Weekly Domestic/Foreign Press Briefing H.E. Song Min-soon, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade
H.E. Song Min-soon, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade
July 11, 2007 - 11:00 KST
Transcript: OPENING STATEMENT (KOREAN-ENGLISH TRANSLATION)
1. Opening Statement
(The North Korean Nuclear Issue)
This week, you're probably most interested in the Six-Party Talks. China, the host country, will make an announcement sometime soon after collecting opinions from the concerned countries, but the chief delegates of the Six-Party Talks are expected to get together for a meeting sometime next week. So we're now making preparations for this.
Meanwhile, the concerned countries are preparing things that are necessary for the implementation of initial phase measures, and, on our part, we will send 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil, which is expected to arrive in North Korea around the 14th, and that is when the IAEA inspectors are also expected to arrive in North Korea.
Other consultations are smoothly underway on various matters among the concerned countries, so we believe that the chief delegates of the Six-Party Talks should get together and discuss what kind of measures should be taken in the next phase following the initial phase. I believe that there will be discussions on denuclearization, particularly the question of having North Korea make a report on its nuclear program or measures for disablement, as well as the issue of providing 950,000 tons of energy, and necessary measures for normalization of relations among the concerned countries, and so on.
I recently visited the United States where I had the first round of consultations with Secretary Rice, and I talked to her once again over the phone day before yesterday, for discussions on what to discuss at the upcoming chief delegates' meeting and how.
Since all of the concerned countries share the common understanding that we must go on to the next phase after promptly implementing the initial phase measures of the February 13 agreement, we will make efforts at the upcoming meeting of chief delegates to draw such an outline.
(Names for the Seabed of East Sea)
I don't have anything else in particular to tell you about, but there's something that the Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries has announced already. The 10 seabed names of East Sea have been passed and they are expected to be registered sometime soon in the future.
※ This is the end of my opening statement, and I would now take questions.
2. Q&A
【YTN】
The chief delegates of the Six-Party Talks will have a meeting next week, and I also believe that a meeting of five foreign ministers will also be held in late July or early August. Please explain what the ROK should focus on at these meetings, and if the roles are separately assigned, what to focus on at the Six-Party Talks and what to focus on at the meeting of five foreign ministers.
【Minister】
First of all, something about your question is not clear. Did you say a meeting of five foreign ministers? ([YTN] Yes.) A separate meeting for five foreign ministers? ([YTN] Ah! I meant the meeting of six foreign ministers.) I've only heard of a meeting of six foreign ministers and I was wondering if you have something else in mind.
First of all, no decision has been made by the concerned countries about a meeting of six foreign ministers of the six countries. That is also something that the chief delegates plan to discuss this time, and I want to tell you once again that right now we do not have a fixed date such as late July or early August. The current denuclearization process of the Korean Peninsula is like having two wheels of the same wagon. One wheel is denuclearization and the other wheel is normalization of relations, i.e. establishment of a peace regime. If a six-party ministerial meeting is held, we will discuss how to make these two wheels turn well by adjusting them. And these processes are expected to steepen, so we will have discussions on measures for adding a political momentum through a ministerial meeting.
【Seoul Shinmun】
The Korean Peninsula Peace Regime Bureau was made with the reorganization of the Ministry, so please explain what you plan to do with this bureau, and with regard to this, some people are asking "Doesn't this mean that discussions are underway on a peace regime or declaring an end to the Korean War at an inter-Korean summit or a four-party summit?". Please tell us how much progress is being made and how.
【Minister】
The Korean Peninsula Peace Regime Bureau is not something new. It was already organized when we set up the Office of Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs last year. We have been postponing the appointment because we want to supplement the personnel while looking at the progress in negotiations for a peace regime, and we will appoint someone suitable while looking at the process of the chief delegates' meeting next week and a ministerial meeting that the concerned countries have already agreed upon.
And, with relation to this, we talk about declaring an end of the war or a peace regime, and when you talk about a peace regime, you seem to think that it is a very special structure, but a peace regime is ultimately the normalization of relations among the directly-involved parties for peace on the Korean Peninsula. The combination of that is a peace regime. It is not something that refers to a particular structure. As I've just said, I believe that we'd be walking on the path toward a peace regime if the relations are normalized among the involved parties, the directly-concerned countries for peace on the Korean Peninsula. And there are speculations on various forms of summit meetings now, but when we talk about denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and establishment of a peace regime, as I've said, denuclearization and peace regime are like having two wheels of the same wagon. If it is necessary in the process of making it, it is always possible to have various forms of talks among the concerned countries. However, that is when there are certain circumstances and the concerned countries must agree on it. We will make progress while keeping in mind something like that.
【KBS】
You just talked about the six-party foreign ministers' meeting -- are there preconditions for the meeting of six foreign ministers, or do you believe that certain conditions must be made before that, such as a certain level of progress for denuclearization? Please tell us if there is an agreement among the concerned countries on something like that.
【Minister】
There are no preconditions for holding a meeting of six foreign ministers. The ministerial meeting is something has was agreed upon in the February 13 agreement, and everyone agrees that we should have a six-party ministerial meeting so as to add a political momentum. However, the ministers of the six countries have various overlapping schedules, so we're in the process of fine-tuning our schedules.
【AP】
You said that the IAEA inspectors are expected to enter North Korea around the time of the arrival of heavy fuel oil. Do you mean that you think the operation of the nuclear facility will be suspended by the time of IAEA inspectors' arrival in North Korea?
【Minister】
That is something, I believe, the IAEA and North Korea will adjust with each other, and from a commonsense point of view, this is something that I've told you once before but, please do not think that something will happen at a specific hour on a specific day. Heavy fuel oil will arrive roughly around the time of IAEA inspectors' arrival and the facility will be shut down. I believe that these things will happen roughly at the same time and the concerned countries believe so, too.
【AFP】
From now on, after disablement, there will be dismantlement and decommission, and these two processes are expected to cost "an enormous amount of money" according to experts. Who will then pay for these expenses?
【Minister】
When they say that "it will cost an enormous amount of money", it is only a presumption without knowing actual details. I do not agree with the term "an enormous amount", and when we talk about how, it will not follow a certain stereotype, a fixed form, but there are various measures that can be acceptable by the concerned countries and sufficient for denuclearization, so it is not appropriate to say "an enormous amount". No matter how much it costs, the basic spirit of the Six-Party Talks process is that the concerned countries will share the cost together.
【Korea Herald】
Sir, you have paid a visit to the U.S. and have had consultations over the phone just a few days ago with Secretary Rice. Has there been sufficient discussions on the HEU program between you two, and will the HEU issue officially be brought up during this round of the Six-Party talks?
【Minister】
We are not making distinctions between plutonium and enriched uranium at the moment. What has been agreed during the Six-Party talks is to abandon all nuclear program, whether it be plutonium or uranium. They're all included in this process, and making separate discussions on any nuclear component is inappropriate. Incidentally, we do not enjoy using the term HEU, do we? Don't we call it UEP(Uranium Enrichment Program)? To talk about UEP is to deal with plutonium only, and we are not doing that. We include all in regard of the denuclearization. Simple and clear: 'To dismantle all nuclear weaponry and all nuclear programs.' We are faithfully abiding by that principle.
【Donga Ilbo】
I'd like to continue what reporter Kim of the Seoul Shinmun had asked.
I think that the reason he asked you one on the peace regime issue is not because he expected a theoretical answer. Rather, there must be an urgent need to make up a team within the Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs Bureau. Then that means we are not just sitting back and doing nothing. We must have a road map for the future of the peace regime, and I think that reporter Kim wanted to know about that. Then I wish to once again ask you just what we need to do at the moment, and if you have any plans on that, although we agree on the theory that the peace regime is necessary.
There recently has been suggestions by the national research institutes that we should not let go of our diplomatic leadership. Anyway, there can be differences among the six nations in regard of the idea of a 'peace regime.' What is the ROK government's thoughts and plans for the process of building a peace regime?
【Minister】
It's quite difficult to follow your long question.
Of course we, as a directly involved party who must maintain peace, have to have a specific plan for building a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula. It's just a matter of action - discussing the issue with the rest of the involved parties to materialize what we have in mind. Of course we have plans, and it is the responsibility of the Korean Peninsula Peace Regime Bureau to map out the plan and push forward. We already have some tracks which we have agreed at the Six-Party talks, don't we? Denuclearization track, economic and energy aid track and the normalization of relations track.
As for the normalization, U.S.-North Korea, North Korea-Japan need to be done. As for us, we are making efforts to normalize relations with the North as a separate inter-Korean dialogue. There are also the Northeast Asian Multilateral Security System and the Peace Regime of the Korean Peninsula. We have our plans for each agenda. But I'd say it's a bit early to officially announce the plan, right here right now. Because it is something that needs to be dealt among the involved parties, through discussions.
【Pressian】
There has been some changes in the expressions regarding the FTA Agreement documents.
For example, we have altered the word 'exercise' for 'exercising sovereignty on land, sea and air' to 'may exercise.' MOFAT officials have mentioned that it is to use the same terms with the U.S. But in the case of U.S.-Panama FTA, Panama has chosen the word 'exercise', whereas the U.S. has used 'may exercise.' We have written the word 'exercise' when having FTAs with other nations, but why change it this time with the U.S.? And some say that it may be interpreted as not being so firm as we used to be on the dominium of the Dokdo Islet. What is your opinion on that?
【Minister】
Well basically that has nothing to do with the issue on the dominium of the Dokdo Islet. And I think it's best for us have the top representative of the FTA talks to give you some details on this 'may exercise' and 'exercise' matter. I do not have the specific expressions etched in my head.
【MBC】
When the Six-Party heads of the delegation talks opens, I believe that a lot more agendas will be discussed than the Six-Party ministerial talks. Also, we may be able to read some of North Korea's intentions on the denuclearization process. Likewise, I believe we need further in-depth discussions on the peace regime issue, which is the other wagon. With all these going on, do you think that what our president has suggested to the North - replacing 'cease-fire' with 'end of war' - holds a special meaning?
【Minister】
First I'd like to make a correction. You just said that the 'denuclearization' and the 'peace regime' are to different wagons. I have said that they are the two 'wheels' of the same wagon. Please keep that in mind.
To announce the end of war is something that needs to be agreed by the involved nations while watching over the progress of the denuclearization and building peace regime on the Korean Peninsula. So I guess it's quite premature to say anything about it at the moment, not to mention that it cannot be a one-way announcement. Rather, I think that we may be able to make such an announcement only when the right time arrives.
【NHK】
Some have reported that 'there are chances that a working-group discussion will follow after the heads of the delegation talks.' What do you think of that?
【Minister】
Working-group discussions can be held whenever deemed necessary. After all, aren't working groups supposed to share views openly and flexibly? So that's that, and we will hold working-group meetings on things that seem to need further discussions. But no specific plans have been set for doing so, and I believe that we first need to hold the head of the delegations talks next week and discuss this matter with the involved parties.
【KBS】
Since you have brought up the formal steps of the meeting, I would like to give you one on that. Up till now, things have gotten right into discussion at the heads of delegation talks. So that meant not putting too much stress on formalities. Nonetheless, the main conference has always followed after that. Please tell us if there is any particular reason why the main conference is not necessarily needed when the heads of delegations talks is held.
【Minister】
It is because we thought it would be best for us to move swiftly by holding this heads of the delegation talks. The heads of the delegation talks is a stepping-stone for implementing the initial steps of the February 13 agreements, and then taking next steps - reporting nuclear facilities, disabling them, normalizing relations with the involved nations and sending additional economic and energy aid to the North. So putting these steps in regard, we will hold the talks to have substantial results rather than focusing too much on formal aspects.
We're not putting too much stress on the formalities of the meeting, but rather we wish to draw substantial outcomes. We're keeping that in mind.
【YTN】
Talking about formal steps of the meeting, are we not having the closing ceremony for the same reason as the opening one? Since the meeting will be held next week, I think that China must have announced the date probably around yesterday. Is there any reason why there has not been any mention about when it will take place?
【Minister】
Since there are six participants in the meeting, the date of the meeting should be announced when all the six nations agree on a day which best suits them. And as for the opening or closing ceremonies, none among the involved parties are paying special attention to them. I would appreciate it if you see that we are endeavoring to make substantial progress rather than the formal aspects.
【Seoul Shinmun】
I believe that the IAEA Director General ElBaradei will be paying you a visit tomorrow. What will you two be discussing?
【Minister】
I think that the IAEA delegation will arrive in North Korea no later than this weekend, so we will be discussing denuclearization, which is the matter of mutual concern. There will be some technical aspects with regard to this issue, but in fact the IAEA mostly deals with technical things rather than political ones. So we will do our best to run things as smoothly as possible. It seems a bit premature to go into details.
이 보도자료는 Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade가(이) 작성해 뉴스와이어 서비스를 통해 배포한 뉴스입니다. 뉴스와이어는 편집 가이드라인을 준수합니다.