North Korea to Give Up Nuclear Aims

[Nurvingiel]

From: BBC News [link]

N Korea to 'give up nuclear aims'

North Korean delegates gave a standing ovation as the talks ended
North Korea has agreed to give up all nuclear activities and rejoin the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, in a move diplomats called a breakthrough.

In return, the US said it had no intention of attacking the North, which was also promised aid and electricity.

The agreement came during a fourth round of six-nation talks in Beijing, aimed at ending a three-year standoff over North Korea's nuclear ambitions.

But correspondents warned that some key issues had not yet been resolved.

"This is the most important result since the six-party talks started more than two years ago," said Wu Dawei, China's vice foreign minister.

Mohammad ElBaradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency [IAEA] also welcomed the development, saying that UN inspectors should return to North Korea as soon as possible.

"The earlier we go back the better," he said.

The chief US negotiator at the talks, Christopher Hill, praised the development as a "win-win situation", adding: "We have to seize the momentum of this."

But he promptly urged Pyongyang to end operations at its main nuclear facility at Yongbyon.

"The time to turn it off would be about now," Mr Hill said.

The BBC's Charles Scanlon in Seoul says that while the statement appears to be a significant step forward in principle, difficulties may arise in its implementation.

One issue which has yet to be resolved is North Korea's demand that it be given a civilian light-water nuclear reactor to generate electric power.

This US has described this request as a non-starter, but agreed in Monday's statement that the issue could be addressed again in the future.

Disagreement also remains over the scope and scale of North Korea's weapons programmes.

The question of verification of these programmes has yet to be addressed - an issue which our correspondent says could present the most formidable obstacle to a final agreement.

Inspections

This historic joint statement came as hope was fading that the six-party talks could ever reach a deal.

Correspondents say the US was on the verge of walking out of the talks and heading home - a fact that may have been the clincher which forced North Korea to back down.

In Monday's statement, the North "promised to drop all nuclear weapons and current nuclear programmes, and to get back to the Non-Proliferation Treaty as soon as possible".

This latter detail is crucial, as it will allow United Nations inspectors to return to the North's nuclear sites.

In return the US made some conciliatory statements, affirming it had no nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula and "has no intention to attack or invade [North Korea] with nuclear or conventional weapons".

The joint statement also said the other five nations involved in the talks - China, Japan, South Korea, Russia and the US - were willing to provide energy assistance to North Korea, as well as promoting "economic co-operation in the fields of energy, trade and investment".

South Korea has already offered to deliver 2m kilowatts of electric power.

The agreement also mentioned North Korea's relations with Japan.

Tokyo and Pyongyang have been locked in a dispute about Japanese citizens kidnapped by North Korea, and the statement promised the two countries would "take steps to normalise their relations".

The six parties agreed to implement Monday's agreement "in a phased manner", using the principle of "commitment for commitment, action for action".

When they meet again in November, they will have the difficult task of working out how this will work in practice.

The long-running nuclear dispute began in late 2002, when the US accused North Korea of having a uranium-based nuclear arms programme, in violation of international agreements.

CRISIS TIMELINE
Oct 2002: US says North Korea is enriching uranium in violation of agreements
Dec 2002: North Korea removes UN seals from Yongbyon nuclear reactor, expels inspectors
Feb 2003: IAEA refers North Korea to UN Security Council
Aug 2003: First round of six-nation talks begins in Beijing
Feb 2005: Pyongyang says it has built nuclear weapons for self-defence
Sep 2005: N Korea agrees to give up nuclear goals

DETAILS OF DEAL
N Korea to abandon all nuclear weapons and programmes
N Korea to return to nuclear treaty and UN monitoring
US states it has no intention of attacking N Korea
N Korea says it has right to "peaceful uses of nuclear energy"
N Korea's demand for light water reactor to be discussed at "appropriate time"

I'm glad that there's important, good news out there right now. I think there will be issues, but this is a very positive step by North Korea. I hope that maybe this new attitude about nuclear arms will lead to a new attitude about human rights.

I admit to being surprised to hear this news. It is a step in the right direction.

[Curubethion]

I hope N. Korea really means it...but with Kim Jong Yung II, who knows?

[inked]

Nurv,

Is this the END of the nuclear family?

[Valandil]

Just saw a story headline that now the North Koreans insist that the US give them civilian nuclear reactors in order for them to agree to dismantle their nuclear arms.

Those North Koreans are such teases!

[Lotesse]

IMO, North Korea does NOT mean it, and no one in their right mind in gov't is going to fall for any N.K. tricks and manipulative demands.

[Nurvingiel]

Well, I don't have a lot of faith in Kim Jong Il, but that's why I never expected this news. But like I said before, it's a step in the right direction. Letting in UN inspectors is a start, for example.

[Spock]

Step, my grandmothers cat! If you've been following this at all NK has changed it's postions eight times in the past six months. And that's only the ones I caught.....it is dangerous to believe because you want to believe.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Lotesse

IMO, North Korea does NOT mean it, and no one in their right mind in gov't is going to fall for any N.K. tricks and manipulative demands.

I definitely agree. North Korea seems to me to be paranoid, however. The government constantly thinks we're planning to attack. Though considering how they're treating their civilians, it might just be better to do it . . .

Originally Posted by BBC News

North Korea has formally told the UN it no longer needs food aid, despite reports of malnutrition in the country.

Deputy Foreign Minister Choe Su-hon said the country now had enough food, due to a good harvest, and accused the US of using aid as a political weapon.

Top UN relief co-ordinator Jan Egeland said an "abrupt" end to food aid would harm North Korea's most vulnerable.

I'm not serious when I suggest we should invade. We can't afford the cash, and as long as the Bush Administration believes there are alternatives to fighting, I will continue to hope. But North Korea is proliferating nuclear secrets, thus showing itself to be a direct threat to the world's security. It is ruthlessly brutalizing its people, just as Saddam was, and now is starving them in order to show a tough national image. North Korea badly needs a regime change. That China and Russia are supporting that government is very, very sad.

[Spock]

Sounds to me like a follower of Pat Robinson

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Spock

Sounds to me like a follower of Pat Robinson

I truly don't know all that much about Pat Robertson, though what I do know causes me to respect him. I'm sure he would prefer peace with Venezuela, if it is possible. I still would need to learn the facts on which he bases his Chavez views before I can form an opinion on that one.

I'm sure I would prefer peace with North Korea, also. An invasion or attack would be hideously costly, both in terms of dollars and loss of life. If there is any chance a regime change can come about through peaceful means, I'm all for it. The Soviet Union and its satellites crumbled relatively peacefully- the Cold War never became hot. If the same can happen with North Korea's government, then I am all for it.

[Spock]

It was a facetious comment..........didn't you see the

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Spock

It was a facetious comment..........didn't you see the

Okay .

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Spock

Step, my grandmothers cat! If you've been following this at all NK has changed it's postions eight times in the past six months. And that's only the ones I caught.....it is dangerous to believe because you want to believe.

I didn't know about those other policy changes. Linkage?

I'm not believing this is a good move just because that would be nice. This article prompted me to think, "If they follow through on what they're saying here, this will be a positive step." I realize they may not - there's a large chance they may not since Kim Jong Il is an atrocious man, but there's still the small chance, and that's worth hoping for eh?

[Spock]

google it.

Mr. Praline: 'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e
rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the
bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!

[Lief Erikson]

I wish China would put the pressure on North Korea. It's the only way this is going to be resolved.

[Spock]

You think the Chinese will take time out from their military build up to help us; not likely. We're number two on their list, right after Taiwan.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Spock

You think the Chinese will take time out from their military build up to help us; not likely. We're number two on their list, right after Taiwan.

I think the main way we might get involved into any military conflict with China is if a war breaks out between China and Japan. And let's face it, China's grievances against Japan to date have had some justification. The only Chinese aggression I have seen has been toward Taiwan. The US supports peaceful unification between China and Taiwan, and the issue in Taiwan of whether or not that state will seek complete sovereignty is still undecided.

China is in no position to seek a struggle with us, and I've seen it trying to improve relations with the US. After President Bush's visit to China, he said that the talks were candid and positive. The two states agreed to increase cooperation for counter-terrorism, law enforcement, economy, trade, AIDS prevention and treatment, environmental protection, commerce, science and technology.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...ent_286969.htm

I see China as a state that is just coming into great power, but is still trying to find its political feet. I haven't yet seen it as a negative influence anywhere, either. It's not like the Soviet Union, trying to seize control of other states and turn them into satellite communist countries. It is developing good terms with the nations around it. Its human rights record is very sad, and it suppresses democratic reform efforts. Those are very sad points in this picture. But I think the picture is, for the most part, a pretty positive one.

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I wish China would put the pressure on North Korea. It's the only way this is going to be resolved.

China has been an active participant in the six-party talks about North Korea's nuclear programme and has stated that do not wish to see any nuclear weapons in the Korean peninsula. But I wonder what kind of pressure China would be able to put on North Korea?

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I think the main way we might get involved into any military conflict with China is if a war breaks out between China and Japan. And let's face it, China's grievances against Japan to date have had some justification. The only Chinese aggression I have seen has been toward Taiwan. The US supports peaceful unification between China and Taiwan, and the issue in Taiwan of whether or not that state will seek complete sovereignty is still undecided.

Although there has been a lot of anti-Japanese sentiments in China lately, I believe a war between the two countries is unlikely. Japan has been an exceptionally pacifist nation and pose no military threat to China.

The main way the US and China might get involved in an armed conflict is if Taiwan declares it independence. China would take action and occupy the island and the US would most likely intervene in some way.

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I see China as a state that is just coming into great power, but is still trying to find its political feet. I haven't yet seen it as a negative influence anywhere, either. It's not like the Soviet Union, trying to seize control of other states and turn them into satellite communist countries. It is developing good terms with the nations around it. Its human rights record is very sad, and it suppresses democratic reform efforts. Those are very sad points in this picture. But I think the picture is, for the most part, a pretty positive one.

China has just recently tasted the fruits of market economy. The Chinese strength lies not in their military might, as was the case in the USSR, but in their economic power. Good relations with other countries are therefore more important for China than they were for the Soviet Union. China wants to purchase things rather than conquer them, something which makes China less scary than was the Soviet Union

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by CNN

CNN.com's Steve Almasy recently conducted a phone interview with Hans M. Kristensen, project director for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, about the impact of the North Korean crisis . . .

CNN.com: How does this change North Korea's relationship with China?

KRISTENSEN: The Chinese have been very somewhat grumpy over this latest development . . .

I love that description of the Chinese reaction .

[Nurvingiel]

Too bad CNN is a complete farce. Yeah, I'd be grumpy too if my neighbours just had a nuclear test.

Now the UN has voted to impose sanctions on North Korea for this. [CBC link]

Normally I'm against sanctions, but this one seems to be limited to military material. Which makes me wonder why we were selling tanks to Kim Jong-Il before.