Japan Brief/FPCJ, No. 0772
October 5, 2007

Six-Party Agreement Stipulates Next-Stage Roadmap

On the evening of October 3, Chinese Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs Wu Dawei, the chair of the six-party talks on the question of North Korea’s nuclear program, announced an agreement stipulating the specific contents of the next (second) phase toward the denuclearization of North Korea. In the latest round of six-party talks, held in Beijing from September 27 to 30, the greatest focus had been on the establishment of a concrete roadmap for carrying out next-phase measures toward North Korea’s complete denuclearization. After the meeting, the chief delegates took the draft agreement back to their respective countries for approval. After two days of recess, they agreed on the announcement of the official document.

Agreement Leaves Ambiguous Points
The gist of the agreement is that (1) North Korea will complete the disablement of three nuclear facilities at Yongbyon by December 31 of this year; the United States will provide the initial funding and dispatch experts within two weeks; (2) North Korea will declare all of its nuclear programs by the end of the year; (3) North Korea has reaffirmed its commitment not to transfer nuclear materials or technology; (4) the United States will begin the process of removing its designation of North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism; the United States will fulfill this commitment in parallel with North Korea’s actions; (5) North Korea and Japan will make sincere efforts toward the normalization of their relations; and (6) the equivalent of one million tons of heavy fuel oil (including the 100,000 tons already delivered) will be provided to North Korea. With this accord, a roadmap has been presented for North Korea’s disabling its nuclear facilities and divulging all of its nuclear facilities by the end of the year.

With regard to North Korea’s divulging its nuclear programs, however, the agreement makes no mention of nuclear weapons, extracted plutonium, and enriched uranium, only going as far as the expression “a complete and correct declaration of all its nuclear programs.” In addition, the agreement does not give any specific dates for the lifting of North Korea’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism and application of the US Trading with the Enemy Act, which Pyongyang is demanding as compensation for its denuclearization.

On the evening of October 3, Chief Cabinet Secretary Nobutaka Machimura welcomed the agreement reached in the six-party talks, saying, “In the end, the talks produced a respectable result: North Korea will declare all of its nuclear programs by the end of the year.” That same evening, Minister for Foreign Affairs Masahiko Koumura commented, “It was a better outcome than we had expected while the meeting was still in progress. The important thing, however, is for North Korea to carry out its promises faithfully.” On Japan’s economic sanctions against North Korea, Foreign Minister Koumura stressed once again that the Japanese government intended to keep its current policy in place for the time being. He said, “There won’t be any moves to lift the sanctions immediately. We must watch how North Korea acts.”

Newspaper Commentaries Divided between “Step Forward” and “Many Problems”
Before and after the official announcement of the agreement, Japan’s main newspapers carried editorials expressing a variety of views on the issue. On October 1, before the agreement was announced, The Nikkei editorial, headlined “‘Pressure and dialogue’ still needed vis-à-vis North Korea,” stated, “Japan has urged the United States not to remove the designation [of North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism] unless there is progress on the abduction problem. Director General Kenichiro Sasae [of the Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs] explained that ‘I think there was a basic understanding that we will seriously discuss’ the abduction problem in the latest talks. Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda refers to the need for dialogue, but pressure must be applied to make North Korea really move. In that sense, the decision of the Japanese government on September 30 to settle on a policy of a six-month extension of Japan’s own economic sanctions against North Korea, including a complete ban on North Korean ships from entering Japanese ports and a ban on imports of all North Korean products, which was to expire in the middle of October, was appropriate. North Korea must respond to Chief Cabinet Secretary Machimura’s statement that ‘Without any progress on the abduction issue, we are not in an objective position to conclude that the sanctions can be lifted or relaxed’.”

Under the headline “Ambiguous agreement leaves the seeds of future conflict in place,” the Sankei Shimbun editorial (October 1) emphasized, “Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda’s stance is to place importance on dialogue with North Korea, but there can be no dialogue with the North without pressure. . . . A further extension of Japan’s own sanctions against Pyongyang, which will expire this month, is a given. We cannot take more time to solve the abduction issue. The sanctions need to be strengthened, not lifted.”

The Mainichi Shimbun editorial (October 2) entitled “Don’t compromise on nuclear disablement” noted, “The agreement on disablement and a complete declaration by the end of the year can be called progress.” But it pointed out, “In the end, all related facilities should be disabled. . . . The important thing is not to compromise on disablement that falls shy of completion. The same goes for the full report on all nuclear programs. If North Korea insists that it has no nuclear development programs using highly enriched uranium, it need to think of measures so that no suspicions remain. The seeds of future conflict must not be left in place.”

Under the headline “Pyongyang’s agreement: Measures should be implemented faithfully,” the Asahi Shimbun editorial (October 4) said that the facilities to be disabled “have already been shut down and sealed in accord with the six-way pact reached in February, but ensuring that they will not be activated again is nevertheless an important step toward Pyongyang’s complete abandonment of its nuclear programs.” It went on, “The latest six-party agreement meets the minimum necessary conditions for being effective at this stage. It at least prevents North Korea from obtaining more material for producing atomic bombs. The initial actions specified in the February agreement, including the shutdown of these facilities, have already been completed.” The Asahi noted, “The negotiators in the six-way talks have apparently opted to deal with urgent priorities first instead of trying to figure out a way to reach a complete solution in one fell swoop. What is important now is to make sure that the measures spelled out in the agreement will actually be implemented faithfully.” The Asahi also expressed concern about the issue of the removal of North Korea’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, which Pyongyang has been demanding of the United States. The Asahi said, “While the document gives no specific time frame for this process, North Korea is claiming that the United States has promised to take that step by the end of the year. This issue could develop into a new diplomatic dispute.” It added, “The issue of the terrorism list also affects Japan’s efforts to solve the long-standing diplomatic dispute over North Korea’s abductions of Japanese citizens. We hope the United States treads carefully in addressing this issue and consults closely with Japan.” The Asahi concluded, “Japan also needs to resume talks with North Korea to solve pending bilateral issues, especially the abduction row, to accelerate the progress toward normalizing bilateral relations.”

The Yomiuri Shimbun editorial (October 4), headlined “Many problems remain for Japan,” remarked, “For Japan, which calls for the complete denuclearization of North Korea, the agreement presents many problems and is the source of much dissatisfaction. . . . There is no clear guarantee that North Korea will implement this agreement. The agreement itself contains many ambiguities.” The editorial noted, “It is also extremely worrying that no mechanism has been spelled out for verifying the content of the declaration [of nuclear facilities]. If North Korea is allowed to exploit loopholes and get away with omissions in the declaration, we won’t be able to achieve the goal of complete denuclearization.” The Yomiuri continued, “Given that North Korea is not making any concrete moves toward solving the abduction issue, the only thing for Japan to do is to continue to oppose the lifting of its designation [as a state sponsor of terrorism].” Furthermore, the Yomiuri stated that until the final stage, when North Korea completely disposes of its nuclear weapons, plutonium, and so on, “Japan will experience no change in its security environment; it will continue to be directly exposed to North Korea’s nuclear and missile threats. The continuation of Japan’s own sanctions, such as the ban on imports from North Korea and on North Korean ships entering Japanese ports, is thus perfectly reasonable.”

(Copyright 2007 Foreign Press Center / Japan)