Robert Alvarez Senior Scholar, Institute for Policy Studies Friday, August 15, 2003; 11:00 a.m. ET
The Kuwolsan incident to smuggle missiles and missile manufacturing equipment to Libya reinforces the view of North Korea as the world's most dangerous source of weapons proliferation. Earlier this year, North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il ousted U.N. inspectors and abandoned the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. North Korea has breached global agreements and has asserted the right to build nuclear arms and global trade for weapons of mass destruction. Robert Alvarez, senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies and former senior policy advisor for the Secretary of Energy discusses his former visit to North Korean nuclear facilities and Post staff writer Joby Warrick's article, "On North Korean Freighter, a Hidden Missile Factory." Between 1993 and 1999, Alvarez served as a Senior Policy Advisor to the Secretary and Deputy Assistant Secretary for National Security and the Environment. In 1994 and 1995 while at the Department of Energy, he led teams in North Korea to establish control of nuclear weapons materials. He coordinated nuclear material strategic planning for the department and established the department’s first asset management program. The transcript follows. Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Robert Alvarez: Dear Readers:
For purposes of introduction, I led U.S. teams into North Korea to secure spent reactor fuel at the Yongbyon nuclear site in 1994 and 1995. As such I was able to inspect their nuclear facilities and interact with North Korean nuclear and military experts. It's important to know that the U.S. never signed the 1953 Armistice Agreement and remains technically at the state-of-war with North Korea. I've written an article about my experiences in the July/August issue of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, which you may find of interest (www. thebulletin.org).
Best Regards,
Robert Alvarez
________________________________________________
College Park, Md.: Regardless of the "who started it" argument, North Korea seems much more rational than so-called experts give credit.
North Korea is a target, and has been one for many years. The current ruling party in DC has embarked on a new nuclear weapons race designed to produce what they call 'usable' nuclear weapons (low yield devices, and those capable of burrowing underground before detonation). I think North Korea would be insane NOT to produce a deterrent force of their own given their status as Axis of Evil member.
What assurances can be given to North Korea for security that could de-escalate the insecurity in the region?
Robert Alvarez: Because the U.S. and South Korea remain technically at the state of War with North Korea, the first step to defuse this situation would be to establish a mutual agreement that all parties will refrain from hostile acts as a starting point for negotiations. In the final analysis, we need to work towards a comprehensive peace agreement that will formaly conclude the Korean War that ensures a nuclear free Korean peninusula.
________________________________________________
Washington, D.C.: Do you think that the situation with North Korea was created, or worsened, by Bush calling them part of the "axis of evil?" Are they reacting to this apparent threat, or was the current crisis already in the pipeline at that time?
Robert Alvarez: The Bush Administration made a series of miscalculations which led to this problem. The most serious was to heatup the state-of-war that still exists between the U.S. and North Korea during the first 20 months of the Bush Administrtion before the US had its first meeting in October of last with with North Korea. The Bush Administration assumed that by holding the 1994 Agreed Framewwok hostage in a "all or nothing confrontation" ast October in Pyongyang, that the DPRK would "behave." Insetad, it set off an unexpected and growing confrontation.
________________________________________________
Reston, Va.: During your trips to N. Korea, did you find them to be cooperative with your teams, or did they play games like Iraq did with the WMD inspectors?
Robert Alvarez: During our visits the North Koreans were fully cooperative and gave us unprecedented access to the reactor and spent fuel storage areas.
________________________________________________
San Francisco, Calif.:
Shortly before negotiations were due to begin, a senior US diplomat from the State Department made public remarks that insulted North Korea and its leadership. What could he have been thinking? Was he trying to sabotage these negotiations before they even began? Is the Bush Administration's combination of hostility, paralysis and wishful thinking the best way to stop North Korea from building and selling nuclear weapons? What approach would you suggest for ending the nuclear danger from North Korea?
Robert Alvarez: By virtue of the mixed messages coming from the Bush Administration, there apears to be a lack of consensus about what to do. I do not know if Mr. Bolton was trying to sabatoge the neogiations, but his conduct clearly had the effect of adding poison to the environment. In the fina anaysis, I think that the United States needs to work towards a comprehensive peace agreement on the Korean Peninsula that would involve Japan and China. In my opinion, the underying basis for this problem is the inability of the U.S., S. Korea and N. Korea formally conclude the 1950-53 Korean War.
________________________________________________
Fairfax, Va.: What do you think of the Post's investigation on North Korea smuggling cargos of missiles?
washingtonpost.com:
Post series: The Gray Zone
N. Korea Shops Stealthily for Nuclear Arms Gear (Post, Aug. 15)
Robert Alvarez: Joby Warrick's piece is an excellent exposition of the steps that North Kore is taking to export missiles and acquire nucear weapons capabilities.
________________________________________________
Gullsgate, Minn.: Robert Alvarez: Who would you suggest--who would be the most diplomatic person or persons to negotiate such a peace agreement? Who within this administration has that capability or credibility?
Robert Alvarez: It appears to me that Colin Powel and Richard Armitage are the best choices to lead this effort.
________________________________________________
Washington, D.C.: How do you explain Kim Jong Il's blatant belligerence toward his neighbors and the U.S.? Why is Pyongyang choosing to develop nuclear weapons, long range missiles and sell weapons around the globe when millions of North Koreas are suffering from starvation and don't enjoy basic economic and human rights?
Robert Alvarez: North Korea's belligerence towards the US stems in large part from the fact that the U.S., South Korea and North Korea technically remain at a state-of-War. The U.S. and South Korea never signed the 1953 Armistice Agreement. Having said this, I also beieve that North Korea's belligerence also is a powerful way by the ruling Communist regime to maintain control internally, by keeping it's people focused on external threats.
________________________________________________
Bethesda, Md.: Were there any indications during your visits that NK intended to use their nuclear facilities to produce weapons rather than electricity? I'm wondering if they meant to produce a nuclear weapon all along, or if they just made that decision recently.
Robert Alvarez: There was no doubt that the North Koreans were pursuing a nuclear weapons capability. They picked technologies that would alow them to generate electricity, but as a secondary purpose for plutonium production.
________________________________________________
Potomac, Md.: With our military forces spread so thin, would the North Koreans believe we would be able to back up our talk with force if necessary? Do we have the resources to carry out action in North Korea if need be?
Robert Alvarez: The United States risks a second very bloody war on the Korean peninsula in our lifetime, if this situation gets totally out of control. The Bush Administration clearly understands this risk, particularly as the 2004 election season nears.
________________________________________________
Vienna, Va. : What was the mindset of the North Koreans when you were inspecting the facilities?
Robert Alvarez: The North Korean nuclear experts were ordered by their government to cooperate. We were there to put an end to their work. But, their deference to authority was greater than than their resentment.
________________________________________________
Springfield, Va.: You say that "-during our visits in 1994 and 1995, the North Koreans were fully cooperative and gave us unprecedented access to the reactor and spent fuel storage". I'm trying to sort this out -- isn't it now clear, in retrospect, that even at that very early stage, North Korea had embarked on a secret breach of the 1994 agreement? If that is true, then your very "vanilla" endorsement of the "cooperation" you and your colleagues were shown is somewhat missing the point.
The question that no one seems to want to wrestle with are: why is there such enthusiasm across the entire political spectrum to do another deal with N. Korea, when no one doubts that they are completely untrustworthy, and when, in the final analysis, it will certainly boil down to a deal that papers over the sorry spectacle of bowing to blackmail?
Robert Alvarez: We are reaching a point in terms of the Korean peninsula of risking a second bloody ground war in our lifetime. It's not just a matter of "blackmail." It's more a matter of the selective way we try to enforce our non-proliferation objectives. Keep in mind that we have maintained a blind-eye to Pakistan buiding a nuclear arsenal, despite the fact that this nation continues to harbor the terrosists
________________________________________________
Oakton, Va.: I believe that at this point the real threat to Kim's regime may be Peking even more than Washington or Seoul. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the Chinese have become seriously alarmed by the possibility of a major and perhaps even nuclear war right on their bordeer. They may try and take out Kim's regime before it is too late.....and with the largest land army in the world, they are in a position to do so.
Robert Alvarez: Niether China nor South Korea want to have a bloody war.
________________________________________________
Washington, D.C.: But North Korea did not cooperate in 1994 or after that! They continued to pursue nuclear weapons. How can the Kim Jong Il regime be trusted?
Robert Alvarez: North Korea did stick to its agreement to freeze its plutonium production proram, which lasted for over eight years. The freeze was verified by full-time IAEA inspectors onsite aided with remote sensing technlogies. North Korea began to seek highly enriched uranium capabilities in the late 1990's, which clearly violated the spirit of the agreement,as enriched uranium was not directly referenced.
This problem could have been adressed by invoking Article IV of the Agreed Framwework, which would have required full-scope safeguards.
________________________________________________
College Station, Tex.: What are the prospects for a negotiated settlement now that the Chinese and Russians will be involved (along with the US, Japan, ROK, and North Korea)?
Robert Alvarez: Your guess is a good as mine.
________________________________________________
Alexandria, Va.: "The United States risks a second very bloody war on the Korean peninsula in our lifetime"
So, are you saying that if the North decides to cross the DMZ it is our fault? Isn't that kind of like saying that because we cut off oil to Japan in 1941, the attack on Pearl Harbor was our fault?
Robert Alvarez: No, unike Pearl Harbor, what I'm saying is that we remain technically at a state-of war with North Korea. The U.S. never signed the 1953 Armistice agreement.
________________________________________________
Washington, D.C.: Aside from the immense political ramifications, would a military strike against their nuclear facilities be effective? Or are they too well defended, too far underground, etc.?
Robert Alvarez: It boils down to huge gamble by the United States, that may result in as many as 1 milion casualities, if it decides to pursue military strikes at Yongbyon or along the DMZ.
________________________________________________
Annapolis, Md.: Was it N. Korea that suddenly pulled out of the ABM Treaty a while back?
Robert Alvarez: North Korea was never a signotor to the ABM Treaty. The Nrth Koreans have announded its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proiferation Treaty.
________________________________________________
Aberdeen, Scotland: How strong do you think the link remains between Iran and Korea. Is Korea still assisting Iran with the nuclear weapons program?
Robert Alvarez: I dont know how strong the link is betwen N. Korea and Iran. However, I assume that N. Korea would be more helpful with respect to missile technology than nuclear weapons. The Iranians, by virtue of their wealth and extensive access to western nuclear technologies for many years really doesn't need North Korea's help.
________________________________________________
Arlington, Va.: Do you think that this and the country's former breach in relations are recent enough proof to go to war with N. Korea? If so, what would be at stake?
Robert Alvarez: After Wowrd War II the United States has found itself in two very bloody ground wars in Asia, Korea and Vietnam. In each case, US. Presidents toppled because of growing opposition to sending our people into carnage.
There are U.S. military scenarios that were made public over the years regarding the consequences of war in Korea. One, scenario would result in the North Koreans firing some 400,000 artillery rounds in less tha an hour into Soeul. Another postulated abut 1 million casualities and $one trilion in damages. Then there's the use of nuclear weapons, which would be even more horrific.
________________________________________________
Silver Spring, Md.: The caller from Oakton brought up a good point....and I don't think you really addressed it. The Chinese must really be losing paitience with this regime in Pyongyang and its threats. While I agree with you that the Chinese may not necessarily WANT a war at this time, the possibility seems there that a quick and massive thrust by the huge Chinese army may be the only realistic way of putting an end to this regime before it is too late....and a nuclear war comes.
Robert Alvarez: China is a large country with a diverse population. There is a very large number of Koreans living in Manchuria, who may greater affinity with their fellow Koreans than with the Chinese, particuarly if China wages war against North Korea. Keep in mind a major portion of the "huge" chinese army that intervened in the Korean war were ethinic Koreans from Manchuria. China risks a major destabization of its own nation, if it wages war with North Korea.
________________________________________________
Vienna, Va.: The 1953 Armistace which formally ended the fighting was brought about by Eisenhower's tacit threat to use nuclear weapons if the North did NOT seriously negotiate. His public position was that if the North did not bargain in good faith, we would "remove all restraints in our use of weapons".....a somewhat veiled use of the N-word. This still remains the only reason, at least on paper, why the Northern forces have not moved south for 50 years. The fact is, that no matter HOW much the North tries to brag about its nuclear capability or willingness to risk war again, the truth is that, if necessary, we can literally destroy that country in a simple matter of minutes. So could Peking.
Robert Alvarez: The United States did more than make a tacit threat. Following the 1953 Armistice, the U.S. deployed as many as 950 tactical nuclear weapons aimed at the North. These weapons were removed in 1991.
________________________________________________
College Station, Tex.: Can you provide insights as to how the IAEA might be involved in North Korean inspections? What are the links between the IAEA and the US government?
Robert Alvarez: The IAEA would be involved if the North Koreans agreed not to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
________________________________________________
Seattle, Wash.: So do you think it's possible that the U.S. could enlist China to help us with negotiations?
Robert Alvarez: It appears that China is playing an important role in brining the parties together.
________________________________________________
Harrisburg, Pa.: Here is my theory: The North Korean government is not as crazy as they pretend to be. They realize that every time they act crazy and shake their nuclear rattles, outside countries will pay them money to quiet down. They take the money, quiet down for awhile, and then repeat the process. How good or bad do you think my theory is?
Robert Alvarez: The North Koreans know they face enormous challenges, after the collapase of the Soviet Union. Their leadership is undergoing some sort of transition involving differences between older "hardliners" who are trying to keep as much of the status quo, and those who recognize that the North Korean regime can ony survive if it adapts to a market economy, as has China. Your theory doesn't take this dynamic into account.
________________________________________________
Seattle, Wash.: So what's to stop North Korea from developing and selling whatever they wish, really? They have plenty to gain and we (U.S., South Korea, China even) have so much more to lose.
Robert Alvarez: The North Korean economy is runnng on about $2 billion per year. They have been enduring massive starvation for nearly a decade. These are very major limiting factors on what they can do.
________________________________________________
College Station, Tex.: What is the engineering base for North Korea's nuclear development programs? Where are they training their engineers and scientists?
Robert Alvarez: The North Korean plutonium production program is based on early 1950's reactor technoogy deveped by the British (gas cooled, graphite moderated) Their chemical separations process came out of the open literature of the 1950s from U.S. technolgies.
They are trying to acquire uranium enrichment gas centrifuges, probably modeled after the Pakistani program, which was modeled after the European programs.
North Korean nuclear experts were trained in Russia at the Dubna laboratory.
________________________________________________
Boston, Mass.: You suggest that a meaningful step towards resolution of this conflict would be a nonaggression pact or ultimately a peace treaty between the US/allies and North Korea, as you assert NK's belligerence towards the US stemming from the states still being at war. At the same time you say the North Korean government uses this conflict to keep their citizens focused on external threats, the implication being their government may ultimately face threats from internal forces. How does one reconcile the belief that a nonaggression pact must be negotiated in good faith, when at the very least the NK government uses the threat of US aggression as a means to ensure its' own survival? Why would North Korean be willing to go to such lengths (bringing their country to the brink of catastrophic war), simply to make such an agreement?
Robert Alvarez: This process has to be done on a step-by-step basis. The first step is to get things back on track in terms of formally suspending current, growing hostilities, to allow for meaningful negotiations. The issues of freezing nuclear technologies and missile sales should be included in any initial quid pro quo.
________________________________________________
College Station, Tex.: Any insights on the impact of these proliferation talks on the continuation of a north-south detente. Possibilities for a broader settlement you speak of enhancing the conditions for reunification?
Robert Alvarez: The 1994 Agreed Framewrok betwen the U.S. and North Korea began the process of reproachment between the North and Suth and with Japan as well. It is positive to see that Nrth Korea is willing to incude these nations in the upcoming talks.
________________________________________________
Alexandria, Va.: Yesterday a Clinton arms-control advisor stated "Hateful tho Saddam is/was, before 1990 he had brought stability and reasonable prosperity to his country. He had done a fair job of developing the oil resources as well." Today, you're implying that North Korean aggression is the fault of the US. What were you people doing during the '90s when you were supposed to be looking out for US interests?
Robert Alvarez: What I am saying is that the Bush Administration miscalculated North Korea's response to its policies, which led to this unraveling problem.
________________________________________________
washingtonpost.com: Mr. Alvarez, do you think North Korea would be open to inspections now and if not, how is the situation different from the time that you visited the country's nuclear facilities?
Robert Alvarez: I think that before we get to the stage of resuming nuclear inspections, we have to establish a situation where North Koreas, and the U.S. will agree to refrain from economic and military hostilities.
________________________________________________
College Station, Tex.:
Howdy,
Any indications of how the North Koreans intend to weaponize their nuclear capabilities? Missiles, artillery, bombs?
Thanks, Joe
Robert Alvarez: To the best of my knowledge, the North Koreans are seeking to weaponize their nuclear capabilities. But, we don't have any "smoking gun" evidence that they have done so.
________________________________________________
Bethesda, Md.: North Korea looks like the best bet for 'Apocalypse Really Soon'-- I sure wish there was -some- reason for thinking that the situation there will work itself out quietly, but I can't think of one offhand. Can you?
Robert Alvarez: This situation can be put back on track if the U.S. and North Korea formally agree to refrain from military and econmic hostiities, while developing an areement.
________________________________________________
College Park, Md.: It is clear that the only two things that are propping up the No. Korean government and "economy" are the Chinese Government and the clandestine sales of weapons. It seems that the Chinese are at their wits end with the North Koreans, seeing them as intransigent cretins.
I was/am against the war with Iraq, but it seems to that the US picked the wrong fight. Iraq was an easy target, though. What does the US do now?
Robert Alvarez: There is nothing to be gained from a bloody war with North Korea. If we were to apply the standard of military strikes against nations acquiring nuclear weapons that pose a threat to the U.S., why aren't we going to war with Pakistan, which continues to harbor anti-US terrorists?
________________________________________________
Vienna, Va.:
This would have been unthinkable just a few years ago, but it looks like the Chinese have become quite embarassed by Kim Jong-Il's actions and are rapidly losing paitience with his regime. The Chinese have much to gain from free trade with the U.S., and I think this is realized in Peking, maybe even to the point that the Chinese themselves would either try to end the North Korean regime by military action or would join in a Joint U.S.-South Korean attack. The absolute last thing the Chinese want to see is a unrestrained nuclear war right on their northeastern border.....and the time to prevent is may be NOW, before the North Koreans become a significant nuclear power.
China, I might add, is a significant nuclear power herself.....a factor that I'm sure is realized in Pyongyang. A threat and ultimatum from their so-called Communist "Big Brother" might just restrain Pyongyang like nothing else.
Robert Alvarez: The Chinese have a very large ethnic Korean population in Manchuria along the N. Korean border, which may chose to fight with their follow koreans against the Chinese. The situation is not as simple as it may seem.
________________________________________________
Robert Alvarez: Thank you very much for your questions and comments. I am signing off now.
Best Regards,
Robert Alvarez
________________________________________________
Automatically Update Page
| Get New Responses | Submit Question
 |