Go to contents

Geneva accord must be upheld

Posted March. 05, 2001 19:51,   

한국어

Ahead of President Kim Dae-Jung`s visit to the United States Tuesday, raising our concern is that some U.S. congressmen and officials of research institutes have raised objections to the Agreed Framework, signed by Washington and Pyongyang in Geneva in 1994. The Geneva pact is the U.S.-North Korean agreement calling for a freeze on the North`s nuclear weapons development program in exchange for the U.S. allies` provision of two light-water reactors for the communist state.

A group of lower house members sent a letter to the White House last Friday, stressing that President George W. Bush should not commit himself to abiding by the Geneva agreement. Earlier, former U.S. ambassador to Korea James Lilley said that a new plan was needed to replace the Geneva accord, while deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage insisted on the need to revise the agreement before his formal appointment to the post. Their assertions were in general based on questions over the North`s capability of operating the light-water reactors, suspicions that the North would gain access to plutonium for nuclear arms, and concerns over the growing financial burden of providing fuel oil to the North under the Geneva pact. This viewpoint has been gaining steam since the launch of the Bush administration.

However, it is our firm position that the 1994 Agreed Framework should be implemented as is. There is no denying that the Geneva agreement has made a significant contribution to maintaining stability on the Korean peninsula. Hence, if one of the two sides refuses to keep the agreement, the situation on the peninsula may become volatile once again. To prevent this, the Korean and U.S. governments are urged to make good on their promises, as they are expressed in the Geneva accord. The same is true for North Korea. Those Americans who hold negative views of the pact have little justification for their opinions.

If their views prevail, an astronomical amount of money would have to be spent on the proposed construction of thermal power plants, while some $600 million that has been funneled into the reactors under construction would go up in smoke. And although the naysayers argue that the projected light-water reactors would be able to produce weapons-level plutonium, such a probability was conclusively dismissed at the time of the Geneva agreement`s signing. As for the agreed U.S. provision of fuel oil to the North, they contend that oil prices have since risen three-fold. But Washington is still advised to hold up its end of the bargain, since the agreed oil provision, amounting to 500,000 tons annually, is a key part of the agreement.

In their upcoming summit, Kim and Bush should devote themselves to a sincere exchange of views and fully address all outstanding issues related to Korean security, such as the Geneva pact and the U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) System. Only in this way can the two sides boost their mutual understanding.