|
NORTH KOREA AND
CUBA:
JOINED EFFORTS
Dr. Manuel Cereijo
Desde
Miami |
Biological
Weapons Program

orth Korea
continues to
have the
scientists and
facilities for
producing
biological
products and
microorganisms.
The North has
the ability to
produce
traditional
infectious
biological
warfare agents
or toxins and
biological
weapons. Acting
on orders of Kim
Il-sung, in
November 1980
North Korea
accelerated the
development of
biological
weapons,
organizing
research
institutions and
plants with
specialists from
other countries.
North Korea has
been pursuing
research and
development
related to
biological
warfare since
the 1960s.
Pyongyang’s
resources
presently
include a
rudimentary (by
Western
standards)
biotechnology
infrastructure
that is
sufficient to
support the
production of
limited
quantities of
toxins, as well
as viral and
bacterial
biological
warfare agents.
In the early
1990s, an open
press release by
a foreign
government
referred to
applied military
biotechnology
work at numerous
North Korean
medical
institutes and
universities
dealing with
pathogens such
as anthrax,
cholera, and
plague. North
Korea possesses
a sufficient
munitions-production
infrastructure
to accomplish
weaponization of
BW agents. North
Korea acceded to
the Biological
Weapons
Convention (BWC)
in 1987.
Biological
warfare has not
received the
same attention
as chemical or
nuclear warfare.
This could be
because North
Korea lacks the
technical
expertise or
because the
difficulty in
controlling
biological
warfare makes it
a less desirable
option. North
Korea realizes
that biological
weapons are as
dangerous to its
own forces as
they are to
South Korean or
US forces, and
the North's
limited medical
services would
make the agents
more lethal.
Therefore, using
biological
agents is not a
likely option.
However, if
North Korea did
choose to employ
biological
weapons, it
probably could
use agents like
anthrax, plague,
or yellow fever
against water
and food
supplies in the
South's rear
area.
The work done at
the National
Defense Research
Institute and
Medical Academy
(NDRIMA)
included studies
of disease
pathogens such
as anthrax,
cholera, bubonic
plague,
smallpox, yellow
fever and
others. Since
early 1990s,
North Korea and
Cuba have
maintained a
secret, but
constant
exchange of
scientists and
technology.
Chemical Weapons
Program
In 1954 the
Soviet Union and
China
transferred
certain special
technologies as
well as chemical
agents and means
of protection
against them
captured from
the Japanese and
Kuomintang
during World War
II to the Korean
People's Army [KPA].
The next five
years were
marked by the
swift
development of
the DPRK
chemical
industry.
Despite the fact
that the country
possessed
considerable
deposits of
natural raw
materials, it
proved to be a
rather difficult
task to create
domestic
capacities for
producing
chemical
weapons. In 1964
the DPRK
concluded a
contract with
Japan for
deliveries of
agricultural
chemicals. Under
their guise,
components came
into the country
initially for
synthesis of
tabun and
mustard gas, and
a later chlorine
and
phosphorus-containing
organic
compounds were
imported.
North Korea’s
chemical warfare
program is
believed to be
mature and
includes the
capability,
since 1989, to
indigenously
produce bulk
quantities of
nerve, blister,
choking and
blood chemical
agents as well
as a variety of
different filled
munitions
systems. North
Korea is
believed to
possess a
sizable
stockpile of
chemical
weapons, which
could be
employed in
offensive
military
operations
against the
South. North
Korea has also
devoted
considerable
scarce resources
to defensive
measures aimed
at protecting
its civilian
population and
military
forces from the
effects of
chemical
weapons. Such
measures include
extensive
training in the
use of
protective
masks, suits,
detectors, and
decontamination
systems. Though
these measures
are ostensibly
focused on a
perceived threat
from U.S. and
South Korean
forces, they
could also
support the
offensive use of
chemical weapons
by the North
during combat.
North Korea has
yet to sign the
Chemical Weapons
Convention (CWC)
and is not
expected to do
so in the
near-term, due
to intrusive
inspection and
verification
requirements
mandated by the
agreement.
North Korea
maintains a
number of
facilities
involved in
producing or
storing chemical
precursors,
agents, and
weapons. North
Korea has at
least eight
industrial
facilities that
can produce
chemical agents;
however, the
production rate
and types of
munitions are
uncertain.
Presumably,
sarin, tabun,
phosgene,
adamsite,
prussic acid and
a family of
mustard gases,
comprising the
basis of KPA
chemical
weapons, are
produced here.
North Korea has
the capability
to produce nerve
gas, blood
agents, and the
mustard-gas
family of
chemical
weapons. North
Korea and Cuba
started
cooperation in
this field in
the 1970s, while
Cuba was
involved in the
wars in Africa.
In the
assessment of US
intelligence
services, their
reserves,
accommodated in
perhaps half a
dozen major
storage sites
and as many as
170 mountain
tunnels, are at
least 180 to 250
tons, with some
estimates of
chemical
stockpiles run
as high as 5,000
tons. In May
1996 ROK Foreign
Minister Yu
Chong-ha
reported to the
National
Assembly that it
was estimated
that North Korea
possessed
approximately
5,000 ton of
biological and
chemical
weapons. Given
the extensive
production
facilities, this
later estimate
may constitute
the low end of
the actual
stockpile.
North Korea is
capable of
producing and
employing
chemical weapons
that virtually
all the fire
support systems
in its inventory
could deliver,
including most
of its artillery
pieces, multiple
rocket launchers
(including those
mounted on CHAHO-type
boats), and
mortars. Some
bombs the Air
Force employs
also could
deliver chemical
agents, as could
the FROG or the
SCUD missile.
Chemicals could
increase the
impact of a
surprise attack.
If the North
should use this
option, it would
have an
advantage over
forward-deployed
South Korean and
US forces.
Nonpersistent
chemical agents
also could be
used to break
through
defensive lines
or hinder a
South Korean
counterattack's
momentum.
Persistent
chemical agents
could be used
against fixed
targets in the
rear areas, such
as command and
control
elements, major
lines of
communications,
or logistic
depots.
Not only do
these weapons
enhance North
Korea's
offensive
capabilities,
but this
chemical
capability could
deter South
Korea or the
United States
from using
chemicals during
hostilities. In
any attack on
the South,
Pyongyang could
use chemical
weapons to
attack forces
deployed near
the DMZ,
suppress allied
airpower, and
isolate the
peninsula from
strategic
reinforcement.
North Korean
military units
conduct regular
NBC defensive
training
exercises in
preparation for
operations in a
chemical
environment.
North Korea has
chemical defense
units at all
levels of its
force structure.
These units are
equipped with
decontamination
and detection
equipment. North
Korean military
personnel have
access to
individual
protective masks
and protective
suits.
Since 1990,
Pyongyang has
placed high
priority on
military and
civilian
chemical defense
readiness. It
has mandated
operational
training in
chemical
environments as
an integral part
of armed forces
training and is
trying to equip
all military
forces,
including
reserves, with
full protective
gear. In
addition, the
leadership has
required broad
segments of the
population to
engage
periodically in
simulated
chemical warfare
drills.
Pyongyang has
emphasized
building and
installing
collective
protection
equipment at
military
production and
civilian
alternate
wartime
relocation
sites, directing
that the entire
population be
issued
protective
masks.
Command and
Control
North Korea's
military
command,
control, and
communications
system consists
of extensive
hardened wartime
command
facilities,
supported by
redundant
communication
systems, which
are believed to
be largely
separate from
systems
supporting other
sectors. A
modernized
telecommunications
infrastructure
will greatly
increase the
regime's ability
to perform both
peacetime and
wartime
management
tasks, and as in
any country,
could provide
critical backup
for military
communication
systems if
necessary. There
are over 30
villas for Kim
Jong-Il
scattered at
mountains and
beaches of
superb scenic
beauty, known as
"palaces." It
was Kim Il-sung
who began
building villas
at places of
scenic beauty.
Those built in
the '50s and
'60s were
exclusively for
Kim Il-sung. In
the '70s, when
Kim Jong-il
began emerging
as his
successor,
villas started
being built
exclusively for
Kim Jong-il.
Since the death
of Kim Il-sung
in '94, both Kim
Il-sung villas
and Kim Jong-il
villas have been
used exclusively
as Kim Jong-il
"palaces."
Facilities are
impressive and
include banquet
halls, fishing
sites,
horse-riding
grounds and
hunting sites,
on areas as
large as many
Western estates.
Thousands of
resident
personnel are
charged with
their management
and upkeep. It
is estimated
that more than
US$2.5 billion
was spent for
the construction
of the
aforementioned
facilities.
"Kangdong
Palace" and "Dukchun
Palace" were
built in the
suburbs of
Pyongyang after
the death of Kim
Il-sung, at a
cost of over
US$150 million.
Kim Jong-Il
spends about 10
days or more at
the palaces in
an average
month. He uses
them for rest
with his family
and enjoying
luxurious
parties with his
close officials,
and sometimes
uses them as his
office when
conducting
inspections of
military units
or industrial
sites. North
Korea currently
is modernizing
its aged
telecommunications
infrastructure
to improve the
speed and
quality and
expand the
capacity of both
domestic and
international
communications.
A fiber-optic
cable linking
Pyongyang and
Hamhung was
complete by
early 1995, with
construction
from Pyongyang
to Kangwon,
North Hamgyong,
and South
Pyongan
Provinces almost
complete by
midyear. In
1995, North
Korea acquired
digital Chinese
switching
equipment for
Chongjin, Najin,
and Hamhung.
Large quantities
of new and used
telephones from
a number of
countries
increased the
number of
telephones to
3.7 per 100
persons by 1993.
The current
emphasis in the
modernization
program is on
upgrading
communications
supporting the
Najin-Sonbong
Free Trade Zone
in northeast
North Korea. A
large
communications
center at Najin
will be the
focal point; it
will be equipped
with digital
switching and
other modern
equipment and
will offer
modern
communication
services to
businesses
operating in the
zone. Vastly
improved
communications
between the Free
Trade Zone and
other countries
will include
fiber-optic
cable and a
digital
microwave relay
link between
Pyongyang, Najin,
and Vladivostok,
with a shorter
link between
Najin and
Hunchun, China.
Additional plans
for the Free
Trade Zone
include
construction of
a satellite
earth station,
as well as
communication
center branches,
in the zone.
North Korean
military
personnel have
been receiving
training at the
Bejucal
electronic base
in Cuba, since
1999.
Nuclear Weapons
Program
Current Status
In early October
of 2002,
Assistant
Secretary of
State James
Kelley informed
North Korean
officials that
the United
States was aware
that North Korea
had a program
underway to
enrich uranium
for use in
nuclear weapons.
Initially North
Korea denied
this, but later
confirmed the
veracity of the
US claim. In
confirming that
they had an
active nuclear
weapons program,
they also
declared the
Agreed Framework
nullified.
The Agreed
Framework signed
by the United
States and North
Korea on October
21, 1994 in
Geneva agreed
that:
-
North Korea
would freeze
its existing
nuclear
program and
agree to
enhanced
International
Atomic
Energy
Agency (IAEA)
safeguards
-
Both sides
would
cooperate to
replace the
D.P.R.K.'s
graphite-moderated
reactors for
related
facilities
with
light-water
(LWR) power
plants.
-
Both
countries
would move
toward full
normalization
of political
and economic
relations.
-
Both sides
will work
together for
peace and
security on
a
nuclear-free
Korean
peninsula.
-
And that
both sides
would work
to
strengthen
the
international
nuclear
non-proliferation
regime.
Prior to the
establishment of
the Agreed
Framework,
intelligence
sources believe
that North Korea
could have
extracted
plutonium from
their reactors
for use in
nuclear
weapons-perhaps
enough for one
or two nuclear
weapons.
Aluminum rods,
necessary for
the enrichment
of uranium,
according to
some
intelligence
sources, have
been provided by
Planta Mecanica,
in Cuba.
Nevertheless, it
is unclear
whether it has
actually
produced or
possesses
nuclear weapons
due to
difficulties in
developing
detonation
devices.
History
North Korea
maintains
uranium mines
with four
million tons of
exploitable
high-quality
uranium. In the
mid-1960s, it
established a
large-scale
atomic energy
research complex
in Yongbyon and
trained
specialists from
students who had
studied in the
Soviet Union.
Under the
cooperation
agreement
concluded
between the USSR
and the DPRK, a
nuclear research
center was
constructed near
the small town
of Yongbyon. In
1965 a Soviet
IRT-2M research
reactor was
assembled for
this center.
From 1965
through 1973
fuel (fuel
elements)
enriched to 10
percent was
supplied to the
DPRK for this
reactor.
In the 1970s it
focused study on
the nuclear fuel
cycle including
refining,
conversion and
fabrication. In
1974 Korean
specialists
independently
modernized
Soviet IRT-2M
research reactor
in the same way
that other
reactors
operating in the
USSR and other
countries had
been modernized,
bringing its
capacity up to 8
megawatts and
switching to
fuel enriched to
80 percent.
Subsequently,
the degree of
fuel enrichment
was reduced. In
the same period
the DPRK began
to build a 5 MWe
research
reactor, what is
called the
"second
reactor." In
1977 the DPRK
concluded an
agreement with
the
International
Atomic Energy
Agency [IAEA],
allowing the
latter to
inspect a
research reactor
which was built
with the
assistance of
the USSR.
The North Korean
nuclear weapons
program dates
back to the
1980s. In the
1980s, focusing
on practical
uses of nuclear
energy and the
completion of a
nuclear weapon
development
system, North
Korea began to
operate
facilities for
uranium
fabrication and
conversion. It
began
construction of
a 200 MWe
nuclear reactor
and nuclear
reprocessing
facilities in
Taechon and
Yongbyon,
respectively,
and conducted
high-explosive
detonation
tests. In 1985
US officials
announced for
the first time
that they had
intelligence
data proving
that a secret
nuclear reactor
was being built
90 km north of
Pyongyang near
the small town
of Yongbyon. The
installation at
Yongbyon had
been known for
eight years from
official IAEA
reports. In
1985, under
international
pressure,
Pyongyang
acceded to the
Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation
of Nuclear
Weapons (NPT).
However, the
DPRK refused to
sign a
safeguards
agreement with
the
International
Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA),
an obligation it
had as a party
to the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation
Treaty.
In July 1990
The Washington
Post
reported that
new satellite
photographs
showed the
presence in
Yongbyon of a
structure which
could possibly
be used to
separate
plutonium from
nuclear fuel.
In a major
initiative in
July 1988, South
Korean President
Roh Tae Woo
called for new
efforts to
promote
North-South
exchanges,
family
reunification,
inter-Korean
trade, and
contact in
international
forums. Roh
followed up this
initiative in a
UN General
Assembly speech
in which South
Korea offered
for the first
time to discuss
security matters
with the North.
Initial meetings
that grew out of
Roh's proposals
started in
September 1989.
In September
1990, the first
of eight prime
minister-level
meetings between
North Korean and
South Korean
officials took
place in Seoul,
beginning an
especially
fruitful period
of dialogue. The
prime
ministerial
talks resulted
in two major
agreements: the
Agreement on
Reconciliation,
Nonaggression,
Exchanges, and
Cooperation (the
"basic
agreement") and
the Declaration
on the
Denuclearization
of the Korean
Peninsula (the
"joint
declaration").
In late 1991
North and South
Korea signed the
Agreement on
Reconciliation,
Non-aggression,
Exchanges and
Cooperation and
the Joint
Declaration on
the
Denuclearization
of the Korean
Peninsula. The
Joint
Declaration
called for a
bilateral
nuclear
inspection
regime to verify
the
denuclearization
of the
peninsula. The
Declaration,
which came into
force on 19
February 1992,
states that the
two sides "shallnot
test,
manufacture,
produce,
receive,
possess, store,
deployor use
nuclear
weapons," and
that they "shall
not possess
nuclear
reprocessing and
uranium
enrichment
facilities." A
procedure for
inter-Korean
inspection was
to be organized
and a
North-South
Joint Nuclear
Control
Commission (JNCC)
was mandated
with
verification of
the
denuclearization
of the
peninsula.
On 30 January
1992 the DPRK
also signed a
nuclear
safeguards
agreement with
the IAEA, as it
had pledged to
do in 1985 when
acceding to the
Nuclear
Non-Proliferation
Treaty. This
safeguards
agreement
allowed IAEA
inspections to
begin in June
1992. In March
1992, the JNCC
was established
in accordance
with the joint
declaration, but
subsequent
meetings failed
to reach
agreement on the
main issue of
establishing a
bilateral
inspection
regime.
When North
Korean Deputy
Prime Minister
Kim Tal-Hyon
visited South
Korea for
economic talks
in July 1992,
President Roh
Tae Woo
announced that
full North-South
Economic
Cooperation
would not be
possible without
resolution of
the North Korean
nuclear issue.
There was little
progress toward
the
establishment of
an inspection
regime, and
dialogue between
the South and
North stalled in
the fall of
1992.
The North's
agreement to
accept IAEA
safeguards
initiated a
series of IAEA
inspections of
North Korea's
nuclear
facilities. This
promising
development was
halted by the
North's refusal
in January 1993
to allow special
inspections of
two unreported
facilities
suspected of
holding nuclear
waste. Ignoring
the South-North
Joint
Declaration of
the
Denuclearization
of the Korean
Peninsula, North
Korea refused
IAEA inspections
and operated
nuclear
reprocessing
facilities,
making the world
suspicious of
its nuclear
intentions.
Lack of progress
on
implementation
of the
denuclearization
accord triggered
actions on both
sides that led
to North Korea's
March 12, 1993,
announcement of
its withdrawal
from the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT).
The North's
threat to
withdraw from
the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT)
brought
North-South
progress to an
abrupt halt.
Tensions ran
high on the
Korean Peninsula
as the
confrontation
between North
Korea and the
United States
deepened.
The UN Security
Council on 11
May 1993 passed
a resolution
urging the DPRK
to cooperate
with the
International
Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA)
and to implement
the 1991
North-South
denuclearization
accord. It also
urged all member
states to
encourage the
DPRK to respond
positively to
this resolution
and to
facilitate a
solution.
The US responded
by holding
political-level
talks with the
DPRK in early
June 1993 that
led to a joint
statement
outlining the
basic principles
for continued
US-DPRK dialogue
and North
Korea's
"suspending" its
withdrawal from
the NPT. A
second round of
talks was held
July 14-19,
1993, in Geneva.
The talks set
the guidelines
for resolving
the nuclear
issue, improving
U.S.-North
Korean
relations, and
restarting
inter-Korean
talks, but
further
negotiations
deadlocked.
Following the
DPRK's spring
1994 unloading
of fuel from its
five-megawatt
nuclear reactor
and the
resultant US
push for UN
sanctions,
former President
Carter's visit
to Pyongyang in
June 1994 helped
to defuse
tensions and
resulted in
renewed
South-North
talks. A third
round of talks
between the US
and the DPRK
opened in Geneva
on July 8, 1994.
However, the
sudden death of
North Korean
leader Kim Il
Sung on July 8,
1994 halted
plans for a
first ever
South-North
presidential
summit and led
to another
period of
inter-Korean
animosity. The
talks were
recessed upon
news of the
death of North
Korean President
Kim Il Sung,
then resumed in
August. These
talks concluded
with the Agreed
Framework.
Under the
framework
agreement, the
North would
freeze and
eventually
dismantle its
existing suspect
nuclear program,
including the 50
MW and 200 MW
graphite-moderated
reactors under
construction, as
well as its
existing 5 MW
reactor and
nuclear fuel
reprocessing
facility. In
return,
Pyongyang would
be provided with
alternative
energy,
initially in the
form of heavy
oil, and
eventually two
proliferation-resistant
light water
reactors (LWR).
The two 1,000 MW
light-water
nuclear reactors
would be safer
and would
produce much
less plutonium,
in order to help
boost the supply
of electricity
in the North,
which is now in
a critical
shortage. The
agreement also
included gradual
improvement of
relations
between the US
and the DPRK,
and committed
North Korea to
engage in
South-North
dialogue.
A few weeks
after the
signing of the
Agreed
Framework,
President Kim
loosened
restrictions on
South Korean
firms desiring
to pursue
business
opportunities
with the North.
Although North
Korea continued
to refuse
official
overtures by the
South, economic
contacts
appeared to be
expanding
gradually.
A close
examination by
the IAEA of the
radioactive
isotope content
in the nuclear
waste revealed
that North Korea
had extracted
about 24
kilograms of
Plutonium. North
Korea was
supposed to have
produced 0.9
gram of
Plutonium per
megawatt every
day over a
4-year period
from 1987 to
1991. The 0.9
gram per day
multiplied by
365 days by 4
years and by 30
megawatts equals
to 39 kilograms.
When the yearly
operation ratio
is presumed to
be 60 percent,
the actual
amount was
estimated at 60%
of 39 kilograms,
or some 23.4
kilograms. Since
20-kiloton
standard nuclear
warhead has 8
kilograms of
critical mass,
this amounts to
mass of material
of nuclear
fission out of
which about 3
nuclear warheads
could be
extracted.
Estimates vary
of both the
amount of
plutonium in
North Korea's
possession and
number of
nuclear weapons
that could be
manufactured
from the
material. South
Korean,
Japanese, and
Russian
intelligence
estimates of the
amount of
plutonium
separated, for
example, are
reported to be
higher -- 7 to
22 kilograms, 16
to 24 kilograms,
and 20
kilograms,
respectively --
than the
reported US
estimate of
about 12
kilograms. At
least two of the
estimates are
said to be based
on the
assumption that
North Korea
removed fuel
rods from the
5-MW(e) reactor
and subsequently
reprocessed the
fuel during
slowdowns in the
reactor's
operations in
1990 and 1991.
The variations
in the estimates
about the number
of weapons that
could be
produced from
the material
depend on a
variety of
factors,
including
assumptions
about North
Korea's
reprocessing
capabilities --
advanced
technology
yields more
material -- and
the amount of
plutonium it
takes to make a
nuclear weapon.
Until January
1994, the
Department of
Energy (DOE)
estimated that 8
kilograms would
be needed to
make a small
nuclear weapon.
Thus, the United
States' estimate
of 12 kilograms
could result in
one to two
bombs. In
January 1994,
however, DOE
reduced the
estimate of the
amount of
plutonium needed
to 4
kilograms--enough
to make up to
three bombs if
the US estimate
is used and up
to six bombs if
the other
estimates are
used.
On 22 April
1997, U.S.
Defense
Department
spokesman
Kenneth Bacon
officially
stated, "When
the U.S.-North
Korea nuclear
agreement was
signed in Geneva
in 1994, the
U.S.
intelligence
authorities
already believed
North Korea had
produced
plutonium enough
for at least one
nuclear weapon."
This was the
first time the
United States
confirmed North
Korea's
possession of
plutonium.
In accordance
with the terms
of the 1994
framework, the
US Government in
January 1995
responded to
North Korea's
decision to
freeze its
nuclear program
and cooperate
with US and IAEA
verification
efforts by
easing economic
sanctions
against North
Korea in four
areas through:
-
Authorizing
transactions
related to
telecommunications
connections,
credit card
use for
personal or
travel-related
transactions,
and the
opening of
journalists'
offices;
-
Authorizing
D.P.R.K. use
of the U.S.
banking
system to
clear
transactions
not
originating
or
terminating
in the
United
States and
unblocking
frozen
assets where
there is no
D.P.R.K.
Government
interest;
-
Authorizing
imports of
magnesite, a
refractory
material
used in the
U.S. steel
industry--North
Korea and
China are
the world's
primary
sources of
this raw
material;
and
-
Authorizing
transactions
related to
future
establishment
of liaison
offices,
case-by-case
participation
of U.S.
companies in
the light
water
reactor
project,
supply of
alternative
energy, and
disposition
of spent
nuclear fuel
as provided
for by the
agreed
framework,
in a manner
consistent
with
applicable
laws.
Smooth
implementation
of the 1994
agreed framework
was obstructed
for a time by
North Korea's
refusal to
accept South
Korean-designed
LWR model
reactors. US and
DPRK negotiators
met for three
weeks in Kuala
Lumpur,
Malaysia, and on
June 12, 1995,
reached an
accord resolving
this issue.
North Korea
agreed to accept
the decisions of
the Korean
Peninsula Energy
Development
Organization
(KEDO) with
respect to the
model for the
LWRs and agreed
that KEDO would
select a prime
contractor to
carry out the
LWR project. The
KEDO executive
board announced
that it had
selected the
South
Korean-designed
Ulchin 3-4 LWR
as the reference
model for the
project and that
a South Korean
firm would be
the prime
contractor. The
South Korean
prime contractor
would be
responsible for
all aspects of
the LWR project
including
design,
manufacture,
construction,
and management.
In this Kuala
Lumpur accord to
the 1994 Geneva
agreed
framework, the
DPRK also agreed
to negotiate
directly with
KEDO on all
outstanding
issues related
to the LWR
project. On
December 15,
1995, KEDO and
the DPRK signed
the Light Water
Reactor Supply
Agreement. KEDO
teams have also
made a number of
trips to North
Korea to survey
the proposed
reactor site; in
the spring of
1996, KEDO and
the DPRK began
negotiations on
implementing
protocols to the
supply
agreement.
Pyongyang is
cooperating with
Korean Peninsula
Energy
Development
Organization,
whose leading
members are
South Korea, the
United States
and Japan. KEDO
has reached an
agreement on the
provision of the
light-water
nuclear reactors
by 2003, and, in
return, North
Korea has frozen
its nuclear
program. South
Korea, which has
promised to bear
the lion's share
of the reactor
project cost
estimated at
US$4.5 billion,
is asking the
United States to
put up at least
a symbolic
amount. The US
administration,
however, has
said it can make
no contribution
to the
construction
cost as Congress
has not
appropriated the
necessary
budget. An
official in
Seoul, however,
said that South
Korea cannot
drop its demand
simply because
of domestic
problems in the
United States.
The US Congress
has been
delaying
approval of the
cost for the
reactor project.
South Korean
officials said
the U.S. refusal
to share the
reactor cost
would make it
difficult for
them to obtain
approval from
the National
Assembly for the
South Korean
share.
Since the
conclusion of
the Supply
Agreement in
December 1995,
six related
protocols have
come into effect
and three rounds
of expert-level
negotiations
have produced
solid results.
The ROK power
company, Korea
Electric Power
Corporation (KEPCO),
is the prime
contractor for
this project and
has as its
responsibility
the design,
manufacture,
procurement,
construction and
management of
the reactors. On
19 August 1997
KEDO and North
Korea held a
groundbreaking
ceremony to
begin
construction of
two light-water
reactors.
In October 2002,
North Korean
officials
acknowledged the
existence of a
clandestine
program to
enrich uranium
for nuclear
weapons that is
in violation of
the Agreed
Framework and
other
agreements.
Missiles: North
Korea
|
Name |
Stages |
Propellant |
Range
(km) |
IOC |
Inventory |
Type |
Body
Dia.
(m) |
Comments |
|
Scud-B |
1 |
liquid |
280-330 |
1981 |
100? |
SRBM |
0.885 |
|
|
Hwasong-5 |
1 |
liquid |
280-330 |
1984 |
150? |
SRBM |
0.885 |
Derivative
of
Scud-B |
|
Hwasong-6 |
1 |
liquid |
500-700 |
1989 |
250? |
SRBM |
0.885 |
Derivative
of
Scud-C |
|
No-dong |
1 |
liquid |
1,350-1,500 |
1999 |
12-36 |
MRBM |
1.3 |
Also
flown
by
Iran
(Shahab-3)
and
Pakistan
(Ghauri
II) |
|
Taep'o-dong-1
Paeutudan-1 |
2 |
liquid |
2,000-2,200 |
2000 |
0 |
MRBM
|
1.3 |
Indigenously
developed
system
with
performance
similar
to
the
Soviet
SS-4 |
|
NKSL-1/Taep'o-dong-1 |
3 |
liquid
+
solid |
2,200-2,672
or
2,200-2,896 |
1998
(ILC) |
0 |
M/IRBM |
1.3 |
Satellite
launch
variant
of
the
Taep'o-dong-1.
Basis
for
the
design
of
Iran's
Shahab-4 |
|
Taep'o-dong-2 |
2 |
liquid |
3,500-3,750
6,400-6,700
7,000
8,000-12,000 |
N/A |
0 |
LRICBM
LRICBM
LRICBM
FRICBM |
2.2 |
This
is a
hypothetical
advance
on
the
Taep'o-dong-1.
North
Korea
is
not
believed
to
currently
possess
a
functional
version
of
this
missile,
but
both
North
Korea
and
Iran
(Shahab-5)
are
believed
to
be
working
towards
a
missile
with
these
capabilities. |
|
NKSL-X-2/Taep'o-dong-2 |
3 |
liquid
+
solid |
4,000-4,300 |
N/A
(ILC) |
0 |
LRICBM |
2.2 |
This
is a
satellite
launch
variant
of
the
hypothetical
Taep'o-dong-2
model
that
may
be
under
development.
Basis
for
the
design
of
Iran's
Shahab-6.
It
would
probably
have
a
similar
performance
to
the
Soviet
SS-5 |
|
No-dong / Shahab-3
Range-Payload to Throwweight Trade-offs |
|
Stages |
Payload |
Range |
Country |
|
kg |
Pounds |
km |
Miles |
|
One-Stage |
1,158 |
2,553 |
1,350 |
839 |
Iran |
|
760 |
1,676 |
1,500 |
932 |
Pakistan |
Official
figures |
|
Taep'o-dong-1 / Shahab-4
Range to weight Defenition |
|
Stages |
Payload |
Range |
|
kg |
Pounds |
km |
Miles |
|
Two-Stage |
1,000 |
2,205 |
2,000 |
1,243 |
|
750 |
1,654 |
2,200 |
1,367 |
|
Three-Stage |
500 |
1,103 |
2,475 |
1,538 |
|
380 |
838 |
2,672 |
1,660 |
|
290 |
640 |
2,896 |
1,800 |
Estimates
based on
limited
data |
|
Taep'o-dong-2 / Shahab-5
Range-Payload to Throwweight Trade-offs |
|
Stages |
Payload |
Range |
|
kg |
Pounds |
km |
Miles |
|
Two or Three
Stage variant |
1,000 |
2,205 |
3,500 |
2,175 |
|
750 |
1,654 |
3,750 |
2,330 |
|
570 |
1,257 |
4,000 |
2,486 |
|
500 |
1,103 |
4,100 |
2,548 |
|
420 |
926 |
4,248 |
2,640 |
|
403 |
889 |
4,264 |
2,650 |
|
390 |
860 |
4,300 |
2,672 |
Estimates
based on
limited
data |
|
Improved Taep'o-dong-2B / Shahab-5B/6
Range to weight Defenition |
|
Stages |
Payload |
Range |
|
kg |
Pounds |
km |
Miles |
|
Three-Stage |
610-490 |
1,345-1081 |
5470 |
3,399 |
|
570-480 |
1,257-1058 |
5,500 |
3,418 |
|
490-440 |
1,080-970 |
5,632 |
3,500 |
|
290-330 |
640-728 |
6,000 |
3,728 |
|
230-270 |
505-595 |
6,200 |
3,853 |
|
170-220 |
375-485 |
6,400 |
3,977 |
|
100-150 |
221-331 |
6,700 |
4,163 |
Preliminary
Estimates
based on
limited
data
(March
2002) |
|
Taep'o-dong-3 / Shahab-5B / 6
Range to weight Defenition |
|
Stages |
Payload |
Range |
|
kg |
Pounds |
km |
Miles |
|
Three-Stage |
1,200-1,220 |
2,646-2,690 |
5,470 |
3,399 |
|
1,130-1,200 |
2,492-2,646 |
5,500 |
3,418 |
|
900-1,040 |
2,492-2,646 |
5,500 |
3,418 |
|
700 |
1,544 |
6,000 |
3,728 |
|
550-540 |
1,213-1,191 |
6,200 |
3,853 |
|
390-420 |
860-926 |
6,400 |
3,977 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
270-290 |
595-640 |
6,700 |
4,163 |
Preliminary
Estimates
based on
limited
data
(March
2002) |
|
Taep'o-dong-4 / Shahab-7 Concepts
Range to weight Defenition |
|
Stages |
Payload |
Range |
|
kg |
Pounds |
km |
Miles |
|
Three-Stage |
1,030 |
2,271 |
9,000 |
5,593 |
|
810 |
1,786 |
10,000 |
6,214 |
|
480 |
1,054 |
12,000 |
7,457 |
|
100 |
221 |
15,000 |
9,321 |
Preliminary
Estimates
based on
a
conceptual
model
for the
system
|
NOTES:
SRBM - Short
Range Ballistic
Missile < 1,000
km
MRBM - Medium
Range Ballistic
Missile
1,000-2,500 km
IRBM -
Intermediate
Range Ballistic
Missile
2,500-3,500 km
LRICBM - L
Limited Range
Intercontinental
Ballistic
Missile
3,500-8,000 km
DR. MANUEL
CEREIJO
This Week - ABC
News
Sunday, October
5, 2003
Host: George
Stephanopoulos
Excerpts of
Transcript by
ABC News
[1]10:45:10
GEORGE
STEPHANOPOULOS
(ABC NEWS)
Did you have
anything else in
mind though, not
discovering a
void, but did
you, what did
you think might
be a surprise?
[1]10:45:17
DAVID KAY
(SPECIAL
ADVISOR, IRAQI
WMD SEARCH)
You know,
George, what I
had in mind is
I'm rarely
gifted in having
1300 very bright
and dedicated
people who can
use all of the
technology that
the US, the UK
and the
Australians can
put there.
We're inside the
country. I know
in that country
we're going to
find remarkable
things about
their weapons
program. I
would contend
we've already
found things
that if they had
been known last
December,
January,
February, you
would have had
headlines in all
the papers who
now pick on the
sentence "not
yet found
weapons,"
trumpeting
North Korean
missiles going
to Cuba,
clandestine labs
in the
biological
program.
There's a whole
host of stuff we
have found.
|

|
|