Christopher R. Hill
Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs
Grand Hyatt
Seoul, Korea
November 29, 2007
Remarks at the American Chamber of Commerce in Korea
Thank you very much Bill, and let me just say it is a great pleasure to be back here at the AmCham. I have spoken to the
AmCham many times, and it's always been a very good experience. I remember when I first spoke to the AmCham. I predicted
-- I think it was September 2004 -- and I predicted the Red Sox would win the World Series. And of course, they did win
the World Series; in fact, they've hardly lost it since. People were impressed at how I knew that they were going to
win. What I didn't tell them was I'd made that same prediction every year since 1973. [laughter]
So, it was indeed a great pleasure to be asked. In fact, I'm in some respects (here as) the partial result of a door
knock group, because when Tami came through the State Department, we talked about when I might come through Korea. Of
course, Tami signed me up for lunch. So, here I am.
It's, I think, a very opportune time to come here at the end of 2007. This has been, indeed, a very busy year. I've
talked to some of Sandy Vershbow's staff here at the American Embassy. They have a very busy embassy these days under
Sandy's leadership, cleaning out the mess from a few years ago. [laughter] Thank you, Sandy.
I know that the Embassy has been very busy, and I know that the AmCham has been very busy this year really dealing with
three issues that are very familiar from my time -- three years ago, four years ago, three years ago, I guess -- which
is the visa waiver program, it's gonna happen; the FTA -- I remember back in 2004 talking about the FTA and it didn't
look like something that might happen in our life time; and then, the Six-Party Talks, about which I know a few details
and can get to in a few minutes.
And so, when I look at how we've gone through these three issues -- which I think if they can be successful, they will
help cement this U.S.-Korean bilateral relationship for years to come -- I can see that '07 was a very important year,
indeed. Actually, before I mention those three issues, there is another important issue which is the issue of relocating
the U.S. Forces Korea. It was great to see, just a few months ago, to see the beginning of construction down in
Pyongtaek and the realization that that, too, is an issue that will help this relationship for decades to come. So, that
is also moving.
Earlier this year, some several months ago, the U.S. Congress passed some important immigration legislation that has
essentially cleared the way to move on the visa waiver program. Of course, we're talking about Washington, and nothing
ever happens overnight there, but we can really see the road ahead. And while we see we've got a lot of things to deal
with -- a lot of issues that we've got to work together with the Korean immigration authorities, the Korean Foreign
Ministry -- we can see that it is possible. I mean, it is ambitious. But I think it is possible that by the end of '08,
a Korean citizen can get on a Boeing 787 -- right Bill, that will happen? -- and fly off to Honolulu or San Francisco or
wherever and not have to stop at Sandy Vershbow's office to get a visa. So, I think it is a vision that is really,
really quite realizable, even in '08. And so I can see that all the hard work that Sandy and his team have put into it
in these last couple of years and the advocacy, the very important advocacy of the U.S. Chamber, the American Chamber
here, is really leading to some results. It's a pleasure to see that moving ahead as we move to the end of '07.
Similarly, the FTA, which I know is an issue very dear to everyone's heart here, has also moved ahead. And there is no
institution that has been more helpful in getting that issue to move than the American Chamber. And I have to commend
you all for getting this done, because I have no doubt at all that this is a very, very important development for Korea.
But I also have no doubt that it is an important development for the United States. It's one of our biggest -- it is
probably our biggest FTA -- that we've done in some fifteen years. I know it's very big for Korea, and we're going to
get through this.
Now, I know that the AmCham has done a lot of work here with Korean business associations, and I think the educational
effort here in Korea has really advanced a long way since I was here three years ago. But, we are getting going on that
educational effort in Washington, and I know the AmCham door knock team was very important in that regard. You know, it
was quite interesting to see the AmCham door knock committee, because often when you see AmChams come back to
Washington, they come to Washington to complain about how they are getting treated out there. This AmCham didn't come
back to Washington to complain about what's gone on in Korea. They came back to praise what's going on in Korea and urge
the U.S. Congress to understand that and to try and get us closer together. Now, obviously we've got some issues ahead
to get through ratification. I know the Korean government wants to get this ratified very soon. In the U.S. government,
we also want to move on this. We have some issues we have to work on together, and I think we can because this is an FTA
that makes sense for both parties. So, I think we are going to get there.
And finally, let me maybe talk a little about where we are in the Six-Party Talks. This, too, has been a labor of love.
I think it has also been an area where, as we have worked together with the ROK, worked together in a multilateral
setting, we have brought the U.S. and the ROK much more closely together. I work every day with ROK diplomats on how we
can make progress on this issue. It was really efforts with ROK diplomats that led us to trying to approach this on a
step-by-step basis. It was really the understanding that we're not going to do this all in one leap. We're going to have
to get the DPRK to understand that as they move step-by-step, they will find that as they move to that next step that it
is a better place to be than it was in the previous step. And they will continue to move on. And so it has required a
lot more patience than I was born with. And I learned a lot of patience being a Red Sox fan, but I tell you that the
Six-Party Talks has sapped a lot of that out of me. But I do believe we're making progress, and I'd like to describe a
little of that progress to you.
I think '07 was a very important year in the Six-Party Talks because we really went from discussing principles and
discussing pieces of paper in large conference rooms in Beijing to actually getting stuff done on the ground. And so our
first phase was to try to get the nuclear complex in Yongbyong shut down. We were able to do that this summer. It was
not easy. You have a large complex that was, frankly speaking, in the midst of producing plutonium right up to the
summer. So to get thousands of people in Yongbyong to understand that it was being shut down was not an easy thing to
do. Yet we did it. And we did it by working very closely with the ROK, working very importantly and very closely with
China, but also with Japan and Russia. And, we succeeded in that first step.
Now, of course, the purpose of what we're trying to do in the Six-Party Talks was not just to shut down the Yongbyong
facility. But rather, it was to disable, dismantle, and finally see that these nuclear facilities, these nuclear
programs, and indeed, these nuclear weapons, are finally abandoned. And this is pursuant to an agreement we reached in
the Six Parties back in September '05. So, I think we are now on the road to getting that done. This next month is going
to be a very important month because we are going to try to complete what we call Phase Two.
Phase Two is to take the shut down of the Yongbyong facility and move it to a natural disablement. Meaning that, even
if, even if the DPRK wanted to turn it back on and start up plutonium production, as has happened in the past, they
would not be able to do that without a lot of expense and a lot of time. And I think we have a good program of how we
are doing that. And I think, importantly, they wanted the Six Parties directly involved, and in particular, also have
U.S. technicians directly involved, in undergoing and doing these technical steps at this Yongbyong facility. So, as I
speak to you today, we have some American technicians, American scientists, working together with North Korean
technicians, North Korean scientists, on disabling the Yongbyong facility. They are making progress. They are making
progress in disabling the fuel fabrication facility, the facility that makes the fuel to go to the reactor. They are
making progress in disabling the reactor so that too cannot be turned back on easily. They are also making progress in
disabling the reprocessing of spent fuel, which is actually where you make plutonium. So, all these steps are very much
underway. They are all happening.
I look forward to going to the DPRK on Monday morning and actually to getting out to Yongbyong and seeing the fruits of
this very hard labor to make sure, to understand directly, how this is working. What I can do is assure you today that
we are getting this task done.
It is not just a Six-Party operation. We have had, very importantly and very successfully, the reintroduction of the
IAEA, of the international organization that regulates nuclear energy. They have been back in Yongbyong. As you recall,
they left precipitously back in 2002. They are back there, and they monitored the shutdown this summer. It was very
important that the IAEA was able to get there within some 48 hours of the agreement to shut down the facilities. So,
we've had the IAEA there, and that is very important because we are looking ahead to when North Korea will once again
rejoin the Non-Proliferation Treaty, rejoin with IAEA safeguards and have a good membership, a proper membership with
this international organization. So, the IAEA has been there throughout. We have American technicians together with IAEA
technicians. We have a flow of materials going in, technical materials designed to help do the task of disabling this
facility. And it is going well.
But of course, disabling the facility is not the only thing we are trying to do. Another, I think, very important
element of this current phase is for the North Koreans, with whom we've had many discussions on this point, to provide
to us a full declaration of what is the universe of their nuclear programs, of their nuclear facilities, of their
nuclear material -- what the programs, facilities, and materials all are -- so that we can look at this list and figure
out how to get on with disabling and abandoning these other programs. So, we have to work very hard with the North
Koreans on that. We have made, I think, a lot of progress on that. We've made a lot of progress in the denuclearization
working group that took place on August 16 in Shenyang in China. We look forward to receiving, in the next few days,
certainly within the next week, a comprehensive list from the North Koreans on all of their nuclear programs, materials,
and facilities, so that we can move on to the next phase -- a phase that will begin at the beginning of this year -- to
design what we hope will be the final phase to finish the job and denuclearize the Korean peninsula.
So, in going to Pyongyang next week, I will go down to Yongbyon and have a look at the work being done. But I will also
be talking to the DPRK officials about the declaration that they are going to be providing to the Chinese hosts and to
make sure that, as that is provided, we will have a consensus about what should be in it, so that as we move to January
1 -- to the next phase -- that there are no surprises and we are able to move expeditiously.
So, it is a very crucial period, I fear, in some respects if we don't make progress in this next month, that if we don't
complete the disablement, if we have problems with the declaration, there will be a tendency of some people to pull back
from this process. It behooves all of us, certainly my government, but also the DPRK government, to really make sure
that we have the courage to move forward. As long as, I think, we have that courage, and we have that resolve to
complete this task, I think we are going to be able to get there. Of course, it is a difficult task to have a country
that has already produced weapons-grade plutonium, to get them to give that weapons-grade plutonium back to the
international community. That is, to abandon this type of weapons-grade plutonium. Clearly, to get that, to make that
happen, I think, you have to widen the lens somewhat, and look at not only the task of denuclearization, but also look
at some of the overall root causes in the region, as to why you might have the type of tension that could produce in one
country a nuclear program of this kind.
So, one of the things that we look forward to doing in the beginning of the year as we get through disablement is to
begin to have a peace process on the Korean peninsula, which will enable us to begin to deal with the problem of
replacing the armistice that ended the Korean War with a treaty to end the Korean War.
We also look forward to creating a Northeast Asian peace and security mechanism. That is, a means by which the six
countries, for starters, are able to come together in an ongoing discussion, maybe adding additional countries as we go
forward. And as we add identifiable tasks to that Six-Party peace and security forum, we can begin, I think, the
important development of a neighborhood in Northeast Asia.
Already -- and I think partly we must give some credit to the Six-Party process for this -- already we can see some
improvement in bilateral relationships in Northeast Asia. We see some improvement in the China-Japan relationship; we've
seen some improvement in the US-DPRK relationship. There are a number of improvements in relationships that are going on
today. I think it is partly due to the fact that we have this common effort in the Six Parties. What we need to do is
make sure that these bilateral relationships are improving, that we are able to put them together in a process that I
think can create a much better sense of neighborhood in the region. This is a part of the world that is one of the most
prolific exporters of goods and services. It now also needs to be an exporter of security, as well.
Of course, I think, every country has difficult choices to make as we go forward in this process. Certainly my country
has had difficult choices to make as we've gone forward in the Six Party process. But I think that the country that has
had the most difficulty facing this has been, in fact, the DPRK. I think it has been important to all of us to show the
DPRK that if they make the right choice about getting away from these nuclear programs, they will see that that choice
is rewarded. They will see improved relationships not only with the U.S. but also with other countries in the region.
They will see less international isolation. Indeed, they will see a road ahead that will allow them to become part of
the international community.
I think from the DPRK's point of view, these are very tough times because they have to think very hard about what they
want. Obviously, there are some people in the DPRK who prefer a continuing sense of crisis, a continuing sense of siege
mentality. But I think there are other people in the DPRK who understand that maybe it is time to try another route,
maybe it is time to look for ways to reach out to the international community. Obviously, there are many changes ahead
for the DPRK, and change is difficult, as the cliché goes. Certainly the DPRK will have to look at a lot of elements in
its organization, and see which ones it really can preserve and which ones it really needs to move away from. Certainly
it will need especially to look at its economy, an economy that is not producing the goods and services anywhere close
to the aspirations of its people, or the aspirations that its people should have. So, I think, the DPRK in particular
needs to make some tough choices.
What is equally clear, I think, from the DPRK's point of view, is the idea of having a militarized country, a country
where the army is taking such a large percentage of the gross domestic product, a country where so much of national
revenue has gone into weapons of mass destruction. They need to understand that that is, frankly, not answering their
needs. I mean, not unlike, perhaps, a story one could find from Greek mythology of someone picking up something on a
mountain side and thinking that this something is going to really help that person become rich. I think the North
Koreans have understood that, in picking up this nuclear energy, they've actually picked up something that has caused
nothing but suffering for themselves and for their people.
So, I hope that as we go forward they will see that a much better course is the one that is laid out for them in the
Six-Party process. I'd like to say also that, from the United States' point of view, it has been very important that we
engage in the Six-Party process. There are a lot of people that think that somehow this should be a U.S.-North Korean
issue. Nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula are not just a U.S. problem; they are everybody's problem. And that is
why it is very important that the U.S. engage with other parties, and that other parties engage with the North Koreans
on this. And I think we are able to do that.
What I do like to believe is that, as we've gone forward in this Six-Party process, our relationships with the countries
in the region have greatly improved. I think that is frankly true in the ROK, even though we've always had a very good
relationship with the ROK. I think our relationship with the ROK is better as a result of the Six-Party process. I think
it has also been very effective for our relationship with China, where the U.S. needs to work with China, find areas
that we can work together, find areas of common interest, and then roll up our sleeves and do old-fashioned diplomacy to
try and get these things done.
I think, overall, the Six-Party process -- an unfinished work that it is, nonetheless -- is one that holds promise not
only for the immediate task ahead of us of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula, but also looking ahead, that once we
achieve that, and we must achieve that for these other accomplishments to be meaningful, that as we go forward we should
be able to create a greater sense of community in the neighborhood. A greater sense of a neighborhood that is able not
only to consume security, but actually produce it, and to be part of an international community and able to help other
parts of the world.
Already we are seeing the ROK as a very active member in peacekeeping in other parts of the world. Obviously, we'd like
to see more of this coming from this part of the world.
So, I would say, as we approach the end of this calendar year, it's been a very good year in terms of U.S.-ROK
relations. We've done a lot on the visa waiver program, and we can actually see the top of the mountain coming up in the
next twelve months. We've done a lot on the FTA, and there, too, I think we know what we need to do. I think everyone
knows what they need to do. And I think we, too, can see where we'll get in '08. Finally, on the Six-Party process,
working not only bilaterally, but with the Chinese and with the Japanese, because we have had some very, very good
discussions with the Japanese and there is a lot to be very hopeful about in Japan's attitude to resolving this issue,
but together -- ROK, Japan, Russia, China, and, of course, the North Koreans -- we will be able to achieve
denuclearization in this coming year, 2008.
So thank-you very much and maybe we'll go to questions.
QUESTION: Secretary Hill, thank you very much for coming. Really good to see you. I would like to thank you for all of
us as well as outside of this room for the tremendous accomplishment and effort. As important as it is, the agreement we
got on this plutonium plant shutdown [inaudible], a heckuva lot, if on the other hand they continue the enriched uranium
program. I know you just said you are going to move on with the declaration which covers all of these things. But once
we get that, [inaudible] of our position has been very viable. How do you verify that what they say is in fact the
truth, coming from the fact that for the past 60 years North Korea has been notorious in not keeping their word? Thank
you.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL: Well, first of all let me just say that while trust is an important element in any negotiation
- I think any businessperson here knows the role of trust - in and of itself it is not sufficient. You need to verify
what's actually happened. And trust, I think, often plays a role in sort of tactical moments through negotiations. So,
if someone says the check they owe you is in the mail, you can trust that they have put the check in the mail. But
frankly, you're going to verify that the check actually arrives. So, fortunately with respect to shutting down a
plutonium reactor complex, we're able to verify that fairly quickly through our own technical means, but also and very
importantly, by the role of the IAEA onsite. But with respect to the uranium enrichment issue, there too, verification
will be absolutely key, and yet, verification is more difficult in that circumstance. Now, we have had in recent months
some very important and very detailed conversations with the DPRK on uranium enrichment, and those conversations are
continuing. And while we do not yet have a solution as I stand here today, I thought that based on the direction of
these conversations, we can have a verifiable solution by the end of the year. We are not looking to humiliate anybody
in this process, but with respect to uranium enrichment we do need an acknowledgment of what has gone on. We need an
explanation of how it went on, and we need a disposition of any equipment involved in uranium enrichment. So, we are
pursuing our conversations with this in mind. So, I can just say in the privacy of this room, I can say we have made
some progress but we do have a ways to go.
AMCHAM PRESIDENT: We have time for one more question.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL: Oh, I'm sorry about that, but --
QUESTION: Yes, Tom [inaudible] with [inaudible]. Can I take you back to your opening remarks when you were, I think,
thinking back to your days as Ambassador and you remarked on how rapidly some things have changed here -- progress with
the FTA, the visa waiver, the base movement, etc. Let me ask you to think a bit in the future. One business-related
North Korea project you didn't mention was Kaesung. I'd like you to speculate what you think it might look like five
years from today.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL: Let me just say I think the ROK is making a bet that engagement with the DPRK -- together with
its participation in the Six-Party process -- will lead the DRPK toward complete denuclearization. And as I said, we are
looking for that complete denuclearization in the calendar year, in '08. And on the assumption that denuclearization is
in fact achieved, I can see in the next five years an expansion not only of Kaesung itself, but of that type of project
with the DPRK. If we don't achieve denuclearization, and the DPRK believes it can continue to hold onto some weapons,
then I think we have a very difficult road, and frankly speaking, I don't think very much will be possible. Thanks to
the Six-Party process, but also thanks to what the ROK is doing bilaterally and what some other countries are doing
bilaterally, the time to settle the nuclear issue in North Korea -- in this coming calendar year - the time to settle
has never been better. So, we have spent a lot of time trying to line up these various avenues of communication, these
avenues of cooperation, we've spent a lot of time trying to line these up. And if we can't get to our objective through
this method, through these various avenues that we've line up, then I think we have a very big problem indeed. And I
think Kaesung and other such projects would also have a very problematic future.
AMCHAM PRESIDENT: And with that [inaudible] brought our Chairman up to close the meeting. And [inaudible] a small gift.
AMCHAM PRESIDENT: Well, thank you very much, sir. Again, especially for taking so much time out of your very, very
valuable schedule. I know you collect Red Sox memorabilia, but this is just to add to your AmCham bric-a-brac.
ASSISTANT SECRETARY HILL: Thank you very much.
Released on November 30, 2007
ENDS