NORTH KOREA Closing of Liaison Office .............................. 10 Submarine Incident ..................................... 10-11 Agreed Framework ....................................... 11
MR. DAVIES: Our understanding is that, indeed, they are closing a Liaison Office that was established in the wake of the 1991 North-South Basic Agreement, which was an agreement that anticipated expanded cross-border contacts.
The Liaison Office was a working-level office that was unable to fulfill its intended function because there have not been up to this point the expanded cross-border contacts that were spoken of in the 1991 agreement.
That is our understanding of why the office was closed. It was an office that, for the last five years, didn't do much, if anything, and so closed down.
QUESTION: There were some reports in Japanese and Korean newspapers that the North Koreans had indicated to the United States, in New York, in their meetings that they were willing to come out with some statement of regret concerning the submarine incident. Can you comment on that, or can you tell us what your understanding of the current North Korean position on that is?
MR. DAVIES: Our position on the sub incident is unchanged from recent days, and that is, we view the sub incident as a serious act, a provocative event. We've said, and stick by, the fact that North Korea needs to make an appropriate gesture to the South in order to improve the atmosphere. It has yet to do so. We've called on it repeatedly to do so. So that's where it stands.
I'm not going to get into describing for you what the North Koreans have told us in New York or what we've replied specifically. We'll keep those talks confidential. That's our position on the sub incident. It is there as an impediment to the relationship between the two sides on the peninsula. We think the North Koreans should make some kind of a gesture as a way of redressing that problem.
QUESTION: What kind of a gesture -- an apology?
MR. DAVIES: That's up to them. It's up to North Korea to work out. It's really between North and South Korea to work out. We think it's important, though, that the Agreed Framework go forward. By all indications, it is going forward.
We certainly are playing our part in the Agreed Framework in the delivery, for instance, of heavy fuel oil. KEDO -- the organization set up by the Agreed Framework -- has, in fact, taken on some new membership recently, including most recently the European Union. So that process is alive and well and should remain functioning.
QUESTION: Any signs that the North Koreans are seeking to slide out of the agreement in any way?
MR. DAVIES: I don't have any signs to report to you right now that they're sliding out of the agreement. Our understanding is that they're fulfilling their role in the Agreed Framework. We believe they should continue to do so.
What I'm talking about here, as regards the sub incident, is the relationship, such as it is, between North and South Korea and how the North can get back to the slightly better track that they were on before the sub incident occurred with South Korea.
(###)