NAPSNet Special Reports
 
Wednesday, April 28, 2004
Navigation
Previous Report       Search Special Reports

Current Reports

April 28, 2004

The Korean Civil Society's Statement Regarding
"The North Korean Freedom Act of 2003" and "North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004"

By MINBYUN (Lawyers for a Democratic Society), SARANGBANG Group for Human Rights, Good Friends, Center for Peace and Disarmament of the PSPD (People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy), Catholic Human Rights Committee in Korea, The Human Rights Committee The National Council of Churches in Korea, Civil Network for A Peaceful Korea, Solidarity for Peace & Human Rights, Korean House for International Solidarity, DASAN Human Rights Center, Korea Reunification Alliance for 6.15 Joint Declaration Attainment and Peace in Korea.

Korean civil society is watching with grave concern the development of the North Korean Freedom Act of 2003, and the North Korean Human Rights Act of 2004, now pending in the U.S. Congress. If passed, both bills will have significant impact on future negotiations over human rights issues in North Korea. In reviewing the North Korean Freedom Act in particular, we have concluded that the proposed bill will negatively affect the fragile dialogue process under way to establish sustainable peace on the Korean peninsula while jeopardizing the chance to improve human rights conditions in North Korea.

To read the full report, please click: here.

March 25, 2004
North Korea on the Terrorism List
Memorandum from the Congressional Research Service

March 18, 2004
US Policy Toward North Korea with Respect to Ballistic Missiles
By Alvin Perkins, Strategy Research Project, US Army War College

March 6, 2004
Bilateral Research Collaboration on Integrated Information Technology
Joint project report of Kim Chaek University of Technology and Syracuse University

March 6, 2004
The Prospect of Economic Reform in North Korea
By Yukie Yoshikawa

March 4, 2004
North Korea: A Status Report on Nuclear Program, Humanitarian Issues, and Economic Reforms
by Keith Luse and Frank Jannuzi

March 3, 2004
Korea: Long-term Decline in the North Korea Premium
by Dominique Dwor-Frecaut

November 25, 2003

Excerpts on North Korea from the U.S. Democratic Candidates for President Debate in Iowa

The following is an excerpt of the portion on North Korea during the Democratic candidates' debate in Iowa sponsored by MSNBC and the Democratic National Committee, as transcribed by FDCH e-Media, Inc. This was originally published in the New York Times on November 24, 2003.

To read the full report, please click: here.

November 14, 2003

Senator Biden's Congressional Record comments on North Korea on the occasion of introducing Senate Resolution 256

The following is text from Senator Joseph Biden's Congressional Record comments on North Korea during the introduction of Senate Resolution 256 which observed the 50th anniversary of the mutual defense treaty between the United States and the Republic of Korea.

Below the comments and Congressional Record is the summary report and key findings of Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff members Keith Luse and Frank Jannuzi's trip to North Korea from August 21-September 2, 2003 to examine the prospects for a peaceful negotiated solution to the North Korean nuclear issue and to follow-up on their earlier set of visits to North Korea designed to push for greater North Korean transparency and accountability on food aid and humanitarian relief.

To read the full report, please click: here.

September 5, 2003

Hu Jintao writes to Kim Jong-il to open door to six-party talks

The six-nation talks on the North Korean nuclear crisis in Beijing in August were the hard-earned result of diplomatic efforts by Chinese President Hu Jintao, says an article under the pseudonym "Zong Hairen." Zong explained how Hu had finally persuaded North Korean leader Kim Jong-il to hold talks with the US, South Korea, Japan, Russia and China to resolve the nuclear issue. Zong said that Hu's shuttle diplomacy had given the new Chinese government a good international image, improved Sino-US relations, and won the trust of Kim Jong-il. Despite China's "dislike" of Kim Jong-il's government and the financial burden of granting more economic aid to North Korea, Zong said that it was a price worth paying in order to repel the infiltration of US influence in Northeast Asia. Zong predicted that the Korean nuclear issue would not trigger a war and would eventually be resolved at the negotiating table.

To read the full report, please click: here.

DPRK Puts Forward 'Package Of Solutions' To Nuclear Crisis

The Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) has reported North Korea put forward "a package of solutions" to the nuclear issue during the six-party talks held in Beijing. The package solutions include the United States signing a non- aggression treaty with the DPRK, the establishment of diplomatic relations with the DPRK, a guarantee of DPRK-Japan and inter-Korean economic cooperation, and the completion of light-water reactors, the report said. It also said North Korea in return will not manufacture nuclear weapons, it will allow inspections, realize the ultimate dismantlement of nuclear facilities and stop the export and experimentation of missiles.

To read the full report, please click: here.

June 5, 2003

Congressional Record of "Results of Trip to North Korea"
By Curt Weldon

The delegation was the largest congressional delegation to visit the DPRK and the first CODEL to visit the DPRK in five years. The visit occurred during a period of escalating tensions between the DPRK, the United States, and nations of the region resulting from the DPRK October, 2002, admission of its nuclear weapons-related uranium enrichment program. Subsequent DPRK withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT); confirmation of its possession of nuclear weapons; expelling of IAEA inspectors; declared intentions to reprocess its spent fuel; continued sales of missiles and technology to terrorist nations; and allegations of nation- sponsored drug trafficking all served to further raise tensions between the DPRK and the international community. The delegation visit was the culmination of over a year- long effort by Representative Weldon to gain entry into the DPRK for the purpose of engaging senior DPRK officials in informal discussions, free of the formality of traditional posturing and imposed pressures of negotiation objectives, to share mutual perspectives on the major political, military, and economic issues.

To read the full report, please click: here.

May 22, 2003

North Korea: Migrants, Asylum Seekers and Human Rights
By Ellsworth Culver

This memorandum by Ellsworth Culver, co-founder and Senior Vice President of Mercy Corps International, was originally prepared for the Task Force on U.S. Korea Policy sponsored by the Center for International Policy and Center for East Asian Studies, University of Chicago, Brookings Institution, Washington, January 9, 2003.

The 28-member panel included Admiral William J. Crowe, Jr., former Chairman of the Joint-Chiefs of Staff; two former U.S. ambassadors to South Korea, Donald P. Gregg and James T. Laney; Lee H. Hamilton, Vice-Chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States; Ambassador Robert L. Gallucci, who negotiated the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea; and Selig S. Harrison, Chairman of the Task Force, Director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy and a leading Korea expert; and the directors of research institutes specializing in Korea and East Asia at ten leading Universities.

The Task Force convened on three occasions between November 2002 and January 2003. It was co-sponsored by the Center for International Policy and the Center for East Asian Studies of the University of Chicago. Funding was provided by the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation and the Center for East Asian Studies.

For more information on the task force:
http://www.ciponline.org/asia/

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Nautilus Institute. Readers should note that Nautilus seeks a diversity of views and opinions on contentious topics in order to identify common ground.

To read the full transcript, please click: here.

May 6, 2003

Nuclear Confrontation with North Korea: Lessons of the 1994 Crisis for Today

The Special Report below is the full transcript of a roundtable discussion organized by the Center for Strategic and International Studies and Co-sponsored by Ilmin International Relations Institute, Korea University and Dong-A Ilbo

On March 20, 2003, a roundtable discussion by former American and South Korean government decision makers who had worked together on resolving the 1994 crisis was convened in hopes of illuminating the historical event, as well as drawing lessons for the future. The present crisis over North Korea's nuclear weapons program makes the events of 1994 and their lessons even more timely as the international community struggles to come to grip with this mounting problem.

The panelists were: Chung Chung-wook (Professor, Claremont McKenna and former Blue House National Security Advisor), Robert Gallucci (Dean at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University; former Ambassador-at-Large in the U.S. Department of State; chief negotiator of the Agreed Framework), Han Sung-joo (President, Korea University; former South Korean Foreign Minister), James Laney (Professor and President Emeritus of Emory University; Co-Chair of the Council on Foreign Relations Task Force on Korea; former U.S. Ambassador in Seoul), and Daniel Poneman (Principle at the Scowcroft Group; former Special Assistant to the President of the United States for Nonproliferation and Export Control Policy).

The panel was moderated by Joel Wit (Senior Fellow, Center for Strategic and International Studies)

To read the full transcript, please click: here.

May 5, 2003

The United States, North Korea, And the End of the Agreed Framework
by Jonathan D. Pollack

The Special Report below is by Dr. Jonathan D. Pollack, director of the Strategic Research Department in the Center for Naval Warfare Studies of the Naval War College.

It will be published in the Naval War College Review, Summer 2003, Vol. LVI, No. 3:
http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/aboutNWCR.htm.

This Special Report focuses primarily on the factors that led to the breakdown of the Agreed Framework. This requires analysis at four principal levels: U.S.-North Korean relations under the Clinton administration; early Bush administration policies and how these policies may have affected North Korean political and security calculations; an assessment of the nuclear enrichment activities undertaken by North Korea; and how Washington and Pyongyang responded to the U.S. disclosure of North Korea's renewed nuclear activities, leading to the policy impasse and ultimate collapse of the Agreed Framework in late 2002 and early 2003.

To read the report please click: here.

April 18, 2003

North Korea's Negotiating Tactics and Nuclear Strategy

This Special Report by Peter Hayes is published a few days before talks between China, North Korea, and the United States are to convene in Beijing. It is written on the day (April 18, 2003) that North Korea apparently announced that it had "crossed the nuclear red line" by reprocessing spent fuel rods to obtain more plutonium although analysts are unclear whether the North Korean translation from Korean into English was accurate.

Either way, the statement today reportedly declared again that the DPRK seeks a "massive deterrent" with which to keep the United States from attacking it.

This Special Report analyzes North Korea's military and nuclear options in the face of fundamental strategic dilemmas facing the regime. It reviews the impact of the Gulf War and the War in Iraq on North Korean threat perceptions in light of their past history and current circumstances. It reviews North Korea's military options to probe and pressure the United States and its allies in Korea over the coming months of what will be arduous and confrontational negotiations. And it analyzes North Korea's nuclear options in the context of these talks.

It concludes that whether the reprocessing plant has been turned on or not today is simply a question of degree and therefore of tactics in the pending negotiations. The essay argues that North Korea took a fundamental strategic decision in late March to obtain nuclear weapons and to essentially void its previous offers to explore trading them in for security guarantees from the United States. Nonetheless, no matter how bizarre it appears to Americans, today's reprocessing threat signals that the North is still willing to bargain because if it is committed to nuclear weapons under all circumstances, then it would have been more prudent and potent to pursue this strategy by silent, secret uranium enrichment while engaging in endless talks than by undertaking public reprocessing that would simply isolate the regime. At this stage, therefore, only a stark, credible, and dramatic roadmap from the Bush Administration that outlines what the DPRK could obtain for which it would be worth giving up its nuclear program will reverse North Korea's course.

The views expressed in these documents do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Nautilus Institute. Readers should note that Nautilus seeks a diversity of views and opinions on contentious topics in order to identify common ground.

To read the full report please click: here.

April 11, 2003

Military-First Ideology Is an Ever-Victorious, Invincible Banner for Our Era's Cause of Independence

In this Special Report, we provide three key texts that bear on the DPRK's possible intention to acquire nuclear weapons-viewed by some strategic analysts as the ultimate guarantee of national sovereignty of modern states, and, by others, to be an overriding DPRK strategic goal. We do so because official statements can provide insight into intentions. A working analytical rule of thumb is that states like North Korea rarely make false declarations to their own populations and other constituencies about their pending acquisition of increased military capacity. To the extent that the "military-first" doctrine implies obtaining nuclear weapons, these texts may prefigure actions by the DPRK over the coming months to reveal or declare actual nuclear weapons capacities.

To read the summary, full report and view documents 1, 2, and 3 please click: here.

March 24, 2003

China and the Korean Peninsula: Playing for the Long-Term
By David Shambaugh

This paper was prepared for the Task Force on U.S. Korea Policy sponsored by the Center for International Policy and Center for East Asian Studies, University of Chicago, Brookings Institution, Washington, January 9, 2003.

The 28-member panel included Admiral William J. Crowe, Jr., former Chairman of the Joint-Chiefs of Staff; two former U.S. ambassadors to South Korea, Donald P. Gregg and James T. Laney; Lee H. Hamilton, Vice-Chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States; Ambassador Robert L. Gallucci, who negotiated the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea; and Selig S. Harrison, Chairman of the Task Force, Director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy and a leading Korea expert; and the directors of research institutes specializing in Korea and East Asia at ten leading Universities.

The Task Force convened on three occasions between November 2002 and January 2003. It was co-sponsored by the Center for International Policy and the Center for East Asian Studies of the University of Chicago. Funding was provided by the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation and the Center for East Asian Studies.

Go to the report.

March 6, 2003

Economic Cooperation On The Korean Peninsula
by Bradley O. Babson

This report is by Bradley O. Babson, Senior Consultant on East Asia to the World Bank. Babson argues that economic conditions in DPRK and the nature of DPRK's relations with other countries have changed so fundamentally that ambiguity on economic issues is not a viable option for future U.S. policy. Also, economic relations in Northeast Asia are undergoing fundamental changes and the U.S. needs to position its future policy in the context of the wider regional perspectives. The focus of debate needs to shift to defining strategic goals for U.S. policy on economic engagement with DPRK and Northeast Asia, and to defining and building consensus on modalities for advancing these strategic goals.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Nautilus Institute. Readers should note that Nautilus seeks a diversity of views and opinions on contentious topics in order to identify common ground.

Go to the report.

March 3, 2003

Turning Point in Korea: New Dangers and New Opportunities for the United States

Summary Report of the Task Force on U.S. Korea Policy
by Selig S. Harrison, Chairman

A blue-ribbon Task Force on U.S. Korea Policy has presented detailed recommendations for resolving the nuclear crisis with North Korea, starting with immediate bilateral U.S.-North Korea negotiations.

The 28-member panel includes Admiral William J. Crowe, Jr., former Chairman of the Joint-Chiefs of Staff; two former U.S. ambassadors to South Korea, Donald P. Gregg and James T. Laney; Lee H. Hamilton, Vice-Chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States; Ambassador Robert L. Gallucci, who negotiated the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea; and Selig S. Harrison, Chairman of the Task Force, Director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy and a leading Korea expert; and the directors of research institutes specializing in Korea and East Asia at ten leading Universities. The Task Force convened on three occasions between November 2002 and January 2003. It was co-sponsored by the Center for International Policy and the Center for East Asian Studies of the University of Chicago. Funding was provided by the Ford Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation and the Center for East Asian Studies.

Among its key recommendations:

* Immediate bilateral U.S.-North Korean negotiations to dismantle North Korea's nuclear program in return for U.S. security assurances to North Korea, economic assistance and normalized relations, provided that North Korea make a public commitment not to reprocess the Yongbyon reactor fuel rods into plutonium during negotiations

* Resume missile negotiations with North Korea to reconfirm the North Korean moratorium on missile testing in force and end the development of long-range missiles

* Harmonize U.S. policies toward North Korea with South Korea

* When the nuclear crisis ends, lower the U.S. military profile in South Korea, to defuse opposition to the U.S. presence, offering to reduce and relocate U.S. forces and move toward greater autonomy for South Korean forces in the U.S.-South Korean Combined Forces Command, including wartime operational control.

* When the nuclear crisis ends, shift gradually from the existing U.S. "tripwire" policy, in which U.S. forces would be automatically drawn into any new North-South conflict, to a new role in which the United States would have greater flexibility in deciding whether or not to become involved

* Sign a peace agreement with North Korea formally ending the Korean War If negotiations on nuclear dismantlement fail and North Korea develops nuclear weapons, preemptive U.S. military action would not be warranted, since North Korea's primary motive for acquiring such weapons would be to deter the United States and U.S. strategic and tactical nuclear capabilities in the Pacific are sufficient to deter North Korean offensive action against U.S. bases and allies in Northeast Asia.

The full report in PDF format can be found here.

Feburary 27, 2003

Regional Energy Infrastructure Proposals and the DPRK Energy Sector: Opportunities and Constraints

Of the many possible approaches to addressing energy sector needs in Northeast Asia, the development of regional energy infrastructure-international power lines and pipelines-offers enticing potential benefits: shared economic savings, environmental improvements, and, most importantly, regional cooperation and confidence-building. This report by David Von Hippel and Peter Hayes of the Nautilus Institute entitled "Regional Energy Infrastructure Proposals and the DPRK Energy Sector: Opportunities and Constraints" provides an overview of some of the regional infrastructure proposals that have been suggested. Also included is summary information on the DPRK energy sector's status, problems, and options for international cooperation to assist in addressing those problems. This report was prepared for the Korea Economic Institute and the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy's workshop on "Northeast Asian Energy Cooperation," which was held in Washington, DC on January 7, 2003.

Read the full report (PDF format).

Feburary 27, 2003

The DPRK Energy Sector: Current Status and Options for the Future

The depth and urgency of the current international crisis over the DPRK's nuclear program is entwined to a considerable degree in the past, present, and future of the DRPK's energy sector. A report by David Von Hippel and Peter Hayes of the Nautilus Institute entitled "The DPRK Energy Sector: Current Status and Options for the Future" provides discussions of current estimates of energy sector activity in the DPRK, of the potential role of energy-efficiency improvements in DPRK energy sector development, and of future energy "paths" for the DPRK. It also provides background to the deliberations of the International Workshop on "Upgrading and Integration of Energy Systems in the Korean Peninsula: Energy Scenarios for the DPRK," held in Como, Italy, September 19-21, 2002, which was hosted and organized by the Landau Network-Centro Volta (Italy) and several partners.

Read the full report (PDF format).

Feburary 21, 2003

Special Report on Plutonium Reprocessing

Time-Asia stated in its February 21, 2003 issue that "Last week a U.S. intelligence source revealed that North Korea had activated a coal-fired steam plant connected to its reprocessing unit at Yongbyon, a sign that Kim is now getting ready to cook up some plutonium." In part, this story was based on the publication by GlobalSecurity.org in Washington of satellite photos of Yongbyon that showed smoke emitted from the coal-fired power plant that provides steam hot to the adjacent reprocessing and fuel fabrication plants, as well as steam leaks in the distribution pipe to the reprocessing building. As of February 5 imagery, there is no evidence of any process heat being emitted from the reprocessing plant itself.

To assist analysts understand the physical activity that might take place at the Yongbyon facility, we are publishing two unclassified official accounts of reprocessing technology. The DPRK reportedly uses the Purex process. For more detail, readers may wish to refer to the best detailed public account of the DPRK's reprocessing plant, Solving the North Korean Nuclear Puzzle [http://www.isis-online.org] by David Albright and Kevin O'Neill.

Go to report 1.

Go to report 2

Feburary 7, 2003

North Korea On Three Critical Risks: Two Documents

This Special Report provides two documents from the DPRK that are important reference material for analysts concerned with the DPRK's perception of historical and current events.

Document 1 was issued by the Korean Anti-Nuke Peace Committee on January 28, 2003. In particular, we draw readers' attention to the penultimate paragraphs which state: "If the US legally commits itself to non-aggression including the no-use of nuclear weapons against the DPRK through the non-aggression pact, the DPRK will be able to rid the US of its security concerns... Although the DPRK has left the NPT, its nuclear activity at present is limited to the peaceful purpose of power generation... If the US gives up its hostile policy toward the DPRK and refrains from posing a nuclear threat to it, it may prove that it does not manufacture nuclear weapons through a special verification between the DPRK and the US... It is the consistent stand of the DPRK government to settle the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula peacefully through fair negotiations for removing the concerns of both sides on an equal footing between the DPRK and the US."

In the editors' experience, policymakers in the DPRK often preface their remarks with incendiary, ideological rhetoric to assert their credentials as they introduce pragmatic negotiating proposals.

Document 2 was issued by the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on January 28, 2003. It concerns the DPRK perception and response to US military activities in East Asia. Analysts who have long read KCNA texts were particularly struck by the final paragraph of this text: "The self-defensive step to be taken by the DPRK unavoidably when the U.S. preemptive attack is considered imminent cannot but involve an unlimited use of means corresponding to what the U.S. mobilized."

Although ambiguous, the text can be read to assert that the DPRK may conduct a pre-emptive military strike if it finds a US preemptive attack to be pending.

Like the statement in Document 1 that the DPRK's "nuclear activity at present is limited to the peaceful purpose of power generation," this text states DPRK intentions very clearly.

From these two texts we can infer that North Koreans believe that three critical risks are being run by the DPRK and the United States in allowing the present standoff to continue unabated.

These are: 1) the risk that the DPRK's intention is not tested, that is, wherher it is willing to trade in its nuclear weapons capacity. 2) the risk that the DPRK's nuclear activities will become warlike "in the future" if not in the present, as asserted. And 3), the risk that tensions will rise to the point where war breaks out in spite of the interests of all concerned to keep the Peninsula stable and peaceful.

The views expressed in these documents do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Nautilus Institute. Readers should note that Nautilus seeks a diversity of views and opinions on contentious topics in order to identify common ground.

Go to Report.

November 15, 2002

KEDO Fuel Oil and the DPRK: A Special Report
by Peter Hayes

This Special Report provides background on the provision of HFO to the DPRK by KEDO. It shows that KEDO-supplied HFO is primarily a political rather than an energy concern to the DPRK. It reveals that KEDO's HFO is a small fraction of primary energy supply in the DPRK as well as of total fuel for electric power production. It is significant only in winter in thermal power production. However, while the humanitarian cost may be substantial in the DPRK due to reduced lighting and heating of occupied buildings in the midst of the freezing winter, the impact is unlikely to be translated into significant leverage on DPRK decision-makers. Indeed, these impacts may increase the legitimacy of the DPRK leadership or lead to increased Chinese and Russian energy supply to the DPRK to make up the difference. The Special Report was prepared by Nautilus Institute staff and draws on a number of published analyses of energy and the DPRK, which are referenced in the Special Report. Finally, the Special Report provides the text of the KEDO decision to terminate HFO supplies to the DPRK.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Nautilus Institute. Readers should note that Nautilus seeks a diversity of views and opinions on contentious topics in order to identify common ground.

Go to Report.

November 15, 2002

What Is Uranium Enrichment Technology?

The DPRK admission that it has been acquiring uranium enrichment technology has led many observers to ask: what is uranium enrichment? To answer this question, Nautilus Institute is publishing a report to the former US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency released under the US Freedom of Information Act. Although the report is old, the physics have not changed and the technology has not been transformed. For a more recent public source review of uranium enrichment technology, readers are referred to: David Albright, Frans Berkhout, William Walker, Plutonium and Highly Enriched Uranium 1996, World Inventories, Capabilities, and Policies, Oxford University Press, 1997,Appendix AII, Highly Enriched Uranium Production, pp. 464-471.

Nuclear Assurance Corporation, Nuclear Materials and Fuel Cycle Services, Sources, Inventories, and Stockpiles, prepared for US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, contract AC9NC105, volume II, September 1979, pp. V8-V25; released under US Freedom of Information Act request to Nautilus Institute.

The 18 page report contains two parts. The first is an introduction to uranium ore ("Yellowcake.") For those already familiar with uranium ore procurement, proceed directly to page V16which deals specifically with the uranium enrichment process.

Go to Report (PDF | HTML).

October 22, 2002

Link Between 1994 Geneva Agreed Framework and 1992 ROK-DPRK Denuclearization Declaration with Enrichment Activity in DPRK

As a key document underlying the Bush Administration's argument concerning the "material breach" of the US-DPRK Agreed Framework concerns the 1992 ROK-DPRK Denuclearization Agreement, we believed it important to remind readers of the link between the two agreements. The Agreed Framework is cross-referenced to the Denuclearization Agreement in Section III.2 which states: "The DPRK will consistently take steps to implement the North-South Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula."

The US negotiator Bob Galluci reportedly insisted on this cross-reference because he wanted to tie the DPRK's hands on uranium enrichment but knew that he could not insist on monitoring and verification of every site in the DPRK where such activity might be undertaken.

Following is the text of the Denuclearization Declaration.

Full text to Denuclearization Declaration

Read the report

October 7, 2002

The DPRK Energy Sector: Estimated Year 2000 Energy Balance and Suggested Approaches to Sectoral Redevelopment

The piece below is a report by the Nautilus Institute (David Von Hippel, Timothy Savage, and Peter Hayes) that provides an overview of the demand for and supply of electricity in the DPRK in the three key years of 1990, 1996, and 2000. Building on previous energy balance work prepared for 1990 and 1996, the authors assembled information from as many data sources as possible to try and update their earlier work to an estimate of year 2000 energy supply and demand in the DPRK. Revised results of the 1990 and 1996 energy balances, and a detailed description of input parameters and assumptions used in the analytical process, are presented. The report also briefly sketches a "Rebuilding" pathway for the DPRK economy and energy sector, and describe some of the preconditions and impacts on the energy sector of such a path.

Read the full report
Read the statistical data here

September 17, 2002

A Breakthrough: Reform-minded Kim and Koizumi Open a New Chapter in DPRK-Japan Relations.

This piece below is by Dr. Alexandre Y. Mansourov, Associate Professor of Security Studies at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu, HI. Mansourov writes that Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi is set to make history when he will hold a landmark summit with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Il on September 17, 2002. Mansourov expects the unprecedented talks, despite their potential risks, to bring considerable geostrategic, political, and economic gains for both sides. Kim Jong Il is likely to give some presents to the Japanese guest on the abduction issue and on his strategic concerns, whereas Koizumi is certain to orally apologize before the North Korean people for Japan's past colonial abuses and to present his host with a gift of agreement in principle to provide generous compensation in the form of "economic cooperation funds" in future. This summit is likely to clear the debris of the century-long animosity and alienation between Japan and the DPRK and launch a speedy process of inter-governmental negotiations leading up to full normalization of diplomatic relations between the two countries in early 2003.

Read the full report

August 30, 2002

Choices Ahead: Three Alternative Energy Scenarios for California

Below is a summary of a report prepared by Nautilus Associate Rebecca Ghanadan regarding future alternative energy scenarios for California. Developing a long-term energy policy framework requires systematic information that can clearly connect understandings of current choices, uncertainties, and driving forces to the range of possible pathways and outcomes for the future. Energy analysis methods which can integrate between long-term visioning and current choices are critically needed to bridge the chasm between immediate priorities and desired outcomes. The following summary seeks to inspire critical discussion about energy choices in a way that is accessible and interesting to a broad base of stake-holders and decision-makers and offer a starting point for considering alternative energy pathways for California.

Read the full report

Read the summary.

August 23, 2002

Rural Energy Survey in Unhari Village, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK): Methods, Results, and Implications.

Executive Summary

During a three-week mission during September and October of 1998, a team of specialists from the Nautilus Institute of Security and Sustainable Development, working with a team of specialists from the DPRK, undertook a collaborative humanitarian project to apply renewable energy technologies-- in this case wind power generators made in the United States-- in a flood affected rural village in the DPRK. This second of three missions to date on the project included an initial rural energy survey. The overall goals of the project have been to bring more reliable, renewable-resource-based electricity supplies and energy efficiency measures to the village, and to demonstrate that a collaborative project involving technicians and organizers from the DPRK and from the United States could be carried out successfully and in an atmosphere of cooperation and trust. The rural energy survey was carried out primarily by a team of North Korean interviewers, and guided by a member of the Nautilus project team.

The full report can be found here.
The report's annex can be found here.

Previous Report

 

 
 
Global Peace and Security Program Northeast Asia Peace and Security Network DPRK Renewable Energy Project Nuclear Policy Project Non-Nuclear NATO Network Related Nautilus Projects NAPSNet Daily Report NATO Flash Nuclear Policy Update South Asia Nuclear Dialogue Nautilus Institute Publications Policy Forum Online Signup for Nautilus Email Services Nautilus Research Kiosk Send Feedback Global Peace and Security Program Staff Nautilus Institute Home Energy, Security and Environment Globalization and Governance Youth/Pegasus Program Digital Library Search the Nautilus Site