Evening Walk through at St. Regis Hotel, Beijing - April 13, 2007

Remarks by Christopher R. Hill
Asst. Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs
Evening Walk through at St. Regis Hotel, Beijing
April 13, 2007


ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Well, I just had some discussions today with the Chinese Foreign Ministry and will continue that tomorrow.  We discussed the fact that all the DPRK accounts are open and available to the account holders, that frankly there is no reason why the DPRK should be holding up the February Agreement at this point.  

There was a statement issued today by the DPRK where it appears to refer to the need to confirm that the accounts are open.  Well, I can confirm for them that the accounts are open.  So I’m not sure what the statement has in mind -- except to say that I think it’s time for them to get on with their denuclearization obligations, and we’re going to be in close contact with the Chinese and with our other Six-Party partners in the days ahead to consider next steps.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, how does the delay -- Tomorrow’s the deadline, so they're obviously not going to make it.  What does that mean?  What will you do next?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Well, we obviously have to see what the meaning of this statement was today.  We’re going to have to consult with our partners on the issue of the deadline, and we’ll be doing that this weekend with the Chinese and with the others.  And we’ll have to take it from there.  We’ll do things together, not just the U.S.  But we’ll work with the other partners and see what is the best thing to do to achieve our goal of denuclearization.

QUESTION:  What about in North Korea this weekend?  There’s going to be a lot of action there.  There’s going to be Kim Jong-Il’s father’s birthday.  They’ve gone through a new Prime Minister, a new economic agenda.  Would they be gearing up (inaudible) to meet this deadline tomorrow?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  You have to ask them.  I don’t know.  Yes, a lot of activities.  I guess you’re right.  But, you’ll have to ask them.  They took the view they wanted to see all the accounts available.  All the accounts are available.  They wanted to hear that indeed the accounts are available to the account holders, and I think the Macau authorities have made that very clear in very public statements.  And my understanding is that the DPRK has been informed that these are all open.  So I don’t think this has anything to do with Macau anymore.  

I know many times I’ve said the issue is over, but I really do believe it’s over.  And now the question is, what are they going to do about the February 13th Agreement?

QUESTION:  Did you actually discuss about extending the deadline with the Chinese Government?  

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  No, we didn’t discuss extending deadlines.

QUESTION:  Who did you meet with?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  I met with Assistant Minister He Yafei.  And I’ll meet with Wu Dawei, who is my Six-Party colleague, I’ll meet with him tomorrow.  But he’s coming back late tonight with the delegation that was in Tokyo.

QUESTION:  Any other schedule tomorrow?  Are you going to meet with the North Koreans?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  I’m here and I’m obviously available, but I don’t think my North Korean counterpart is going to be here.  So my plan is, I would like to meet with my Six-Party counterpart Wu Dawei tomorrow, and then I’ll leave -- probably go back to Washington on Sunday.

QUESTION:  (Inaudible) that he’s not coming?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  No, we haven’t heard one way or the other.  We haven’t requested a meeting either.  We’re just making sure they know the travel schedule and that I’m here in Beijing.

QUESTION:  Ambassador Hill, you were initially talking about a sixty-day time frame.  Now, what is your best guess for the kind of timeframe we are looking at?  Seventy-day?  Eighty-day?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  I have no idea. I mean, frankly, there is no reason why the DPRK can’t get on to this task of denuclearization.  They could it have done it, frankly, weeks ago -- but certainly in the last few days, even by their own definition of resolving the BDA matter.  It has been resolved even by the DPRK view of that for several days.  And yet we haven’t seen them step forward on their own obligations.  So, again, we have to work with our partners and see what is best for achieving our goal.

QUESTION:  Is there any indication that they have done anything towards meeting the requirement.  Do you know if they have started drawing up their list?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  No, there were some indications early on that.  We had some discussions of what that would look like.  But the big issue, the main issue is they have to get the IAEA in there.  As you know, they had some discussions with them early on, which was welcome.  But they haven’t had them in to accomplish the main task that is set out in the February agreement.

QUESTION:  Mr. Secretary, I know that you don’t want to be an enabler for the North Koreans in this instance. Your counterpart in South Korea today was talking about, “Lets give them time, let’s be patient,” that kind of thing.  I think the question really is, “If they miss the deadline tomorrow, does it blow the deal?”  Or are you guys still willing to see how it goes in the next few days ahead?  This is the deadline you’ve all set.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Oh I know --

QUESTION:  What happens when you miss the deadline?  Is the United States willing to roll a little bit more with the punches?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  No, we need to work with our partners, and we need to see what is best for our interests.  And certainly we are not indifferent to missing a deadline.  I mean, obviously, that is a very important date.  And we will obviously have to be in very close contact with our partners, including our South Korean partners.  I am not sure that I would agree with you that they seem to be indifferent.

QUESTION:  I wouldn’t say indifferent.  I’d say they have more patience.  Sorry.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  I was -- I spent the last couple of days in Seoul.  I know there is a great deal of concern with the current circumstances.  Obviously, this is a very important weekend, and we are going to have to be in close contact and see what we are going to do.  This is not, I’ve said a million times, this is not some U.S.-North Korean bilateral issue.  We are working closely with partners.  We’ve always felt that the best way to achieve our goal is to work closely with partners, especially with the Chair-- the Chinese.  That is why I am here this weekend on what I think is an important date.  So we’ll have to see.

QUESTION:  Could I follow up by just asking, does that mean that the United States will go along with the consensus of the other five people to deal with the deadline if it’s missed and whatever way the other four decide?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Yes, I think we will work with our other partners on the appropriate response to the current circumstances.  This is for us a multilateral process, and we will continue to deal with it multilaterally.  Go along with consensus is really not the way I would phrase it.  I think we will have some discussions, and we will help shape that consensus.

QUESTION:  Ambassador Hill, are you saying that they [the IAEA] should be in there when Yongbyon is shut down, or they just need to be in there when they pull out the rods?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Well, these are technical questions about how IAEA would monitor and verify the shutdown and sealing of the facilities, but certainly they need a phone call.

QUESTION:  Ambassador Hill, the BDA issue, as you said, is resolved now.  But there is some speculation that the North Koreans are concerned, still concerned about access to the international banking system. Do you think that is the reason why they are holding this delay?  What do you take from this silence from North Korea?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  It’s very hard to tell.  They -- There are obviously domestic developments there.  We saw a new prime minister being selected.  I can’t really speculate on what the reasons are.  But one reason that shouldn’t be there is access to their funds, because they’ve got access to their funds.  

How they look at their long-term access to the international financial system is, frankly, I think, something they should give some thought to.  North Korea is a country that’s been involved in banned weapons programs – that is, producing weapons of mass destruction.  And, as such, they’re going to have troubles dealing with the international community and, in particular, the international financial system as long as they’re in this business.  I’ve said it a million times.  They’ve got to get out of this nuclear business.  And when they do so, they’ll find life is a lot easier in many, many respects.  But certainly they’ve got a key date coming up this weekend, and we have to determine what we’re going to do.

QUESTION:  Does the United States still have the international banking community on -- do they still have the international banking community alerted to dealing with North Korea at this time?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:   Well, I don’t think the United States needs to play any particular role in that, as far as the DPRK is concerned.  I think people have been concerned about the DPRK’s activities for a long time.  What we did was to, really, conclude our role in this BDA matter.  And we supported the decision of the Macau authorities to make available all the DPRK funds.  That was, I think, an important move that the Macau authorities made.  It was a move that, frankly, I think, all concerned felt would facilitate the Six-Party process.  We have to see whether the DPRK is going to respond to it.  They issued a statement today.  The statement reaffirmed their support for the February 13 agreement, but at this point, we’re looking for more than support.  We’re looking for implementation.  

QUESTION:  Mr. Ambassador, do you think punitive measures should be considered against North Korea?  

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:   Again, I don’t want to get into what measures should be considered.  I think what’s important is for us to sit down with our partners and consider what we need to do, because, yes, deadlines are important.  But what is also important is we need to work with our partners in this multilateral process and try to develop an agreement on what’s the best way to achieve our objectives.  

QUESTION:  Once the process starts, how long should it take them to shut down that nuclear reactor, and will they be in charge of the time scale on that?  Will there be—

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Again, it’s a technical question, but it does not take that long.  We’re not talking months or anything like that.  Again, there should be no reason to go slow in this process.  And that’s the thing.  That’s certainly worrisome to all of us who see them approaching this date rather lethargically.  We believe this date is something they can – they could have lived with.  We understood their concerns about the banking issue, and, frankly, those concerns have been met.  

QUESTION:  But are they in charge of the time frame now, because this deadline having been met --

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:   No.

QUESTION:  There’s no new deadline.  Are they now -- they now decide when they will move (inaudible)?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  No, I would say they’re not in charge of the time frame.  I think all the partners in the process have a role to play in that.  And, certainly, when -- The IAEA certainly knows the time frame needed to complete the shutdown of the facilities.  

QUESTION:  You’ve always said that you’d never had a doubt about their commitment to the first phase of this process.  Are you now starting to have any doubt about their commitment?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  They continue to profess their support for the February 13 agreement, which has some very specific notions of what needs to be accomplished.  Certainly, we need to see them do something on their side if we’re to have confidence that they will fulfill or continue on the road to what we’re all demanding, which is denuclearization.

QUESTION:  Would that just be – I mean, could they announce like tomorrow, we have shut down the nuclear facility or –

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  No, it’s not going to work like that.

QUESTION:  -- call in the IAEA?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  IAEA needs to – There are a number of technical tasks.  The IAEA is very familiar with those tasks.  The DPRK is very familiar with the fact that the IAEA is very familiar.  So I don’t think you’re going to see any trick announcements of that kind.

QUESTION:  Would it be the IAEA asking them to come in?  Would that be – if they did that, then --

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  They need to call the IAEA in, and that would certainly be an indication that they are getting ready to do what they need to do on the February 13 agreement.  

There’s no question that this whole banking issue has really slowed up implementation of the February 13 agreement.  It is not just in terms of shutting down these facilities, but also in terms of the full discussion of the full list of nuclear programs that needs to be put together in a declaration for the next phase.  In addition, they have not received any heavy fuel oil, which was also part of it.  And they are not going to receive heavy fuel oil until they get going on their own obligations.  

We need to work with our partners on what the appropriate response is going to be.

QUESTION:  But BDA is not an issue any more?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  You saw the statement from Macau authorities which came out Wednesday, April 11.  It was a pretty clear statement that these accounts are fully available.  So I am hard-pressed to say that it is still an issue.  It is not an issue as far as we’re concerned.  

QUESTION:  Is there anything in particular that the North Koreans could do by tomorrow, the deadline?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Well, certainly, they could call up, place a phone call to IAEA and invite them back to begin to do what they need to do in relation to the shutdown of the facility.  So a phone call to IAEA would be a good step.

MODERATOR:  Two more questions, please.

QUESTION:  How long can this go on?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  This press conference?  (Laughter.)

QUESTION:  How long can this go on now for delays past Saturday?   Can it go on for another month?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  I don’t believe we can go on for another month, no.  I don’t want to put a date or hour, but another month is not in my constitution.  

Okay, thank you.

QUESTION:  What’s your main purpose for this trip?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Here in Beijing, I want to talk to the Chinese.  We need a very clear, very serious discussion with the Chinese, who are the chair of the Six-Party process.  We need to be really in sync as to how we regard these developments and how we might regard future developments.

My main purpose is to be in close coordination with the Chinese, and I’m looking forward to Mr. Wu Dawei’s – well, he’s coming back tonight.  We’ll talk tomorrow.

QUESTION:  What time are you leaving?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  I don’t know.  Do we know yet?  We’ll try to get an answer so you can spread the word.  Do we know when we’re going?

AIDE:  No, not yet.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL:  Okay, we’ll let you all know, so don’t wait here.  (Laughter.)  Do something else.  See you later.

# # #