We urge for change of US Policy

Statement fo Korean NGOs on The Fourth Six Party Talks

The fourth round of six party talks is scheduled to be held in Beijing from July 26th. The resumption of the talks is surely welcomed considering the breakdown of the six party talks would only worsen the crisis on the Korean peninsula especially when there are no alternatives left. The three previous rounds failed to produce substantial progress and the situation has aggravated since then. Yet, the resumption of the talks implies both opportunity and crisis for the resolution of the Korean peninsula nuclear crisis. If it bears an obvious breakthrough, on the one hand, we can take a meaningful first step toward a big compromise; on the other hand, however, if the fourth round again ends without any tangible result, skepticism about the usefulness of the talks would sweep, and the present crisis would only go from bad to worse.

Paying attention to these circumstances and expectations, we hope that by producing material results the new round will be a stepping-stone to the resolution of the Korean peninsula nuclear crisis. In order to profit of the benefits the two main parties of the talks, North Korea and U.S., should take a more serious, sincere and flexible attitude than they did before. Moreover, South Korea’s creative, positive and leading role is also very important.

We want to focus particularly on the attitude of the U.S. The reason is that besides the importance of the role of the other parties including North Korea, until this far the insincere and unilateral attitude of Washington has been a main obstacle to the resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. Although the Bush administration can be blamed for the breakdown of the Geneva Agreed Framework and can also mainly be held responsible for the recurrence of the North Korean nuclear issue, the Bush administration demanded Pyongyang first to abandon its nuclear program, throwing all the blame for past breakdowns upon the North. In particular, it heavily depended on the argument of ‘North Korean Threat’, in order not to lose the rationale for reinforcement of its armaments such as Missile Defense (MD). Meanwhile, North Korea’s nuclear capability increased.

We believe that the new round of talks will be a good chance for the U.S. not to repeat previous mistakes and to cooperate for the goal of a nuclear-free and peaceful Korean peninsula. The Bush administration has openly declared that its second term will not be the time of war but of diplomacy. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, head of the U.S. delegation, said that the U.S. had good intentions for the North, and was willing to solve the problem with ‘word for word’ and ‘action for action’, hereby modifying its previous proposal. We hope these words, expressing the changed attitude of the U.S., won’t stay just mere words, but will instead result in some action. In that sense, this fourth round of talks will serve as a test board to gauge any change of the US attitude.

Emphasizing repeatedly that any tangible change of the US policy is the decisive factor to hold sway over the success of the talks, we ask the following of the US government:

Firstly, the U.S. must not, as preconditions for the talks, demand the North to admit that it runs highly enriched uranium (HEU) program and to dismantle it.

It is not he issue of HEU, of which the existence is unclear, but the issue of preventing the production of nuclear weapons by using plutonium, that must be settled urgently. We also agree on the need that the suspicion of North Korea having HEU should be cleared away. However, to address this problem, the U.S., who raised the issue, must present clear evidence first, and then it is up to the North to explain as regards the evidence. Nevertheless, Washington has so far impede the progress of the talks by demanding Pyongyang, without any material evidence, to admit that it runs HEU program and to dismantle it. Therefore, by making it clear that the U.S. must not repeat the previous demand, we emphasize that the first step to resolve the conflict surrounding the HEU program lies in presenting evidence by the U.S.

Secondly, the U.S. must accept the principle of simultaneous action.

The North Korean nuclear issue must be resolved peacefully by giving due consideration to each state’s concern and demand on the basis of mutual understanding and respect among all the states concerned. It means that Pyongyang’s abandonment of the nuclear program, Washington’s withdrawal of the hostile policy towards the North and its security assurance to North Korea must be taken reciprocally and simultaneously. It also means that the U.S. must accept the ‘principle of simultaneous action’.

Thirdly, the U.S. must guarantee that it will not use or threat to use its nuclear weapons against North Korea.

We also do not agree with the assertion that six party talks should be nuclear disarmament talks. Such an argument is not only incompatible with the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula but also aggravates distrust in the North’s intention. Nonetheless, it is true that the nuclear threat from the U.S against the North has increased, even without citing the North’s claim. For more than 50 years, the U.S. has never exempted North Korea from its list of objects for nuclear first use. In this context, even though it is not appropriate to discuss the issue of the nuclear umbrella policy of the U.S. and the reduction of nuclear weapons in this talk, negative security assurance (NSA) issue must be taken up on the agenda. To ensure that the U.S. will not use or threat to use nuclear weapons against North Korea is a natural responsibility of the U.S. as a nuclear state and the essential condition for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

Fourthly, the U.S. must not put the North Korean human rights issue on the agenda at the six party talks.

We are also concerned about the human rights situation in the North, and feel that the improvement of the North’s reality is needed. However, connecting the human rights issue with the resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue, or using the issue as a means of hostile policy toward the North not only endanger the resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue, but also never helps to improve human rights reality of the North Korean people. If the U.S. has true intentions to improve the human rights situation in North Korea, we believe that it must first lift the limitations on the rights of peace and development it has imposed on the North. We will welcome the human rights issue raised by U.S. only after U.S. cooperates to replace the cease-fire mechanism with the peace mechanism; lifts the economic sanction against the North; removes North Korea from its list of states that sponsor terrorism; and after U.S. pursues the normalization of its relations with North Korea.

Lastly, the U.S. must make it clear that it has the intention to normalize its relations with the North.

To clear away the hostile relationship between the U.S. and North Korea is both an important tool and goal of the resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. At the same time it is also the most important condition to eliminate the Cold War structure that reigned for sixty years on the Korean peninsula. However, the U.S. is maintaining its ultra hard-line stance, saying that the normalization of relations is only possible when all other conditions are met such as issues of human rights, missile, biological and chemical weapons, and conventional armaments, even after resolving the nuclear problem. We think that such a keynote of the US policy towards North is unjustifiable since it is both arbitrary and partial. Rather, we believe that the problems, which the Cold War system has brought on the Korean peninsula, must be resolved through the normalization of the relations between the U.S. and the North, and we must try to induce the reform and change of the North Korean system. Therefore we demand the U.S. to make its position clear that it has the intention to establish diplomatic ties with the North at this round. By doing so, the achievement of a significant progress toward the resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue will be possible, and the U.S. will have an opportunity to show that it really wants peace and reunification of the Korean peninsula.

Green Korea United, Citizens’ Coalition of the Democratic Media, People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea, Women Making Peace, National Council of YMCAs of KOREA, Korean Federation for Environmental Movement