Bush hard-liners see end of N.Korea accord

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Hard-liners in the Bush administration hope a recent decision questioning North Korea's compliance with a 1994 nuclear agreement is a prelude to the accord's demise, according to U.S. officials.

If they are right, it would mark another administration assault on a 30-year-old system of arms control agreements.

"The battle remains to be fought (on North Korea) but that's why this shift in the certification question this year is so important," one senior official told Reuters.

The White House sent a strong message, ruling it could not be sure Pyongyang was adhering to the agreement that was hailed as a landmark on signing eight years ago and aimed to freeze its nuclear weapons program.

It was a dramatic break with the administration of former President Clinton, which negotiated the accord called the Agreed Framework to resolve a nuclear crisis with Pyongyang.

As a condition of U.S. assistance to North Korea, Congress requires the U.S. president to certify annually that Pyongyang is in compliance with the 1994 accord.

The White House told Congress nine days ago it could not do that because it was not satisfied Pyongyang was making new nuclear inspection arrangements with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

But it gave North Korea some respite by invoking a national security waiver allowing U.S. commitments to continue -- at least for this year.

Those commitments include $95 million for half a million tons of fuel oil to the secretive and economically desperate communist country as well as backing for construction of two light-water nuclear power reactors, all part of the estimated $5 billion deal.

Next year could be a different story.

U.S. officials said administration hard-liners who are most suspicious of Pyongyang see this year's certification decision as a first step toward unraveling the agreement altogether.

It occurred after Bush toughened his rhetoric following the September 11 attacks on America and put North Korea in an "axis of evil" with Iran and Iraq, claiming each was intent on developing weapons of mass destruction.

"It was a transitional move away from saying, 'Everything is fine.' It's saying, 'Be on notice. You've got a year to go,"' one official said.

This official, who opposes the 1994 accord and believes North Korea has not complied with nuclear safeguards, was optimistic the administration next year would declare Pyongyang in violation of the agreement.

"If they don't allow the IAEA the kind of access they need (for inspections), then it's clear they (North Koreans) will have broken the Agreed Framework and the responsibility for that will be unambiguously theirs," the official said.

"You might as well say flatly, 'You're in breach of the agreement and it's over,"' he added.

In such a case, he would press the United States to stop backing the reactor construction and stop providing oil supplies, although humanitarian aid would continue.

The official added that the Korean Energy Development Organization, a New York- based international agency overseeing the reactor project led by the United States,

South Korea and Japan -- would then "disappear."

Officials said hard-liners believe the accord with its massive aid is propping up North Korea and impeding its reunification with South Korea -- a U.S. democratic

ally.

In general, the debate over the 1994 agreement has pitted the State Department, which favors the accord, against the Pentagon, which opposes it. An exception is

undersecretary of state for international security affairs, John Bolton, who often goes

with the Pentagon.

The administration insists the North must immediately begin full cooperation with the IAEA on inspections to determine how many nuclear weapons or material Pyongyang produced.

Former Clinton aides argue Pyongyang does not need to begin those inspections until KEDO is ready to install the nuclear components in the reactors.

Under Clinton, high-level visits took place and North Korea agreed to suspend test launches of their long-range missiles. But Bush has taken a much harder line toward the North and talks have been erratic and at lower levels.

Bush has given formal notice that the United States will withdraw from the 1972 Anti- ballistic Missile treaty and has refused to support ratification of the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. He has taken issue with other pacts as well.

Copyright 2002 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.