Go to contents

No rush for engagement with Pyongyang: Albright

Posted November. 03, 2000 19:20,   

한국어

U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said that Washington will not rush its policy of engagement with North Korea but that it would be irresponsible to neglect a historic opportunity to diminish the North Korean missile threat. She told the National Press Club in Washington Wednesday that the content of an agreement with Pyongyang is more important than the timing, adding that President Bill Clinton would soon decide on his trip to North Korea.

As the current policy toward the North is right for the world as well as the United States and its ally, South Korea, Albright said, the continuation of the policy by the incoming President is desirable. Fears of a detente between the United States and North Korea sidelining inter-Korean dialogue overlook the firm and indivisible ties between Washington and Seoul, the secretary pointed out. She predicted that it will not be long before the comings and goings between the two Koreas no longer attract the attention of the world due to progress in inter-Korean exchanges and tension reduction.

In the meantime, Koh Hong-Ju, assistant undersecretary of state for human rights, in his article published in the Washington Post Wednesday, termed Albright¡¯s visit to Pyongyang a breakthrough in U.S.-North Korean relations. The official, who is of Korean descent, asserted that criticism against her diplomatic foray related not as much to the substance of the visit as to the sight of her making a toast with North Korean strongman Kim Jong-Il.

According to Koh, Secretary Albright discussed with North Korean officials a wide range of topics, from missiles and U.S. security concerns to the North's compliance with international norms on terrorism and human rights. She was the first member of the American cabinet to raise the question of human rights before National Defense Commission chairman Kim and other government leaders of the North, he stressed. The contribution was apparently meant to respond to unfavorable opinions voiced recently by several leading U.S. newspapers like the Washington Post and the New York Times.