13~Sep. 19, 2005 (Beijing, China)
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs and
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
Assistant State Secretary for East Asian
and Pacific Affairs
Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs
Deputy Director-General of Asian and
Oceanian Affairs Bureau
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs
Outcomes : Agreement on a Joint Declaration of 6
|The text of the joint statement
of the six-party nuclear talks in Beijing
is as follows:
1) The six parties unanimously reaffirmed
that the goal of the six-party talks is
the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean
Peninsula in a peaceful manner.
The Democratic People's Republic of Korea
(North Korea) committed to abandoning all
nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs
and returning at an early date to the treaty
on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons
(NPT) and to IAEA (International Atomic
Energy Agency) safeguards.
The United States affirmed that is has no
nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula
and has no intention to attack or invade
the DPRK with nuclear or conventional weapons.
The ROK (South Korea) reaffirmed its commitment
not to receive or deploy nuclear weapons
in accordance with the 1992 joint declaration
of the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,
while affirming that there exist no nuclear
weapons within its territory.
The 1992 joint declaration of the Denuclearization
of the Korean Peninsula should be observed
The DPRK stated that it has the right to
peaceful uses of nuclear energy.
The other parties expressed their respect
and agreed to discuss at an appropriate
time the subject of the provision of light-water
reactor to the DPRK.
2) The six parties undertook, in their relations,
to abide by the purposes and principles
of the Charter of the United Nations and
recognized norms of international relations.
The DPRK and the United States undertook
to respect each other's sovereignty, exist
peacefully together and take steps to normalize
their relations subject to their respective
The DPRK and Japan undertook to take steps
to normalize their relations in accordance
with the (2002) Pyongyang Declaration, on
the basis of the settlement of unfortunate
past and the outstanding issues of concern.
3) The six parties undertook to promote
economic cooperation in the fields of energy,
trade and investment, bilaterally and/or
China, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK),
Russia and the U.S. stated their willingness
to provide energy assistance to the DPRK.
The ROK reaffirmed its proposal of July
12, 2005, concerning the provision of 2
million kilowatts of electric power to the
4) Committed to joint efforts for lasting
peace and stability in northeast Asia. The
directly related parties will negotiate
a permanent peace regime on the Korean Peninsula
at an appropriate separate forum.
The six parties agreed to explore ways and
means for promoting security cooperation
in northeast Asia.
5) The six parties agreed to take coordinated
steps to implement the aforementioned consensus
in a phased manner in line with the principle
of ''commitment for commitment, action for
6) The six parties agreed to hold the fifth
round of the six party talks in Beijing
in early November 2005 at a date to be determined
verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula
※ Resolution to observe and realize the 1992 Korean
Peninsula Denuclearization Declaration
- DPRK ? To abandon all nuclear weapons and ongoing
nuclear weapons programs
To resume safeguard agreements with the NPT and
IAEA as soon as possible
- US ? To reconfirm that the Peninsula is free of
Resolution to practice nonaggression toward the
- ROK ? To reconfirm that the Peninsula is free
of nuclear weapons
Resolution to stand by the 1992 Korean Peninsula
the DPRK's rights to the peaceful use of nuclear
- The matter of providing the DPRK with light-water
reactors to be addressed at a 'suitable time'
of relations with the Western World
- Measures for the mutual respect of US-DPRK sovereignty,
peaceful coexistence, and normalization of relations
- Normalization of DRPK-Japan relations through
the Pyongyang Statement (settling historical disputes)
the DRPK with economic cooperation and energy aid
- Strengthening bilateral/multilateral economic
cooperation in the fields of energy, trade, and
- Confirmation of ROK-US-Japan-Russia-China willingness
to provide the DPRK with energy
- Reconfirmation of ROK's proposal of direct channeling
of power (2M kW) to DPRK (Jul. 12, 2005)
for establishing peace in the Peninsula
- Korean Peninsula peace treaty to be negotiated
through a separate forum
the 'words for words, actions for actions' principle
- Agreement to take 'mutually coordinated measures'
in accordance with this principle
to hold 5th Round of the Six-Party Talks early in
November, in Beijing
- Specific date to be decided upon through mutual
Proceedings and Key Issues - the ‘Scope of CVID’
and ‘light-water reactor’
Marked US-DPRK differences
on light-water reactors
confrontation and lack of concessions by both
the US and DPRK on the rights to the peaceful
use of nuclear energy once threatened to scuttle
the talks, but persistent bilateral negotiation
and conciliatory efforts by the ROK and China
have resulted in an agreement.
※ Key topics and development of US-DPRK debate
- The DPRK stated ahead of the talks that "no
nation needs outside authorization in order to
enjoy its rights to the peaceful use of nuclear
energy', and requested "the provision of
light-water reactors in exchange for its abandonment
of graphite-moderated reactors" during the
General Meeting held on Sep. 15th.
- The US responds that "the matter of light-water
reactors is absolutely out of the question".
- At a press conference held on Sep 16th, the
DPRK denounces the US and threatens that it "will
not cease nuclear activities unless provided with
※ Meanwhile, the DPRK has also emphasized that
"due to the concern expressed by the US,
any acquired light-water reactors will be jointly
managed and open to inspections".
Conciliatory efforts by the ROK and China
ROK delegation demonstrated diplomatic finesse
at critical junctures of the talks, preventing
a breakdown in negotiations.
- Delegation Chief Song Min-soon attenuated US-DPRK
disagreement by remarking that "the window
of opportunity is open for the light-water reactors"
(Sep. 15th). President Roh supported this by stating
that "rights to the peaceful use of nuclear
energy may be respected if certain conditions
are satisfied" (Sep. 16th).
- In a Minister-level opening speech (Sep. 14th),
Unification Minister Jung Dong-young urged the
DPRK's cooperation for producing a Joint Declaration
and communicated to top DPRK officials US Delegate
Chief Hill's message that "Washington was
of clear resolve to normalize relations with the
- Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon contacted Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice, expressing ROK consent
to China's 5th draft joint statement and urging
a change in the US position.
ROK also directed efforts toward reaching an "agreement
on principles" through actively proposing
conciliatory offers when US-DPRK disagreement
concerning the light-water reactors grew serious.
- The ROK remark about a "window of opportunity"
contributed to the parties’ circumventing of the
light-water reactor issue.
the host state, continually contacted both the
US and DPRK and combined persistent persuasion
and aggressive argumentation to urge each party
to make strategic decisions.
- Concerning its 5th draft, China urged the US
and DPRK to reply "only in the affirmative
or negative"; the ROK officially announced
approval of the draft.
- In a telephone conversation with Secretary of
State Rice, Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing
emphasized that "the US must make a decision".
New York Times and the Washington Post named China
the "victor" of the talks, citing the
central role it played in bringing about the current
Bridging of differences and the agreement on Joint
until the Delegate Chiefs' General Meeting on
Sep. 18th, the US maintained that China's draft
was "ambiguous" and the DPRK also expressed
opposition. Although a breakdown of the talks
was feared at one point, conciliatory efforts
by the ROK and China led to the announcement of
the Joint Declaration on Sep. 19th.
※ The US and DPRK persisted in bilateral negotiations,
even amid the high tension over the light-water
the two parties agreed to authorize the DPRK's
right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, conditional
on the DPRK's total CVID (complete, verifiable,
irreversible dismantlement) of all nuclear materials,
its return to the NPT, and submission to IAEA
outcome seems to be the result of reluctance by
both the US and DPRK to bear responsibility for
having contributed to the talks’ dissolution,
as well as the DPRK's strategic decision to offer
"total CVID" in exchange for more concrete
concessions that may become feasible, given the
US willingness to compromise.
Agreement on a Joint
Declaration and the principle of denuclearizing
ambiguous slogan of the "denuclearization
of the Peninsula" circulated during the 1st
through 3rd rounds of the talks has gained a measure
of concreteness by directly addressing "the
DPRK's abandonment of its nuclear program".
has also gained some binding power through by
articulating the principles of DPRK observance
of international norms, US assurance of the DPRK's
security, and ROK-DPRK observance of the Joint
Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Peninsula.
DPRK decision to offer
"total CVID" of nuclear materials
the fact that the DPRK's nuclear capability was
its sole source of leverage in negotiations with
the US after the fall of the Soviet Union and
other socialist regimes, this decision is highly
worthy of notice.
Joint Declaration includes articles on all concessions
such as the normalization of relations, provision
of energy, and economic cooperation. Furthermore,
the Declaration also mentions "respecting
the DPRK's right to the peaceful use of nuclear
energy" and "addressing the matter of
providing light-water reactors at a suitable time".
The DPRK most likely signed the Joint Declaration
because of these clauses, which offered a "window
of opportunity" for the light-water reactors.
US concedes on the light-water
US made a concession in stating that the DPRK's
right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy may
be approved and that the matter of light-water
reactors may be discussed. It has gone as far
as expressing the willingness to provide energy
aid to the DPRK, reflecting a different stance
compared to previous rounds of talks.
※ Some believe that the DPRK proposal to leave
the management of the light-water reactors to
a committee of six states prompted the US to make
US reconfirmed its stance of non-aggression toward
the DPRK, precluding the DPRK argument that it
needed nuclear capabilities to deter potential
Establishing a peace regime
on the Peninsula , normalization of US-DPRK, DPRK-Japan
relations, and organizing a Peace Forum
agreeing to organize a separate forum for discussing
the establishment of a peace regime on the Peninsula,
a basis has been established for pursuing long-term
talks on the issue.
possibility of the normalization of the DPRK's
relations with the US and Japan as pursued through
separate bilateral talks may contribute to dissolving
the Cold War power structure still prevalent on
may serve as a stepping stone to: final resolution
of the DPRK nuclear issue -> dissolution of
Cold War structures and establishing peace on
the Peninsula -> realizing the vision of a
"Northeast Asia Security Cooperation"
Ambiguous wording leaves
room for disputes
an agreement on the 'words for words' principle
was reached, US-DPRK differences on the specifics
of the 'actions for actions' principle, such as
the sequence, procedure, and content of the actions,
may spark further disputes.
- Scope of CVID: US-DPRK disagreement may recur
during the process of designating the specific
facilities and materials to be subject to CVID;
the US will attempt to be as inclusive as possible
while the DPRK will attempt to limit the scope
- Time to provide the light-water reactors: The
DPRK will continue to request "light-water
reactors first" while the US will maintain
that reactors will come only after the DPRK's
"abandonment of nuclear programs"
the ROK, a dispute may arise concerning the overlap
between the light-water reactors and the ROK's
"important proposal" of energy supply
to the DPRK.
※ The ROK government has stated that the light-water
reactors and KEDO are "two separate enterprises",
and that its "important proposal" would
replace the KEDO light-water reactors. The government
has added that the supply of electricity would
last only until the construction of light-water
reactors is complete in the DPRK.
the Joint Declaration reflects a general agreement
on the denuclearization of the Peninsula, the
road to taking concrete actions for security assurances,
economic assistance, and the normalization of
DPRK-US and DPRK-Japan relations is expected to
be riddled with obstacles arising from differences
in US-DPRK opinions.
this sense, the 5th Round of the Six-Party Talks
to be held in November will present an even greater
challenge than the previous sessions.
DPRK's announcement that "the light-water
reactors must be provided for first", which
came the day immediately following the announcement
of the Joint Declaration, signals that US-DPRK
diplomatic jockeying in the run-up to the 5th
round of talks has already begun.
demand by the DPRK, rather than being geared toward
nullifying the articles of the Joint Declaration,
seems to be an attempt to take the initiative
on articulating the "specific” interpretation
of the ambiguous phrases used in the Declaration.
this reason, the US and Japan are refraining from
over-reacting, pursuing a principle-based stance.
- US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice remarked
on Sep. 21st that "under no circumstances
shall the light-water reactors be provided first".
※ At the closing General Meeting on Sep. 19th,
the five participant states excluding the DPRK
are believed to have generally agreed to the US
view that the "suitable time" for the
provision of the light-water reactors as stipulated
in the Declaration should be interpreted as "after
the DPRK has abandoned its nuclear program, rejoined
the NPT and implemented IAEA safeguards agreements".