US threatens North Korea with 'severe consequences' if it flouts nuclear ban
|
Version 0 of 1. North Korea would face “severe consequences” if it continued with its announced decision to restart a nuclear reactor, the US secretary of state, John Kerry, has said. Related: North Korea's renewed nuclear threat keeps experts guessing Pyongyang has said it is restarting the long-mothballed Yongbyon reactor, which is capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium, and has threatened to launch a rocket, a move seen internationally as a test of ballistic missile technology. Asked whether Washington could respond credibly to North Korea after striking a deal to allow Iran’s nuclear program to continue, Kerry insisted it could. “There will be severe consequences as we go forward if North Korea does not refrain from its irresponsible provocations that aggravate regional concerns, make the region less safe, and if it refuses to live up to its international obligations,” he said. “Our position is clear: we will not accept a DPRK – North Korea – as a nuclear weapons state, just as we said that about Iran.” Asked what the US could do if North Korea continued to flout bans on its nuclear and missile programs, Kerry said Kim Jong-un’s regime was already experiencing growing diplomatic isolation. “China for instance has taken serious steps in the last year, year and a half, since we engaged China on this subject specifically to encourage them to do more, and they have,” he said. He had also spoken to his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, about North Korean defiance. “So there’s a lot happening. And I can assure you that all of these countries remain fixated on the need for North Korea to denuclearise with respect to its weapons program and to live up to its international obligations.” North Korea mothballed the Yongbyon reactor in 2007 under a six-nation aid-for-disarmament accord but began renovating it after its latest nuclear test in 2013. When fully operational the reactor is capable of producing about 6kg (13lb) of plutonium a year – enough for one nuclear bomb, experts say. |