DPRK Rejects US Disinformation

Workers' Daily Internet Edition : Article Index :

DPRK Rejects US Disinformation

US Ties Military Aid to Troops’ Immunity
US Troops Arrive in Jordan
Israel is Largest "Developing Country" Arms Buyer

The United States administration is asserting that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) must accept the IAEA's nuclear inspection of sites in the DPRK. The ultimatum is that if the DPRK does not comply, the US will not provide assistance in light-water reactor (LWR) construction. In so doing, the US administration is diverting from the most pressing issue at present, which is that the DPRK-US agreed framework (AF) must be abided by, which the US is trying to avoid.

If there is an issue of nuclear inspection, it can only be settled when the agreed framework is implemented and the construction of the LWRs makes headway. There can be no argument with this, because it is quite clearly stipulated in the AF and an unofficial memorandum of understanding, a special document, as a spokesman of the DPRK Foreign Ministry pointed out in a statement issued yesterday, August 13, as regards the US administration's floating of disinformation.

The process of ground concrete tamping, or pouring concrete into the foundations, to begin the construction of an LWR to be provided by the US under the AF had been inaugurated with a ceremony at the Kumho area construction site on August 7. The executive director of the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation (KEDO), Charles Kartman, was present and other officials from both sides. However, it is reported that US envoy Jack Pritchard said in a speech that Pyongyang should allow the nuclear inspections in order for the assistance to continue.

The statement of the DPRK Foreign Ministry spokesman pointed out that the agreed framework had specified that the US should complete the LWR construction by 2003. Since the construction had only just started, it was hard to say whether it would be completed even by 2008. By delaying the construction of the LWRs the US has caused a huge loss of electricity to the DPRK and created grave difficulties in its economy as a whole. This has seriously threatened its right to existence. The DPRK itself has fulfilled all its commitments under the AF.

"The AF stands at the crossroads of abrogation or preservation due to the much delay in the provision of the LWRs, its core issue," the Foreign Ministry spokesman said. "The blame for such developments rests entirely with the US side, which seriously delayed the LWR construction. The reality is pushing us to the phase where we should make a final decision to go our own way."

The spokesperson continued: "What is most urgent for preserving the AF is for the US side to compensate for the loss of electricity caused by the delayed provision of the LWRs and this is the issue the US should discuss with the DPRK before anything else whether it likes it or not. As the DPRK-US relations are belligerent ones, not ones based on confidence, the commitments of the two sides under the AF should be implemented on the principle of simultaneous action. Hence, we will move if the US does."

The DPRK has always denied that it was ever developing nuclear weapons or had any intention to do so. However, to satisfy the US, the two sides came to a deal in 1994 whereby the DPRK would abandon its nuclear power programme provided the US constructed the LWRs, and for that matter provided oil for oil-fired power stations, which the US has not fulfilled. While continuing to accuse the DPRK of harbouring designs to become a nuclear power, the US itself is threatening the Korean peninsula with nuclear weapons with bases on the soil of south Korea.

The US must drop its hostile policy towards the DPRK and should compensate it for the loss of electricity caused by the delay in constructing the LWRs. To demand early nuclear inspection is a further ploy by the US not only to renege on its responsibilities but to spread disinformation that the DPRK is not to be trusted and the guilty party, and mislead public opinion that the DPRK is a "sponsor of terrorism". However, it is not difficult for public opinion to correlate that as the US has been threatening peoples throughout the world in its own hegemonic interests, the same is true in this case also.

The Bush administration, making use of a provision of the new "antiterrorism" law, warned foreign diplomats this week that their nations could lose all American military assistance if they became members of the International Criminal Court without pledging to protect Americans serving in their countries from its reach, according to a New York Times article of August 10.

The threat to withdraw military aid – including education, training and help financing the purchase of equipment and weaponry – could be felt by almost every nation that has relations with the United States, though the law exempts many of its closest allies, says the article. The law gives the president authority to waive the provision and decide to continue military aid if he determines it is in the national interest.

Countries that are members of NATO and other major allies – including Israel, Egypt, Australia, Japan and south Korea – are exempted from the military assistance prohibition. The Pentagon said the measure could touch just about every other country on the globe.

President Bush signed this new law last week. The Bush administration opposes the ICC, which allows individuals to be charged with genocide and crimes against humanity in an international forum, on the ground that it could subject Americans to politically motivated prosecutions abroad.

The article states that the State Department invited foreign ambassadors in for briefings to lay out American opposition to the court and to warn them of the prohibition against military aid to countries that are a party to the treaty establishing the court.

"That is a fact under the law, it's right there in the law," said Philip Reeker, a State Department spokesman. "The president welcomes the law – I can't underscore how important this is to us to protect American service members."

Another provision in the law gives the president authority to free members of the armed services or other Americans who are in the court's custody by any "necessary and appropriate means," including use of the military.

"It is easier to list what countries do not receive American military assistance than those that do," said Lt. Comdr. Barbara Burfeind of the Navy, a Pentagon spokeswoman. "Virtually every country but Cuba, Iraq, Iran and the other countries on the terrorist list receive some military training or aid from us."

US troops arrived in Jordan on Monday to take part in joint military exercises. Despite the fact that plans to invade Iraq detail an attack across the Syrian Desert from Jordan, an official said that the exercises have no link with any eventual US attack on Iraq.

Around 4,000 US troops will hold various joint manoeuvres with Jordanian soldiers for three weeks, the official said on condition of anonymity.

"These manoeuvres were decided more than a year ago and are part of regular exercises between the armies of the two countries that have nothing to do with Iraq," the official said.

"Every single US soldier taking part in the manoeuvres will leave Jordan at the end of the exercises in the first week of September," the official added.

Jordanian officials have repeatedly denied Western and Arab press reports on the presence in the kingdom of US troops in preparation for such an attack. They have also stressed that no exercises with the US army have been held near the Iraqi border.

According to a US Congressional Research Service study "Conventional Arms Transfer to Developing Nations 1994-2001", Israel is the largest arms buyer among what the report terms "developing" countries. The report is based on arms contracts between suppliers and the armies of the world and weapons deliveries.

The report states there was no immediate link between Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians and Israel’s increased purchase of arms, and its procurement was part of long-term procurement deals.

The report, cited in "The New York Times", states that the US was the leading country in arms transfers agreements to developing nations last year, signing almost $ 7 billion in contracts. The US was followed by Russia, with $ 5.7 billion and China, with $ 600 million.

The US was also the leader in overall arms transfer agreements to developed and developing countries, with $ 12.1 billion, followed by Russia - $ 5.8 billion, and France - $ 2.9 billion. Of the nations categorised as part of the developing world, Israel led in signing arms contracts last year, buying $ 2.5 billion in conventional arms, followed by China - $ 2.1 billion and Egypt - $ 2 billion.

The Congressional Research Service report does not detail the countries to which Israel has sold arms. However a report by the Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University revealed that in recent years, Israel has signed arms deals with Indonesia (a country that has no diplomatic relations with Israel), Cambodia (to upgrade MiG-21s), Nepal, Zambia, Sri Lanka, Uganda, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic and Singapore.