White House Mum on Syrian Nukes

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071018/FOREIGN/110180044/1003
White House mum on Syrian nukes

By Nicholas Kralev
October 18, 2007

Bush administration officials said yesterday that they are determined to prevent current and former hard-liners from using reports of North Korean nuclear-related transfers to Syria to derail negotiations with Pyongyang.

President Bush repeatedly refused at a press conference to disclose any information about the suspected exports to Syria or an Israeli air strike on a site thought to house those materials, saying any proliferation concerns that the United States has will be addressed in six-nation talks with the North.

Asked whether the American people have a right to know whether North Korea is secretly aiding the nuclear ambitions of a country hostile to the United States while negotiating the end of its own programs, Mr. Bush offered a terse answer.

“No,” he said. “You have a right to know this — that when it comes to the six-party talks, the issue of proliferation has equal importance with the issue of weaponry, and that North Korea has said that they will stop proliferating, just like they have said they will fully disclose and disable any weapons programs.”

Current and former hard-line members of Mr. Bush's administration, who drove North Korea policy during his first term but have since lost his ear, have expressed dismay that the White House is not making more of the Syria reports.

Those policy-makers to whom Mr. Bush listens now — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Christopher R. Hill, the chief negotiator with the North — will not allow the hard-liners, who criticized the recent nuclear agreement even before the Syria mystery, to stall the negotiations, administration officials said.

“The president has decided that it's worth pursuing a deal with North Korea, and that's what matters,” one official said.

In February, Pyongyang agreed in principle to dismantle its nuclear programs, and to shut down its main reactor at Yongbyon as a first step, which it did in July. Earlier this month, it promised to disable Yongbyon's three main facilities and to produce a full declaration of its nuclear efforts and capabilities by year's end.

But critics of the deal — whose other parties are China, Japan, South Korea and Russia — said the text was too vague and left much room for interpretation.

Some of that vagueness became apparent yesterday, when Mr. Bush said the North Koreans had agreed to something that analysts said is not technically part of the deal.

“Step two will be full declaration of any plutonium that has been manufactured and/or the construction of bombs, along with a full declaration of any proliferation activities,” the president said.

The Oct. 3 document does say that the North “committed not to transfer nuclear materials, technology or know-how,” but when it comes to the declaration, it says it “will include all nuclear facilities, materials and programs.” There is no mention of documenting proliferation activities.

Nevertheless, such a disclosure “is implied in their commitment, and we intend to hold them to it,” said Gordon Johndroe, spokesman for the National Security Council at the White House.

The agreement is also vague on whether North Korea is required to list any nuclear weapons it has built. Kim Kye-gwan, the chief North Korean negotiator, was reported as saying two weeks ago: “We can't declare nuclear weapons this year, because if we do it at this stage, our nuclear-weapons technology level will be revealed.“

Bruce Klingner, senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, said the “very vague document” demonstrates the need for “specific treaty language prohibiting further proliferation and requiring a full declaration” of past activities.

Congress is likely to ask questions about the Syria reports during Mr. Hill's next testimony on the deal, Mr. Klingner said.

“The administration needs to come clean on this story to the degree possible to garner more support for the negotiations,” he said.