PDA

View Full Version : N. Korea ousts inspectors..


watermock
04-14-2009, 06:16 PM
Nuke panel: N. Korea ousts inspectors

Enlarge By Hans Punz, AP

The International Atomic Energy Agency, based in Vienna, reports that North Korea has expelled its nuclear inspectors and has plans to reactivate is nuclear reactors.



CHRONOLOGY OF N. KOREA'S NUCLEAR PROGRAMS

1994: Under agreement with United States, North Korea pledges to freeze and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons program in exchange for help building two safer power-producing nuclear reactors.

Aug. 31, 1998: Fires suspected missile over Japan and into the Pacific Ocean, calling it a satellite.

Sept. 13, 1999: Pledges to freeze long-range missile tests.

Sept. 17, 1999: President Bill Clinton agrees to first major easing of economic sanctions against North Korea since Korean War's end in 1953.

June 2001: North Korea warns it will reconsider missile test moratorium if Washington doesn't resume contacts aimed at normalizing relations.

July 2001: State Department reports North Korea is developing long-range missile.

December 2001: President Bush warns Iraq and North Korea will be "held accountable" if they develop weapons of mass destruction.

Jan. 29, 2002: Bush labels North Korea, Iran and Iraq an "axis of evil."

September 2002: North Korea pledges in summit talks with Japan to extend its moratorium on missile tests beyond 2003.

Jan. 10, 2003: North Korea announces withdrawal from Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

March 10, 2003: North Korea fires a land-to-ship missile off east coast into waters between the Korean peninsula and Japan.

August 2003: North Korea joins first round of six-nation nuclear talks in Beijing with China, United States, Japan, Russia and South Korea.

July 5, 2006: North Korea launches seven missiles into waters between the Korean peninsula and Japan, including a long-range Taepodong-2.

July 15, 2006: U.N. adopts Resolution 1695 demanding North Korea halt missile program.

Oct. 9, 2006: North Korea conducts underground test blast after citing "extreme threat of a nuclear war" from United States.

Oct. 15, 2006: U.N. adopts Resolution 1718 condemning test, imposing sanctions and banning North Korea from all activities related to its nuclear weapons program.

Feb. 13, 2007: North Korea agrees to disable its main nuclear facilities in return for energy aid, other benefits.

July 14, 2007: North Korea shuts down main Yongbyon reactor, later starts disabling it.

June 27, 2008: North Korea destroys cooling tower at Yongbyon.

Sept. 19, 2008: North Korea says it is restoring a key atomic reactor.

Oct. 11, 2008: United States removes North Korea from a list of states that sponsor terrorism.

Feb. 15, 2009: North Korea claims it has the right to "space development."

Feb. 23: South Korea says North Korea has a new type of medium-range ballistic missile capable of reaching Australia and Guam.

April 5: North Korea launches long-range rocket from the country's northeast coast. U.N. Security Council holds emergency meeting.

April 13: U.N. Security Council condemns launch and says it will tighten sanctions against North Korea.

April 14: North Korea announces withdrawal from disarmament talks and says it will restore partly disabled nuclear facilities.

Sources: South Korean government, AP.


VIENNA (AP) — The International Atomic Energy Agency says North Korea is expelling its inspectors. The North has also told the U.N. nuclear watchdog that it is reactivating all of its nuclear facilities.
An IAEA statement Tuesday said North Korea has told inspectors to remove seals and cameras from the Yongbyon nuclear site and leave the country as quickly as possible.

The moves reflect North Korea's anger at U.N. Security Council criticism of the country's latest missile launch.

The White House, meantime, is urging North Korea to "cease its provocative threats" and respect the will of the rest of the world by honoring its international commitments, presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs said Tuesday.

The spokesman said North Korea's vow to restart its nuclear reactor and boycott international disarmament talks is a serious step in the wrong direction.

Gibbs says the international community will not accept North Korea unless it abandons what the White House says is its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

The developments emerged on Tuesday, after North Korea vowed to restart its nuclear reactor and to boycott international disarmament talks for good in retaliation for the U.N. Security Council's condemnation.

Russia, voicing regret over the move, urged Pyongyang to return to the negotiating table. The Foreign Ministry called the U.N. statement "legitimate and well-balanced," and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said all sides must stick to the current disarmament process. China, the North's main ally, appealed for calm.

North Korea's denunciation of the council's "hostile" move came just hours after all 15 members, including Beijing and Moscow, unanimously agreed to condemn the April 5 launch as a violation of U.N. resolutions and to tighten sanctions against the regime.

The U.N. statement, issued eight days after the launch, was weaker than the resolution Japan and the United States had pursued but still drew an angry response from Pyongyang, which called it "unjust" and a violation of international law.

North Korea claims it sent a communications satellite into space as part of a peaceful bid to develop its space program.

The United States and others call the launch an illicit test of the technology used to fire an intercontinental ballistic missile, even one eventually destined for the United States.

A Security Council resolution passed in 2006, days after North Korea carried out an underground nuclear test, prohibits Pyongyang from engaging in any ballistic missile-related activity — including launching rockets that use the same delivery technology as missiles mounted with warheads, Washington and other nations say.

The council on Monday demanded an end to the rocket launches and said it will expand sanctions against the communist nation. The council also called for quick resumption of disarmament talks.

President Obama called the statement a "clear and united message" that North Korea's action was unlawful and would result in real consequences, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

North Korea, following through on earlier threats to withdraw from international disarmament talks if the council so much as criticized the launch, announced Tuesday it would boycott the negotiations hosted by China.

"The six-party talks have lost the meaning of their existence, never to recover," the North's Foreign Ministry said in a statement, declaring it would never participate in the talks again and is no longer bound to previous agreements.

Since 2003, envoys from six nations — the two Koreas, the United States, China, Russia and Japan — have been meeting in Beijing for sporadic negotiations on getting Pyongyang to give up its nuclear program in exchange for aid and other concessions.

Under a 2007 six-party deal, North Korea agreed to disable its main nuclear complex in Yongbyon, north of Pyongyang — a key step toward dismantlement — in return for 1 million tons of fuel oil and other concessions. Disablement began later that year.

In June 2008, North Korea famously blew up the cooling tower at Yongbyon in a dramatic show of its commitment to denuclearization.

But disablement came to halt a month later as Pyongyang wrangled with Washington over how to verify its 18,000-page account of past atomic activities. The latest round of talks, in December, failed to push the process forward.

On Tuesday, the North said it would restart nuclear facilities, an apparent reference to its plutonium-producing reactor at Yongbyon. North Korea already is believed to have enough plutonium to produce at least about half a dozen atomic bombs.

One official at the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency said agency inspectors remained onsite at Yongbyon. He asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue.

Asked whether there had been any indication that the North was making good on its threats, he said only that the situation "remained status quo." That suggests IAEA cameras and seals remained in place at the facility and that the inspectors continued their monitoring activities.

The Russian foreign minister said all sides must continue denuclearization through the six-party talks.

"Any new international forum to discuss the situation on the Korean Peninsula should not be created," Lavrov told a Moscow news conference. "The negotiators of this forum have reached important agreements that impose obligations on all the parties, not only North Korea."

Analyst Koh Yu-hwan, a North Korea expert at Seoul's Dongguk University, called Pyongyang's move yet another tactic in the regime's bid to get Washington to the negotiating table outside the six-party framework.

"The U.N. statement humiliated North Korea internationally, and that's why North Korea angrily reacted to it," said Atsuhito Isozaki, assistant professor of North Korean politics at Keio University in Japan. "Since China and Russia supported the statement, North Korea feels betrayed."

However, Prof. Yoo Ho-yeol of Korea University in Seoul said Pyongyang will find it difficult to boycott the talks entirely, since that would only serve to further isolate the impoverished country, one of the world's poorest.

China appealed for calm.

"We hope the relevant parties will proceed from the overall interest, exercise calmness and restraint," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu told a press conference in Beijing on Tuesday.

South Korea, expressing "deep regret," also decided Tuesday to fully join the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative, a program launched in 2003 to halt the spread of weapons of mass destruction, the presidential office said.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Rohirrim
04-14-2009, 06:35 PM
When it comes to the "family of nations" N. Korea is the schizo cousin living in the attic.

kappys
04-14-2009, 10:35 PM
You'd think that old bastard would get sick and die eventually but somehow assholes live forever.

barryr
04-15-2009, 06:38 AM
Oh, but the Clintons and Albright had him "under control." Right.

Dukes
04-15-2009, 07:01 AM
Oh, but the Clintons and Albright had him "under control." Right.

Guess it depends on your interpretation of "under control"

ElwayMD
04-15-2009, 07:12 AM
If by under control you mean shipped buckets of money his way to shut him up then yes, they had him "under control"

Hotrod
04-15-2009, 08:33 AM
Good job Barry ****

Ok on a serious note there is ZERO we can do at this point. That sucks but a military option would be insane and economic sanctions are a joke.

Personally I put this one in Clintons lap.

cutthemdown
04-15-2009, 01:40 PM
No President can control this freak. It's not Clintons fault, Bush's fault, and it's not Obama's fault.

All we can do is be prepared to strike N Korea in the event they attack S Korea or Japan.

You can negotiate all you want but it will never stick. He is crazy and is going to do what he wants when he wants to regardless of any deal he has made.

We can argue all day if he built nukes under clinton, or if he built them under Bush, the fact is he built them and neither President had the balls it would take to stop him. Giving the go ahead to strike N Korea would be a decision that could only be made by a crazy President IMO. No sane President would ever want to start something like that.

I don't put it on anyones lap. It's stupid to blame Presidents for things other countries do. We can influence, and put sanctions, even bomb and attack, but you can't make a crazy dictator decide to be sane.

I support anything Obama wants to try because IMO they will all end the same.

barryr
04-15-2009, 01:59 PM
Bush bashers have stated about this issue in the past that Clinton and Albright had everything in control in regards to North Korea until the bumbler Bush messed it all up. Yes, there are those that really believe this idiocy. Just as some really believe the UN had Iraq and Hussein under control too. I know, some live in a wonderland, but hey, they're out there.

Sanctions are great, but like with these 2 examples, if other countries help them violate them, then the reality is nothing is being done. Words mean nothing to these people.

spdirty
04-15-2009, 05:54 PM
I just hope like hell we never ever go to war with N Korea.

watermock
04-15-2009, 06:06 PM
Why?

If China comes, we default on our debt. It wouild be the best thing to happen. Maybe we would start making things in our own country for once in 40 years.

We could have new nuclear power up in 3 years. WTF do we need China for?

BroncoBuff
04-16-2009, 12:34 AM
Good job Barry ****

Ok on a serious note there is ZERO we can do at this point. That sucks but a military option would be insane and economic sanctions are a joke.

Personally I put this one in Clintons lap.

Clinton's lap? That was a long, long time ago ... and in the interim we had a president who called North Korea the "Axis of Evil," and foolishly refused to talk to our "enemies." Get real.

That said, this is a very, very serious problem. This could easily escalate into the biggest thing since 9/11. A precision strike to knock out their nuclear program seems prudent at this point ... but that's up to the Chinese, really. They're so close to this that they kinda have veto power.

BroncoBuff
04-16-2009, 12:37 AM
I just hope like hell we never ever go to war with N Korea.

They have the second largest standing army in the world, I believe. But any "war" would probably be just a precision strike to knock out their nuclear capability. Japan would be for it ... surprisingly, South Korea would not. Like I said, it's kinda all up to the Chinese. But from the US's viewpoint, ousting the IAEC is a quasi-act of war anyway, and should probably be met with a strike, seeing that they do have some nuclear capability.

Hotrod
04-16-2009, 07:33 AM
They have the second largest standing army in the world, I believe. But any "war" would probably be just a precision strike to knock out their nuclear capability. Japan would be for it ... surprisingly, South Korea would not. Like I said, it's kinda all up to the Chinese. But from the US's viewpoint, ousting the IAEC is a quasi-act of war anyway, and should probably be met with a strike, seeing that they do have some nuclear capability.

Ugh love alot of your football takes but wow man.

****ing a right S Korea is against it. Any strike against N Korea and S Korea no longer exists. You really need to think this thru just a little

Clintons lap, your damn straight this is on his hands. **** tard wanted to "talk and pay off" little nut case. So basically he gave him cash while little nut case worked on the the bomb.

Dont even get me started on Clinton giving China prefered trade status. Now we are just as tied to Asia as we are the middle east. We need oil and Chinas **** since we dont do a damn thing for ourselves anymore.

Wake up people Clinton while he did alot of good things did make some MAJOR **** ups.