This report is a collection of selected North Korean statements on their nuclear program. This material was assembled to support the report, “North Korean Nuclear Nationalism and the Threat of Nuclear War in Korea” by Peter Hayes Professor, RMIT University and Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute and Scott Bruce, Nautilus Institute Director. These sources are meant to show the change in DPRK statements on its nuclear program between October 2002 and the present. Statements from the Korean Worker’s Party (KWP), Korean People’s Army (KPA), and DPRK Cabinet are labeled as such so that the distinctions between the views of these different institutions in the DPRK can be observed.

We invite our audience to send us other relevant statements that may compliment and expand this study.

Noël Stott, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Security Studies, offers an overview of UN Security Council Resolutions 1540 and 1373 in the African and South African contexts with specific recommendations for implementation, including “streamlining the various counter-terrorism committees, including those established pursuant to Resolutions 1267 (1999), 1373 (2001) and 1540 (2004), so that together they could form a coordinated UN Security Council body for the prevention and combating of terrorism.”

This report by Gordon Thompson outlines a code of conduct for transfer of nuclear power plant (NPP) technology to consumer countries.  The term “consumer” is used here to refer to a country that is a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has not developed an indigenous capability to design or manufacture the major components of an NPP.  The code outlined here would apply to the transfer of Generation III nuclear power plant technology during the next few decades.  Relevant items of technology would pertain to light-water reactors or CANDU reactors.  Before outlining the content of a potential code, this report provides background regarding codes of conduct, sustainability, and trends in the use of nuclear power.  It then discusses ten issue areas for a code of conduct, and outlines a process for constructing a code that accounts for each issue area.

Raymund Jose G. Quilop, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of the Philippines

and Secretary of the Philippine Political Science Association, writes “In making Southeast Asian states more receptive to the practice of extraterritoriality particularly in regard to preventing non-state actors from having access to WMD, it would be helpful to fully utilize existing mechanisms for exchanging information including the numerous platforms that bring together leaders, foreign and defense officials as well as making existing treaties such as the SEANWFZ adapt to the changed regional environment where nuclear proliferation is no longer solely the result of state action but involves non-state actors too. Indeed, the complexity of the challenge of terrorism is eventually pushing governments to become more receptive to the idea of working together, not merely in having their efforts coordinated but in finding ways to collaborate with one another.”

Peter Hayes, Professor, RMIT University and Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute, and Richard Tanter, Nautilus Institute Senior Associate,  provide an overview of the Nautilus Institute’s exploration of two inter-linked but highly contested aspects of the strategic nuclear situation on the Korean peninsula: the complexity and uncertainty associated with United States assurances of nuclear extended deterrence to South Korea (and Japan), and the potential contribution a nuclear weapon free zone to shifting the current impasse concerning North Korean nuclear weapons.

Peter Hayes, Professor, RMIT University and Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute, writes, “In this Special Report, we compare and contrast six elements that constitute national power for the ROK and the DPRK.   These are: Diplomacy and international relations, Military power, Economic power, Governance and internal security, Social development, Perceptions of future prospects—internal and external to the two Koreas. This comparison demonstrates that the ROK has achieved overwhelming superiority in every dimension of national power, especially in conventional military power. ”