I want to say that the dilemma that we were confronted with is that the North Koreans at this point are unwilling to impose a complete freeze on their weapons of mass destruction programs, so to give many, many billions of dollars in sanctions relief would in effect put us in a position of subsidizing the ongoing development of weapons of mass destruction in North Korea. Now, they didn’t ask us to do that, but that is effectively the choice that we were presented with
Emmanuel Thomas l Friday, March 01, 2019
MANILA, Phillipines – The United States today explained that it could not enter into a deal with North Korea during the summit for the reason that it is unwilling to impose a complete freeze on all weapons of mass destruction programme.
The US spoke following a meeting between officials of the United States and North Korea in Hanoi at the sideline of the summit which ended in a no deal scenerio. The North Korean delegation was made up of five people, representing the ministry of foreign affairs, what they would call the Asia Pacific Peace Commission, and the State Affairs Commission, which is effectively the equivalent of the White House.
Others in the team include State Affairs Commission, the people who work directly for Chairman Kim in their structure. While the US team had a delegation of 16 experts, including international law experts, nuclear fuel cycle experts, missile experts, trade sanctions experts, economists.
Speaking on the outcome of that crucial meeting, a senior official of the US State Department said that during a working-level negotiations in the week leading to the summit, North Korea offered to dismantle the Yongbyon nuclear complex which has been at the center of the North Korean nuclear weapons program.
He described the Yongbyon Nuclear complex as a substantial set of facilities on a single property but that it is very important to be very precise about it, whereas the North Koreans struggled to give a precise definition of what that was.
“I want to say that the dilemma that we were confronted with is that the North Koreans at this point are unwilling to impose a complete freeze on their weapons of mass destruction programs, so to give many, many billions of dollars in sanctions relief would in effect put us in a position of subsidizing the ongoing development of weapons of mass destruction in North Korea. Now, they didn’t ask us to do that, but that is effectively the choice that we were presented with”, he said.
He explained that during the meeting, President Donald Trump of the United States encouraged Chairman Kim Jong-Un to go all in.
“We just couldn’t get there on the agreement at this point but within the discussions on this agreement we got to a level of detail that has eluded us for quite a while, certainly since the Singapore joint statement, including things like what is the definition of the Yongbyon nuclear complex, which is a very important issue for us as we look to disassemble the entire weapons of mass destruction program in North Korea.
“So we’re in an okay place. We didn’t get a deal because the deal wasn’t there to be had, but we are prepared to continue talking. I was very reassured to see the official press release from the North Koreans this morning that they’re actually taking the exact same tone that President Trump took in his press conference yesterday. They were constructive discussions. There’s room to continue talking. The two leaders have a personal relationship that both of them believe will yield benefits for the development of our plans here, and for my part – well, I shouldn’t say this because I’m on background, but let me just say the United States very much looks forward to engaging further with the North Koreans as soon as they’re prepared”, he said.
He explained that these sanctions are actually layered on top of each other. They’re not severable. “One of the things that you might potentially hear them say is they stopped testing, therefore all sanctions that were imposed because they were testing should be lifted. That’s another thing that you would hear, but that testing was part of a process of developing nuclear weapons, and the weapons themselves need to be on the table. It’s not the testing of the weapons, it’s the actual presence of the nuclear weapons – and, by the way, likewise in the case of missile testing, the ICBMs as well that are central to this discussion”, he added.
