Didn't think they would actually agree to it.

DESX · Post by **DESX** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:53 am

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... as_nuclear

BEIJING - North Korea on Monday agreed to stop building nuclear weapons and allow international inspections in exchange for energy aid, economic cooperation and security assurances, in a first step toward disarmament after two years of six-nation talks.

ADVERTISEMENT

The chief U.S. envoy to the talks praised the breakthrough as a "win-win situation" and "good agreement for all of us." But he promptly urged Pyongyang to make good on its promises by ending operations at its main nuclear facility at Yongbyon.

"What is the purpose of operating it at this point?" said U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill. "The time to turn it off would be about now."

Despite the deal's potential to help significantly ease friction between the North and the United States after years of false starts and setbacks, Hill remained cautious.

"We have to see what comes in the days and weeks ahead," he said.

The agreement clinched seven days of talks aimed at setting out general principles for the North's disarmament. Envoys agreed to return in early November to begin hashing out details of how that will be done.

Then, the hard work of ensuring compliance will begin, officials attending the talks said.

"Agreeing to a common document does not mean that the solution to our problems has been found," said Japan's chief envoy, Kenichiro Sasae.

Another Japanese official, who spoke on condition he not be named in order to discuss the issue more freely, noted that there was no common understanding among the participants about the nature of North Korea's nuclear program.

The head of the U.N. nuclear nonproliferation agency welcomed North Korea's decision to allow inspections, saying he hoped his experts could take the country at its word as soon as possible.

"The earlier we go back, the better," said Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

According to a joint statement issued at the talks' conclusion, the North "committed to abandoning all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs and returning at an early date" to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.

"The six parties unanimously reaffirmed that the goal of the six-party talks is the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner," the statement said.

Responding to Pyongyang's claims that it needs atomic weapons for defense, North Korea and the United States pledged to respect each other's sovereignty and right to peaceful coexistence, and also to take steps to normalize relations.

"The United States affirmed that it has no nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula and has no intention to attack or invade (North Korea) with nuclear or conventional weapons," according to the statement, in assurances echoed by South Korea.

The talks, which began in August 2003, include China, Japan, Russia, the United States and the two Koreas.

The negotiations had been deadlocked over North Korea's demand to keep the right to civilian nuclear programs after it disarms, and the statement acknowledges the North has made such an assertion but doesn't go beyond that.

North Korea had also demanded that it be given a light-water nuclear reactor at the latest talks — a type less easily diverted for weapons use — but Washington had said it and other countries at the talks wouldn't meet that request.

Putting aside the question for now, the statement said: "The other parties expressed their respect and agreed to discuss at an appropriate time the subject of the provision of light-water reactor" to North Korea.

The North will have to build trust by fulfilling all its pledges before that issue would be discussed, said Sasae, who is director of the Asia and Oceania Bureau at Japan's Foreign Ministry.

North Korea has also refused to totally disarm without getting concessions along the way, while Washington has said it wants to see the weapons programs totally dismantled before granting rewards. The statement, however, says the sides agreed to take steps to implement the agreement "in a phased manner in line with the principle of 'commitment for commitment, action for action.'"

The other countries at the talks said they were willing give energy assistance to the North, including a South Korean plan to deliver electricity across the heavily armed border dividing the peninsula.

"This is the most important result since the six-party talks started more than two years ago," said Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei, Beijing's envoy.

North Korea was promised two light-water reactors under a 1994 deal with Washington to abandon its nuclear weapons. That agreement fell apart in late 2002 with the outbreak of the latest nuclear crisis, when U.S. officials said North Korea admitted having a secret uranium enrichment program.

The North is believed to have enough radioactive material for about a half-dozen bombs from its publicly acknowledged plutonium program, but hasn't performed any known nuclear tests to prove its capability. In February, the North claimed it had nuclear weapons.

Japan and North Korea also said in the statement they would move to normalize relations regarding "the outstanding issues of concern." The reference appears to allude to Tokyo's concerns over its citizens that the North has admitted abducting.

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:11 am

I am glad it did not come to war but does anyone else not trust the Gargoyle to stay true to his word? Or better yet do any of you trust him not to attack Taiwan, or demand more later on?

Post by **Lyion** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:14 am

Same deal as when he signed an agreement with the Peanut farmer in the 90s during Bubbas administration.

Completely untrustworthy.

Scoota McGee · Post by **Scoota McGee** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:31 am

So... Did President Carter have to give his Nobel Peace Prize back since the deal his administration brokered failed?

and will President Bush get a Nobel Peace Prize for brokering essentially the same deal with the North Koreans?

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:53 am

Republicans dont get Nobel peace prizes...they get oil derricks. Didnt you know that?

labbats · Post by **labbats** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:00 am

A signature from a liar is worthless.

Phlegm · Post by **Phlegm** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:04 am

kaharthemad wrote:I am glad it did not come to war but does anyone else not trust the Gargoyle to stay true to his word? Or better yet do any of you trust him not to attack Taiwan, or demand more later on?

North Korea wont attack Taiwan since China would put some serious hurt on them if they did.

Phlegm · Post by **Phlegm** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:10 am

Scoota McGee wrote:So... Did President Carter have to give his Nobel Peace Prize back since the deal his administration brokered failed?

Carter didnt win the Nobel Prize just because of that. Sadat and Begin shared the 1978 peace prize for that deal. Carter won it in 2002 for all that he has done in his career.

"for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights, and to promote economic and social development"

Harrison · Post by **Harrison** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:39 am

I would love to watch China stomp on that little shitstain N.K.

Zanchief · Post by **Zanchief** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:41 am

China isn't much better.

Harrison · Post by **Harrison** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:47 am

Never said it wasn't really...

I'd rather see them two fight than us.

xaoshaen · Post by **xaoshaen** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:52 am

Zanchief wrote:China isn't much better.

Yes it is. China's been slowly, but steadily moving to a more populist system of government where the welfare of the people is an actual concern. North Korea is still an old-school dictatorship where the state views its population as resource to be exploited. The two nations' relative economic strengths are an indicator of their future direction...

Zanchief · Post by **Zanchief** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:10 pm

Better.

Not MUCH better.

xaoshaen · Post by **xaoshaen** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:24 pm

Zanchief wrote:Better.

Not MUCH better.

Assuming you've been keeping up with the developments in China, I'd say you're woefully overestimating the quality of life in North Korea.

Zanchief · Post by **Zanchief** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 12:30 pm

My point. China aint that great.

Goose_Man · Post by **Goose_Man** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:21 pm

"The head of the U.N. nuclear nonproliferation agency welcomed North Korea's decision to allow inspections, saying he hoped his experts could take the country at its word as soon as possible. "

I have this scene from Team America in my head. Hans Blix from the UN, comes to inspect N Korea for WMD and Kim Jon il wont let him into the super secret room and ultimately ends up feeding him to sharks…. I’m so wonly, so wonly..

Captain Insano · Post by **Captain Insano** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:03 pm

Harrison wrote:I would love to watch China stomp on that little shitstain N.K.

Yah me too....

but then I think about all the material provided by NK for the Team America movie and I say let the tyranny continue!

Hewwoooo Hanz Bwix! LOl

I think NK is probably a bit scared after we pretty much invaded Iraq unprovoked. I am surprised more people haven't notice the different stance middle eastern and communist countries have taken since our little war.

Maybe Kimmy J. Il is a bit scurrred of the big bad U.S. and all our high tech toys of destruction.

Tuggan · Post by **Tuggan** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:38 pm

different stance? like iran not only continuing their nuke plans, but offering to share their technology to other middle eastern countries? for 'energy purposes' of course though.

Captain Insano · Post by **Captain Insano** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:20 pm

That is being overblown by the media. Chances are that if they get the reactors they are asking for they will comply with the UN's monitoring agencies on the matter or face almost certain retaliation from the U.S. and their neighbors.

There have been countless news stories about how angered large portions of the arab world are becoming when their own people perpetrate terrorism...

Why is that? That hasn't ever happened before. In the past those terrorists would martyrs and heroes in the eyes of the arab community.

I think the arab will is beginning to crack under the power of the western world and it's about fucking high time I says!

Tuggan · Post by **Tuggan** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:31 pm

The vast majority of the muslim world has been very much against the actions of terrorists since they started targetting innocent people instead of government and military installations. Even then most were against terrorist actions.

Its only now that you get to hear the voice of the majority. Before it was nothing but mobs of young angry men cheering on the terrorist actions in order to fuel our dislike for that entire portion of the world. 9/11 is a good example, news agencies showing old non-related footage of groups of men burning US flags and cheering. Now thats changed cause we have to sorta like them so theres still a few people out there that will support what were trying to do.

DESX · Post by **DESX** » Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:14 pm

So much for the agreement.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... ea_reactor

North Korea Demands Nuke Reactor From U.S. By JAE-SOON CHANG, Associated Press Writer
59 minutes ago

SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea said Tuesday it would not dismantle its nuclear weapons program until the United States first provides an atomic energy reactor, casting doubt on its commitment to a breakthrough agreement reached at international arms talks.

ADVERTISEMENT

The North insisted during arms talks that began last week in Beijing that it be given a light-water reactor, a type less easily diverted for weapons use, in exchange for abandoning nuclear weapons. The agreement reached at the talks' end Monday — the first since the negotiations began in August 2003 — says the six countries in the negotiations will discuss the reactor issue "at an appropriate time."

Both the United States and Japan, members of the six-nation disarmament talks, rejected the North's latest demand.

"This is not the agreement that they signed and we'll give them some time to reflect on the agreement they signed," U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said in New York, where he was with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice at meetings of the U.N. Security Council.

"The Japanese side has continuously said that North Korea's demand is unacceptable," Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura told reporters.

The Beijing agreement called for the North to abandon it arms efforts and accept inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency in exchange for energy, economic and security aid.

But the North's statement Tuesday indicated it was again raising the reactor demand as a prerequisite for disarming.

"We will return to the NPT and sign the safeguards agreement with the IAEA and comply with it immediately upon the U.S. provision of LWRs, a basis of confidence-building to us," the North's Foreign Ministry said in the statement, carried by the North's official Korean Central News Agency.

"The U.S. should not even dream of the issue of (North Korea's) dismantlement of its nuclear deterrent before providing LWRs," the North said.

The impact of the North's statement wasn't immediately clear. During the years of debate over its weapons program, the communist nation has sometimes given confusing or dramatic statements as it publicly maneuvers for negotiating leverage.

Other countries at the talks made clear that the reactor could only be discussed after the North rejoins the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and accepts inspections from the International Atomic Energy Agency — which North Korea pledged to do in Monday's agreement.

U.S. State Department spokesman Adam Ereli emphasized earlier in Washington that the "appropriate time" for discussing the reactor means only after the North comes in compliance with those conditions.

"It's a theoretical proposition in the future, contingent on dismantling having taken place, resigning up to the NPT and having IAEA safeguards in place," he said Monday in Washington.

The North's position is likely to be a major sticking point in talks slated to begin in early November on implementing Monday's agreement.

The North had demanded during the six-nation talks in Beijing — which include China, Japan, Russia, the United States and the two Koreas — that it be allowed to keep a civilian nuclear program for power generation after it disarms.

But the United States strongly opposed the demand, and Monday's agreement only acknowledged that the North had "stated" its claim to that right.

The administration of U.S. President George W. Bush has opposed anything resembling a 1994 U.S.-North Korea agreement, which promised the North two light-water reactors for power. That project stalled amid the current crisis that broke out in late 2002 over the North's resumed nuclear weapons program.

___

[/quote]

Captain Insano · Post by **Captain Insano** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 12:01 am

A few people mentioned this already...

North Korea really isn't going to be our problem if they get blatently nuclear. They probably already have 2-3 nukes right now but if they get carried away China is going to squash them like bugs.. Chances are they will get both the backing of the U.S. and South Korea of course to some degree.

As weak of a nation as they are I can't believe the South hasn't overrun them and claimed the land as theirs.