Thursday, July 30, 2015




FM SPOKESMAN SLAMS U.S. FOR DELIBERATELY LINKING NEGOTIATIONS WITH IRAN OVER NUCLEAR ISSUE WITH DPRK

A spokesman for the Foreign Ministry of the DPRK Tuesday gave the following answer to the question put by KCNA as regards the fact that the U.S. is deliberately linking the conclusion of the agreement on the nuclear issue of Iran with the DPRK:
The U.S. is talking this and that over the nuclear issue of the DPRK in the wake of the conclusion of the agreement on the nuclear issue of Iran. A spokesperson of the U.S. Department of State said on July 14 that "Washington is ready for dialogue with Pyongyang if discussion is made on the nuclear issue of North Korea and it helps put it on a concrete and full-fledge stage of nuclear disarmament."
A U.S. under secretary of State uttered on July 16 that it was his hope that the conclusion of the agreement with Iran would help the DPRK rethink of its nuclear issue.
Iran's nuclear agreement is the achievement made by its protracted efforts to have its independent right to nuclear activities recognized and sanctions lifted. But the situation of the DPRK is quite different from it. The DPRK is the nuclear weapons state both in name and reality and it has interests as a nuclear weapons state. The DPRK is not interested at all in the dialogue to discuss the issue of making it freeze or dismantle its nukes unilaterally first.
The nuclear deterrence of the DPRK is not a plaything to be put on the negotiating table as it is the essential means to protect its sovereignty and vital rights from the U.S. nuclear threat and hostile policy which have lasted for more than half a century.
It is illogical to compare Iran's nuclear agreement with the situation of the DPRK which is exposed to constant provocative military hostile acts and the biggest nuclear threat of the U.S. including its ceaseless large-scale joint military exercises.
The DPRK remains unchanged in the mission of its nuclear force as long as the U.S. continues pursuing its hostile policy toward the former.

No comments:

Post a Comment