units for the military to use for hands on training, including a “scatter kit,” designed to look like nuclear weapons parts.  Military personnel train with the kit to be able to identify unexploded bomb parts in a nuclear accident.  Sandia also provides training units for the NNSA’s Pantex Plant in Texas, which assembles and disassembles nuclear weapons (John Fleck, Albuquerque Journal, Oct. 25).

Back to top

CTBT:  Botswana Ratifies Treaty

Botswana ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Monday (see GSN, Oct. 1).  The country hosts an auxiliary seismic station, part of the treaty’s International Monitoring System (see GSN, Sept. 18).  To date, 166 countries have signed the treaty and 97 have ratified it, including 31 of the 44 countries which must ratify the treaty before it can enter into force (CTBT Organization Web site, Oct. 30).

For further information, see:

CTBT Text

States Parties to the CTBT (Federation of American Scientists)

CTBT Organization

Back to top

Russia:  German Company Plans to Launch Converted ICBM

The German firm Astrium plans to launch a satellite on a Dnepr rocket, a model made from a former Russian SS-18 ICBM, ITAR-Tass reported Monday (see GSN, Sept. 12).  Astrium has signed a contract with the Russian-Ukrainian transnational space company Cosmotras, according to ITAR-Tass, and the launch is scheduled for December (ITAR-Tass, Oct. 28 in FBIS-SOV, Oct. 28).

Back to top

North Korea:  Tokyo and Pyongyang Begin Normalization Talks

North Korea and Japan today began two days of talks in Kuala Lumpur on normalizing relations between the two countries (see GSN, Oct. 28). 

The talks are expected to focus on North Korea’s recently acknowledged nuclear weapons program and the abduction of Japanese citizens by North Korea during the 1970s and 1980s.  Japan has told the United States it will not sign a normalization agreement with North Korea unless Pyongyang agrees to end its nuclear weapons program, the Financial Times reported (David Pilling, Financial Times, Oct. 29).

At the talks, North Korea “completely denied” demands for an end to its nuclear weapons program, a senior Japanese delegation official said.  North Korea blames concerns over its nuclear weapons program on the United States, saying the U.S. hardline position was the “root of the problem” the delegation official said.

North Korea wants the nuclear issue dealt with as the normalization talks progress, and not as a precondition for normalization, said Pak Ryong Yeon, the No. 2 member of the North Korean delegation to the talks.

“Japan wants to focus on the abduction and security issues,” Pak said. “But our thinking is that if we work toward diplomatic ties, then the security issues will be solved along the way” (Eric Talmadge, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Oct. 29).

Upon meeting the Japanese delegation at the talks, North Korea’s top negotiator, Jong Thae Hwa, said the two countries remain far apart on the two issues, according to Reuters.

“Although we gathered here for talks on normalizing ties, certainly, we are far apart,” Jong said.  “There are differences over various views.  There are issues which cannot be solved without cooperation” (Teruaki Ueno, Reuters, Oct. 29).

Back to top

Pakistan:  China to Assist in Nuclear Plant Construction

A Chinese delegation yesterday told Pakistani officials China would help Pakistan construct a third nuclear power plant, according to one of the leaders of Pakistan’s nuclear program (see GSN, Oct. 8).

“China has shown its willingness to give us a new nuclear power plant,” said Ashfaq Ahmad, head of Pakistan’s Strategic Program.  “We have energy problems so we want to enhance the contribution of nuclear energy.”

The nuclear plant is to be constructed in Chashma, 225 kilometers southwest of Islamabad.  Pakistan’s second nuclear plant, constructed with Chinese aid, is also located there, according to the Press Trust of India.

The new nuclear plant will only be used for peaceful purposes, Ahmad said.  Pakistan also has plans to build a fourth nuclear plant in Karachi, he said (Press Trust of India/Times of India, Oct. 29).

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  128,000 Nuclear Warheads Have Been Built

More than 128,000 nuclear warheads have been built worldwide since 1945 — the overwhelming majority of them by the United States and Russia, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists said in a recently released report.

Today, the world’s eight nuclear capable countries have more than 30,000 intact nuclear warheads, 20,000 of which are in the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom.  Israel, India and Pakistan maintain fewer than 400 operational nuclear warheads between them.

There are 17,500 operational warheads in the world, according to the report and Russia has 10,000 “nuclear warheads of indeterminate status.”  The remaining warheads are held in reserve or are retired and ready to be dismantled.

The United States and Russia produced 98 percent of the world’s nuclear warheads, according to the report.  The United States has produced a total of 70,000 warheads and dismantled 60,000 of them.  Russia has produced 55,000 warheads since 1949 and dismantled 37,000 of them, according to the report (see GSN, July 9).  About 10,000 Russian nuclear warheads are nonoperational, however, leaving Russia with 8,600 working nuclear warheads (Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, November/December).

Back to top

Georgia:  Aid Sought to Reopen Research Reactor in Nonproliferation First

By Bryan Bender
Global Security Newswire

TBILISI, Georgia — Georgia is seeking new nonproliferation aid to reopen a small nuclear reactor for research purposes.  The proposed project would mark a departure for arms control efforts in the former Soviet Union by funding new nuclear efforts rather than decommissioning facilities or destroying weapons, according to government officials and experts.

After three years of closure, re-opening Georgia’s only reactor would help prevent nuclear scientists from seeking employment elsewhere and would help train a new generation of experts to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, Georgian officials said.

Shukuri Abramidze, director of the Andronikashvili Institute of Physics near here, said in an interview last week that the institute is seeking new assistance from the International Atomic Energy Agency and donor countries to reopen its research reactor for peaceful, scientific pursuits. 

If such assistance were approved and financed, under the U.S.-sponsored Cooperative Threat Reduction program or from other international sources such as the IAEA, experts say it would mark a significant departure for nonproliferation efforts, which have focused primarily on closing down former Soviet nuclear facilities and securing remaining ones from sabotage.

Nevertheless, they say the possibility of funding research reactors with low enriched nuclear fuel is a subject of growing debate as nations pledge additional resources to secure nuclear know-how.

“There is a big effort in this area,” Robert Einhorn, former assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation who is now with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said of discussions about providing research reactor assistance to former Soviet states and others, relying on low enriched uranium fuel to support scientific and educational pursuits.

Pros and Cons

“As far as I know this has never been done [using nonproliferation money] and there could be arguments on both sides,” said Matthew Bunn, a nuclear expert at Harvard University.

For example, while funding nuclear research efforts could prevent nuclear expertise from leaking to would-be proliferators such as Iran, Iraq or North Korea — and help to train a new generation of nuclear scientists in such places as Georgia where many Soviet-era physicists are reaching or have surpassed retirement age — it could also pose new proliferation problems.

“On the downside there are hundreds of research reactors and that is a much larger number than needed for science, for training or for testing of materials,” Bunn said.  “A very small number would do the job if there were more international cooperation.” 

There are also security issues involved, including the possibility of sabotage, he added.  For example, the spent fuel for small research reactors tends to be small and potentially portable, unlike power reactor spent fuel, Bunn said.  While only highly enriched uranium can be used to make a nuclear bomb, low enriched uranium could be used to make a radiation dispersal device, or so-called dirty bomb.

“You would have to make sure [there are] regulations to provide a level of security that is commensurate with the level of threat,” he said.  “You can’t rule out a bunch of guys with machine guns showing up somewhere.”

But in Georgia, the 72-year-old Abramidze and his team of 90 scientists have concluded that reopening the research reactor would be the best way to utilize the workforce, while paving the way for a new generation of Georgian scientists to receive hands-on experience in peaceful nuclear disciplines. 

At its height the reactor employed 400 scientists, most of whom have moved to Russia, other former Soviet states or the West.  Abramidze expressed confidence that none of them has gone to Iran, Iraq, North Korea or other countries allegedly seeking to build nuclear weapons.

The institute has been working on an IAEA-funded study to determine the reactor’s future, according to Abramidze. The light water research reactor was decommissioned in 1999 and its estimated 40 kilograms of low enriched uranium — both fresh and spent fuel — was removed for safe storage in Scotland as part of the U.S.-led Operation Auburn Endeavor, officials said.  The reactor itself is housed beneath two meters of concrete to prevent leakage of any leftover radiation. 

“We are ready to provide a special report by the end of this year to outline a future role for this” reactor, Abramidze said.  “We are hoping to get funds for this new project,” including a 50-kilowatt light water reactor. 

Others see the benefits of such a project.  “They don’t have a new generation [of scientists] anymore,” said Andrei Chupov, head of IAEA technical cooperation in Europe, Africa and West Asia.  “They have no tool anymore,” he said, referring to the decommissioned reactor.

Bunn agreed that a low power research reactor could benefit Georgia. “On the upside, it is certainly true that many of the experts are retiring and there is a need for training another generation of nuclear experts.  A case can also be made that these under-employed scientists … need useful and worthwhile civilian work [so they will] not sell them to somebody who will use them for nefarious purposes.”

However, “I suspect it would make more sense to work out an arrangement where Georgian scientists could travel to a facility in Russia,” Bunn said.

Back to top

North Korea:  Pyongyang Urged to Abandon Nuclear Efforts

U.S. President George W. Bush, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and South Korean President Kim Dae-jung Saturday called on North Korea to abandon its recently acknowledged nuclear weapons program.  The three leaders met in conjunction with the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation conference in Mexico (see GSN, Oct. 25).

Bush, Koizumi and Kim agreed that North Korea’s nuclear weapons program violates the 1994 Agreed Framework and the South-North Joint Declaration on Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, according to a joint statement.  The three leaders urged Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear weapons program and abide by international agreements.

“The three leaders agreed that North Korea’s relations with the international community now rest on North Korea’s prompt and visible actions to dismantle its program to produce highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons,” the joint statement said (U.S. State Department release, Oct. 26).

APEC

Leaders from the 21 countries attending the APEC conference also released a joint statement Sunday calling on North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program.

“We uphold that a nuclear weapons-free Korean peninsula is important to the peace and stability of the peninsula and northeast Asia, and is also in the interests of all members of the region,” the APEC joint statement said.  “We call upon the D.P.R.K. to visibly honor its commitment to give up nuclear weapons programs and reaffirm our commitment to ensure a peaceful resolution of this issue (Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Oct. 27).

The statement, however, did not reach the level of condemnation that some Bush administration officials had said they wanted, according to the Wall Street Journal.  The APEC conference also made little progress on what, if any, measures should be taken if North Korea continues to maintain its nuclear weapons program (see GSN, Oct. 24).  Some U.S. State Department officials have expressed concerns that Pyongyang might intensify its efforts if threatened, the Journal reported.

“It’s a tricky and complicated problem that I wish would go away in a week or two but I have a feeling that it’s going to be with us for a while,” a senior State official said (Cummings/Cooper, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 28).

China

Chinese President Jiang Zemin said yesterday that he was “completely in the dark” about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program but agreed to work with Bush to convince Pyongyang to bring it to an end.  While China is one of North Korea’s main allies, it is unknown how much influence Beijing has over Pyongyang, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.

“We Chinese always hold the position that the Korean peninsula should be nuclear-weapons free,” Jiang said following a meeting with Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas (Ron Hutcheson, Philadelphia Inquirer, Oct. 26).

China has warned the United States that North Korea might have developed three to five usable nuclear weapons, double the number estimated by U.S. intelligence, according to the London Sunday Times. 

The CIA has previously estimated that North Korea stockpiled enough plutonium to produce one or two nuclear weapons before signing the Agreed Framework, under which Pyongyang agreed to end close it plutonium production reactors in exchange for two light-water nuclear reactors.  China, however, has concluded that North Korea has enough enriched uranium through its recently admitted program to produce several more warheads, according to the Sunday Times.

South Korean officials have said they have been informed by the United States that North Korea has enough enriched uranium, about 70 pounds, to produce two warheads, the Sunday Times reported. 

North Korea is also believed to have succeeded in miniaturizing their nuclear weapons for use on their ballistic missiles, according to experts.

China told U.S. officials last week that a U.S.-North Korean conflict would end in disaster, diplomatic sources said (Michael Sheridan, London Sunday Times, Oct. 27).

Japan

Japanese and North Korean officials arrived in Malaysia today for two days of long-scheduled talks beginning tomorrow on normalizing relations between the two countries. 

The talks will have a “great impact on peace and stability” in the region, and will address the issue of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, Koizumi said today.

“We intend to make the talks comprehensive,” he said during a speech at the APEC conference.  “We will discuss the abduction issues and security, as well as problems of the past, the present and the future.”

The talks are expected to be difficult, said Katsunari Suzuki, head of the Japanese delegation.

“The hurdle is very high,” Suzuki said.  “But we will do our utmost to take advantage of this door opened by the prime minister. ... We hope to make appreciable progress” (Eric Talmadge, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Oct. 28).

KEDO

The Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization, which oversees the light-water reactor construction project, finished a round of working-level talks with North Korea Saturday on the creation of a satellite network as part of the project (see GSN, Oct. 22).

During the talks, held in Pyongyang, KEDO and North Korea discussed the construction of a satellite connection between Seoul and the Kumho district in North Korea’s South Hamkyong province, where the reactors are to be built.

“The KEDO and North Korea will hold further talks to push for the communication network,” said an official at the Office of Planning for the Light-Water Reactor Project (Sohn Suk-joo, Korea Times, Oct. 28).

For further information, see:

Agreed Framework Text

KEDO

Back to top

Al-Qaeda:  Intelligence Sources Describe Al-Qaeda as Nuclear Threat

Many intelligence and defense officials operate under the assumption that the al-Qaeda terrorist network has nuclear capabilities, the Washington Times reported today (see GSN, Oct. 8).

Several anonymous sources said that al-Qaeda definitely has nuclear warheads.

Israeli intelligence reported that al-Qaeda “bought tactical nuclear weapons from some former Soviet republics,” a former Soviet intelligence officer said.  “They are not the suitcase-type bombs that people often refer to, but more the warhead-type munitions.  These are the payloads of short-range missiles, torpedoes and the like.”

An unnamed Western intelligence official said Russian mob figures sold nuclear weapons to al-Qaeda operatives, who then took the devices to Central Asia.  Osama bin-Laden’s followers also sought technical expertise in the area, according to the Times.

“Several Russian nuclear technicians were hired by the Islamic fundamentalists to try and make the weapons operational,” the Western official said.

These allegations are supported by the discovery of non-weapons-usable uranium 238 almost a year ago in a tunnel near Kandahar, Afghanistan, and indications from officials that al-Qaeda has nuclear capabilities, the Times reported.

Some disputed the intelligence sources, however.

“I believe that the chance that al-Qaeda controls actual warheads is virtually nil,” said Rose Gottemoeller, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Neil Doyle, Washington Times, Oct. 28).

Back to top

Interview:  Former U.S. Ambassador to China and South Korea James Lilley

National Journal correspondent Lee Michael Katz interviewed James Lilley on October 19.  Lilley served as U.S. ambassador to China and to South Korea, as well as assistant secretary of defense for international affairs. He is now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.

In the edited excerpts that follow, Lilley contends that insular North Korea uses nuclear “extortion” to gain foreign aid.

NJ: North Korea just made this declaration, but the United States has long had suspicions about a North Korean nuclear weapons program. How did this come out now?

Lilley: It took time for the Bush administration to gather the convincing evidence. They first got indications about two years ago. Gradually, information accumulated and they connected the dots. They decided they would lay it before the North Koreans in a pretty cold way, and got a rather unexpected response.

The first day was a pretty typical North Korean response: tantrums, accusations that we were lying, cheating, and fabricating. The second day we got the real surprise: They said, “OK, it’s happening; what are you going to do about it?”

NJ: What were the motives of North Korea and its dictator Kim Jong Il?

Lilley: Certain motives we can spot, such as survival or extortion. It’s very hard, because you are trying to read the mind of King Jong Il, essentially, and he’s a very strange, weird, and contradictory person.

Why now? They think they can use it as a means to get additional aid. The first time they were caught, they got $4 billion for two nuclear reactors, plus 500,000 tons of oil a year. It was a tremendous shot in the arm for them. The acquisition of money — that’s very much their technique, and they’ve been phenomenally successful.

NJ: North Korea has made some public gestures, while still maintaining clandestine programs. Are they trying to open up to the world or are they desperate for aid?

Lilley: What they’re trying to have is a North Korean-controlled opening-up. They have to do it because of their miserable conditions.  Their agriculture’s a terrible mess. They have no workable financial system. They can’t produce goods, heat their country, provide light.

They can keep their population repressed indefinitely because of very totalitarian methods, but they have to try to get the West and South Korea and Japan to feed them. This requires controlled openings, but their objective is to keep their weapons of mass destruction, and their huge conventional force, as a military threat to extort money.

NJ: The White House called the North Korean nuclear revelation “troubling, sobering news.” Was that an understatement by a Bush administration focused on Iraq?

Lilley: I don’t think they’re downplaying it, but the point they’re trying to make is, this is a different tactical situation. Military force is a major component in Iraq to accomplish our objectives. This is not the case in North Korea. There is no military option. These countries are radically different.

The big war happened for North Korea in 1950 when they invaded the South.  Iraq has more of a tendency for external violence. The whole attitude of Saddam is messianic, to become conqueror of the Middle East.

Iraq has a lot of oil and it’s a comparatively richer country. North Korea is a basket case. Kim Jong Il can only survive in his own little country.  We have to pressure North Korea, using our tremendous economic leverage, to contain their nuclear program and start economic reform, which would lead to a basic regime change over time. So Kim Jong Il either has to change or he’s out of there. I’m not saying he’s not in control, but his whole situation is more challengeable.

NJ: Do you think Kim Jong Il would use nuclear weapons against U.S. troops or allies in the region?

Lilley: The Americans have made it clear to him that this would lead to massive retaliation-the end of his whole country. That doesn’t mean he can’t use them for psychological purposes. He’s very good at that. He has a million-man army, 70 percent of it in aggressive deployment.

He threatened to attack in 1993, 1994, and we bought him off. First time we’ve ever done that: Buy off a nation that’s creating nuclear weapons with this huge aid package. Congress was enraged [that the Clinton administration] committed all this money.

But the little guys from the U.S. government would trundle up and say, he needs this or he would make war. They got the money. So the threat of war has been a very useful device for extorting money. It’s a very complicated psychological warfare game.

NJ: North Korea has one of the world’s largest armies, but the U.S. military is the strongest. Would attacking North Korea be so different from attacking Iraq?

Lilley: Yes, it would be. First, South Korea is absolutely adamant that we do nothing like a pre-emptive strike on the North because they know the North Koreans have 12,000 artillery pieces. The day you touched North Korea, you would get probably half a million shells dropped on Seoul and probably lose between 5 million and 10 million people. Or you’d get suicide planes crashing into nuclear plants in the South. The devastation would be unbelievable.

South Korea, when the loose talk of pre-emptive strikes came up in 1994, came to me, and others, and said, “You Americans, you’re playing games with our life.”

Second, North Korea has got this secret, weapons-of-mass-destruction program spread out all over the place — people say 11,000 caves. They’ve been working underground for 40 years. You’d never find it. They’ve got some World War II “Fat Boy” plutonium bombs they can deliver by air.

So your closest allies are dead-set against it; the cost would be much, much greater; and the results would be much worse than in Iraq.

NJ: Do you agree with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who says North Korea already has several nuclear weapons?

Lilley: The CIA has been saying that for eight years-it estimates they’ve got two or three bombs. Of course, the North Koreans hinted in talks, “Oh, we’ve got something much worse than uranium enrichment.”

We say they have biological and chemical weapons and two or three plutonium bombs, so they look at us in a sly way and say, “Maybe you’re right.” I would say they were bluffing when they said they would go to war in ‘93, ’94 — and it worked beautifully for them. I think now, it’s not an empty threat.

NJ: Under President Clinton, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright went to North Korea, but it took the Bush administration until last month to have an assistant secretary of state meet with North Korean officials.  Why?

Lilley: My sense is Bush was trying to make the case to the North Koreans:  “You’re in a new ball game. This is not Madeleine Albright. This is not our deal. We are not going to bribe you with billions of dollars.” The Clinton approach was basically, “We will reward you if you do things.” The Bush approach is basically, “We will punish you if you do bad things.” To give them unconditional food aid was not very smart, but it created a dependency they can’t live without.

NJ: There’s a real question of how to respond to desperate reports from North Korea. Do we let them starve?

Lilley: First of all, in every other country in the world, including Stalinist Russia, when we gave food aid, we monitored its distribution.  North Korea is the exception. The result is, probably a good percentage of that food aid is not going to the children. It’s going right into their military and their prized bureaucrats. You’ve got to get monitors in there.

Of course you’ve got to worry about starving children. It’s a very pathetic sight. And you can be sure, you’re going to get lots of pictures of swollen bellies and sunken jaws. But they’re causing it. It’s like Saddam Hussein has got 14 palaces and he shows you pictures of starving children. This is an internal problem of theirs. Somebody has got to say, “This must change.”

NJ: Members of Congress are upset they weren’t informed when North Korea told administration officials about its nuclear weapons program.

Lilley: My reading is they did tell certain congressmen. It was a very confused time. The North Koreans had blindsided us. We weren’t sure how we’d handle it. We were afraid it would have leaked prematurely.

NJ: Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle says North Korea should immediately accept inspections and the dismantling of its weapons-of-mass-destruction program. What do you think?

Lilley: It won’t happen. It makes Daschle look tough and the administration look weak and watery. I don’t think it’s terribly helpful.  You’re going to get progress in an evolutionary manner. Part of the reason they came through this time is that they didn’t want inspections, which would reveal how many bombs they have and prove them to the world as liars all along.

NJ: What should U.S. officials do in upcoming diplomatic contacts with China, Japan, and South Korea?

Lilley: You’ve got to include China to a greater extent-perhaps Russia, all the countries around North Korea. The first issue is to get some sort of common policy. China has considerable leverage with North Korea, I don’t give a damn what they say.

NJ: Aside from this, how is the U.S.-China relationship?

Lilley: I think it’s pretty good. China’s approach in helping us on counter-terrorism has been pretty solid. Chinese and Taiwan economic cooperation has gone through the roof, and war is the last thing they want.

So, there’s every reason that America and China can push along. And the big thing is the symbolism of summitry. The Chinese wanted this very much. I’m not saying the Chinese are not spreading anti-American propaganda among their youth. They are, but if you can’t handle contradictions, get the hell out of the Far East. Jiang Zemin is committed to having this strong relationship with the United States, not because he likes us, but because he has to.

NJ: U.S. policy efforts have focused on Iraq and the Mideast. Is Asia and the outcome of the Bush-Jiang summit suddenly more of a life-and-death issue?

Lilley: It certainly becomes more interesting and dramatic, something more than a barbecue in cowboy boots and clearing brush on the ranch. This will be the catalyst for getting closer cooperation with North Asia. The big bombing in Bali certainly dramatized terrorist problems.

What’s been missing has been a real reason to bring us together. Now you have two things: counter-terrorism and North Korea. It’s not going to be easy.

Back to top

Cuba:  Havana Ratifies Treaty of Tlatelolco

Cuba last week ratified the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which establishes a nuclear weapon-free zone in the Caribbean and Latin America (see GSN, Oct. 2).  Even though Cuba signed the treaty in 1995, it was the last of 33 eligible states to ratify the treaty, according to Inter Press Service/TerraViva.  In early October, Cuba announced its intention to ratify the treaty.

“The ratification of the Tlatelolco Treaty reaffirms Cuba’s commitment to and respect for the principle of nuclear nonproliferation in a global context,” the Cuban Foreign Ministry said in a statement Friday (Patricia Grogg, Inter Press Service/TerraViva, Oct. 28).

For further information, see:

Treaty of Tlatelolco Text

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP