BBC NEWS Americas Africa Europe Middle East South Asia Asia Pacific Chinese Vietnamese Burmese Thai Indonesian
BBCi NEWS   SPORT   WEATHER   WORLD SERVICE   A-Z INDEX     

BBC News World Edition
 You are in: Asia-Pacific  
News Front Page
Africa
Americas
Asia-Pacific
Europe
Middle East
South Asia
UK
Business
Entertainment
Science/Nature
Technology
Health
-------------
Talking Point
-------------
Country Profiles
In Depth
-------------
Programmes
-------------
BBC Sport
BBC Weather
SERVICES
-------------
LANGUAGES
EDITIONS
Friday, 25 October, 2002, 07:42 GMT 08:42 UK
N Korean statement on talks proposal
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il
North Korea is suggesting a pact of non-aggression
Following is the text issued by North Korea's foreign ministry which proposes a deal with the US regarding Pyongyang's nuclear weapons programme.

New dramatic changes have taken place in the situation on the Korean peninsula and the rest of Northeast Asia in the new century.


The US attitude was so unilateral and high-handed that the DPRK was stunned by it

Inter-Korean relations and the DPRK's [Democratic People's Republic of Korea's] relations with Russia, China and Japan have entered a new important phase and bold measures have been taken: To reconnect inter-Korean railroads which have remained cut for over half a century; settle the past with Japan; and do away with the leftovers of the last century.

The DPRK has taken a series of new steps in economic management and adopted one measure after another to re-energise the economy, including the establishment of a special economic region, in conformity with the changed situation and specific conditions of the country.

These developments practically contribute to peace in Asia and the rest of the world.

US envoy James Kelly

Almost all the countries, except for the United States, therefore, welcomed and hailed them, a great encouragement to the DPRK.

It was against this backdrop that the DPRK recently received a special envoy of the US president in the hope that this might help fundamentally solve the hostile relations with the US and settle outstanding issues on an equal footing.

Regretfully, the Pyongyang visit of the special envoy convinced the DPRK that the hostile attempt of the Bush administration to stifle the DPRK by force and back-pedal the positive development of the situation in the Korean peninsula and the rest of Northeast Asia has gone to the extremes.

Producing no evidence, he asserted that the DPRK has been actively engaged in (an) enriched uranium programme in pursuit of possessing nuclear weapons in violation of the DPRK-US Agreed Framework.

He even intimidated the DPRK side by saying that there would be no dialogue with the US unless the DPRK halts it, and the DPRK-Japan, and North-South relations would be jeopardised.

The US attitude was so unilateral and high-handed that the DPRK was stunned by it.

The US is seriously mistaken if it thinks such a brigandish attitude, reminding one of a thief crying "stop the thief", would work on the DPRK.

US 'strategy for supremacy'

As far as the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula is concerned, it cropped up as the US has massively stockpiled nuclear weapons in South Korea and its vicinity and threatened the DPRK, a small country, with those weapons for nearly half a century, pursuing a hostile policy toward it in accordance with the strategy for world supremacy.

The DPRK-US Agreed Framework was adopted in October 1994, but the US (sic) has been deprived of the right to talk about the implementation of the Framework since then.


Over the last eight years, however, the US has persistently pursued (a) hostile policy toward the DPRK and maintained economic sanctions on it

Under Article 1 of the Framework the US is obliged to provide light water reactors to the DPRK by the year 2003 in return for the DPRK'S freezing of graphite-moderated reactors and their related facilities.

But only site preparation for the LWR was made, though eight years have passed since the DPRK froze its nuclear facilities.

This will bring the DPRK an annual loss of 1,000 MW(E) in 2003 when light water reactor number one is scheduled to be completed and that of 2,000 MW(E) from the next year.

Under Article 2 of the Framework the two sides are obliged to move toward full normalisation of political and economic relations.

Over the last eight years, however, the US has persistently pursued (a) hostile policy toward the DPRK and maintained economic sanctions on it.

The former has gone the length of listing the latter as part of the "axis of evil".

Delay of lightwater reactors

Under Article 3 of the Framework the US is obliged to give formal assurances to the DPRK against the threat or use of nuclear weapons by the US.

However, the US listed the DPRK as a target of its pre-emptive nuclear attack.

Under Article 4 of the Framework and Paragraph G of its confidential minute the DPRK is to allow nuclear inspections only after the "delivery of essential non-nuclear components for the first LWR unit, including turbines and generators" is completed.

But the US has already come out with a unilateral demand for nuclear inspection in a bid to convince the international community of the DPRK'S violation of the framework.

This compelled the DPRK to make public the confidential minute for the first time.

'US breach of Framework'

The US has, in the final analysis, observed none of the four articles of the Framework.

It is only the US that can know whether it had willingness to implement the Framework when it was adopted or put a signature to it without sincerity, calculating that the DPRK would collapse sooner or later.

However, the Bush administration listed the DPRK as part of the "axis of evil" and a target of US pre-emptive nuclear strikes.


Nevertheless, the DPRK, with greatest magnanimity, clarified that it was ready to seek a negotiated settlement of this issue

This was a clear declaration of war against the DPRK as it totally nullified the DPRK-US Joint Statement and Agreed Framework.

In the long run, the Bush administration has adopted it as its policy to make a pre-emptive nuclear strike at the DPRK. Such moves, a gross violation of the basic spirit of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, reduced the inter-Korean Joint Declaration on Denuclearisation to a dead document.

Its reckless political, economic and military pressure is most seriously threatening the DPRK's right to existence, creating a grave situation on the Korean peninsula.

Nobody would be so naive as to think that the DPRK would sit idle under such [a] situation.

That was why the DPRK made itself very clear to the special envoy of the US president that the DPRK was entitled to possess not only nuclear weapon but any type of weapon more powerful than that so as to defend its sovereignty and right to existence from the ever-growing nuclear threat by the US.

The DPRK, which values sovereignty more than life, was left with no other proper answer to the US behaving so arrogantly and impertinently.

The DPRK has neither need nor duty to explain something to the US seeking to attack it if it refuses to disarm itself.

Conditions of pact

Nevertheless, the DPRK, with greatest magnanimity, clarified that it was ready to seek a negotiated settlement of this issue on the following three conditions:

Firstly, if the US recognises the DPRK'S sovereignty, secondly, if it assures the DPRK of non-aggression and, thirdly, if the US does not hinder the economic development of the DPRK.


The settlement of all problems with the DPRK, a small country, should be based on removing any threat to its sovereignty and right to existence

Nowadays, the US and its followers assert that negotiations should be held after the DPRK puts down its arms.

This is a very abnormal logic.

Then, how can the DPRK counter any attack with empty hands?

Their assertion is little short of demanding the DPRK yield to pressure, which means death.

Nobody can match anyone ready to die. This is the faith and will of the army and people of the DPRK determined to remain true to the army-based policy to the last.

The position of the DPRK is invariable. The DPRK considers that it is a reasonable and realistic solution to the nuclear issue to conclude a non-aggression treaty between the DPRK and the US if the grave situation of the Korean peninsula is to be bridged over.

If the US legally assures the DPRK of non-aggression, including the non-use of nuclear weapons against it by concluding such a treaty, the DPRK will be ready to clear the former of its security concerns.

The settlement of all problems with the DPRK, a small country, should be based on removing any threat to its sovereignty and right to existence.

There may be negotiations or the use of deterrent force to be consistent with this basis, but the DPRK wants the former, as far as possible.


Nuclear tensions

Inside North Korea

Divided peninsula

TALKING POINT
See also:

25 Oct 02 | Asia-Pacific
21 Oct 02 | Asia-Pacific
21 Oct 02 | Americas
17 Oct 02 | Asia-Pacific
17 Oct 02 | Asia-Pacific
17 Oct 02 | Asia-Pacific
Internet links:


The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

Links to more Asia-Pacific stories are at the foot of the page.


E-mail this story to a friend

Links to more Asia-Pacific stories

© BBC ^^ Back to top

News Front Page | Africa | Americas | Asia-Pacific | Europe | Middle East |
South Asia | UK | Business | Entertainment | Science/Nature |
Technology | Health | Talking Point | Country Profiles | In Depth |
Programmes