This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/25/world/asia/south-korea-and-us-fail-to-reach-nuclear-energy-deal.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
South Korea and U.S. Fail to Reach Deal on Nuclear Energy South Korea and U.S. Fail to Reach Deal on Nuclear Energy
(about 11 hours later)
SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea said on Wednesday that it had failed to reach a compromise with the United States on its civil nuclear energy program, forcing the two allies to delay the deadline for a deal by two years. SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea and the Obama administration delayed the deadline for a deal that Seoul had hoped would allow it to begin making its own fuel for its civil nuclear energy program, but that the United States feared would undermine its attempts to curb nuclear proliferation.
Secretary of State John Kerry had called for an agreement before the planned summit between President Obama and his South Korean counterpart, Park Geun-hye, on May 7. But the differences between the allies remained deep over South Korea’s demand that the United States lift a ban on enriching uranium and reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. The United States had South Korea commit itself to the ban in a treaty signed in 1972 when Washington transferred nuclear material and technical expertise to help build South Korea’s nuclear energy industry. It had appeared that a deal might be reached this year, but officials in both countries said the deadline would slip until 2016.
As the allies negotiated to revise and renew the treaty, which expires in March 2014, South Korea demanded that the ban be lifted so that it can enrich uranium to make its own nuclear fuel. Currently, it imports all its nuclear fuel. It also wanted to reprocess spent nuclear fuel to reduce its almost-full nuclear waste storage and turn the waste into a new fuel for the next generation of reactors it is developing. The government of President Park Geun-hye has been pushing hard for the United States to lift a ban, part of a treaty signed in 1972, that prevents South Korea from enriching uranium and reprocessing spent nuclear fuel.
But the same technologies are also used to make material for nuclear weapons. Washington feared that allowing South Korea to engage in either enrichment or reprocessing technologies would undermine its global efforts to curb nuclear proliferation. That would also complicate Washington’s diplomacy to persuade North Korea and Iran to give up their nuclear programs, American officials said. But the same technologies are also used to make material for nuclear weapons. American officials have said that lifting the ban would have complicated diplomatic efforts to persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear programs and to stop any attempt by Iran to develop atomic weapons.
South Korea’s push to have the ban lifted comes at a time of heightened tensions with North Korea, which was angered by United Nations sanctions imposed after its latest nuclear test and which has threatened for several weeks to attack both South Korea and the United States if provoked. Some South Koreans — including a few members of the governing party — responded to the threats by urging their country to develop its own nuclear weapons program rather than relying solely on the United States for protection.
Ms. Park’s government has maintained that it has no intention of developing nuclear weapons, but the suggestion that some South Koreans wanted to push for the bomb may have raised the stakes in the negotiations over the deal.
The United States had South Korea commit itself to the ban in a treaty when Washington transferred nuclear material and technical expertise to help build the South’s nuclear energy industry.
The treaty had been set to expire in March 2014, but will now be extended to 2016. Currently, South Korea imports all of its nuclear fuel. It also wanted to reprocess spent nuclear fuel to turn the waste into a new fuel for the next generation of reactors it is developing.
In a recent visit to South Korea, Secretary of State John Kerry called for an agreement before a planned summit meeting between President Obama and Ms. Park on May 7. But he also suggested that lifting the ban would be difficult.
“We are at a delicate moment with respect to the situation with the North, and we are also dealing with Iran and are very concerned at this time about not having any ingredients that could alter our approach with respect to either of those,” Mr. Kerry said in the South Korean capital, Seoul, on April 12.“We are at a delicate moment with respect to the situation with the North, and we are also dealing with Iran and are very concerned at this time about not having any ingredients that could alter our approach with respect to either of those,” Mr. Kerry said in the South Korean capital, Seoul, on April 12.
But President Park made securing American concessions on the issue one of her top campaign pledges for her December election. She has repeatedly appealed for such concessions since talking office in February. Ms. Park’s foreign minister, Yun Byung-se, had said the negotiations would be an important test of “trust” between the allies.
Her foreign minister, Yun Byung-se, said the negotiations will be an important test of “trust” between the allies. “Washington does not seem to trust South Korea as much as it reiterates blood-tight relations,” the mass-circulation newspaper JoongAng Ilbo said in an editorial last Saturday, when rumors of a delay in the deadline began to circulate. “Just because the pact has been extended for two years does not assure that the two will narrow their differences. It is merely a makeshift move to avoid a dispute.”
“Washington does not seem to trust South Korea as much as it reiterates blood-tight relations with Korea are as important as a linchpin, since it does not agree to revising the pact,” the mass-circulation daily JoongAng Ilbo said in an editorial last Saturday, when the postponement of a deal was first leaked to the media. “Just because the pact has been extended for two years does not assure that the two will narrow their differences. It is merely a makeshift move to avoid a dispute.” Cho Tai-young, a spokesman for the South’s Foreign Ministry, said Wednesday that the two allies had agreed to extend the treaty to give negotiators more time to sort out “the complexity of details and technologies.”
The South denied any intention of developing nuclear weapons. But a few members of the South Korean governing party grabbed Washington’s attention by urging their government to consider building nuclear weapons to counter North Korea’s nuclear threat. Asked to identify the precise issues that had forced the delay, Patrick Ventrell, the State Department spokesman, told reporters in Washington, “I don’t think it hinges on one thing or another, other than these are very technical talks.”
On Wednesday, Cho Tai-young, a spokesman of the South Korean Foreign Ministry, said the two allies agreed to extend the expiration date of the nuclear treaty by two years until 2016 so their negotiators have more time to sort out “the complexity of details and technologies.” But he said there has been “some meaningful progress” over South Korea’s need to manage its spent nuclear fuel and secure a stable supply of nuclear fuel. South Korea dependence on atomic energy is projected to grow to 60 percent by 2030.
South Korea is now the world’s fifth-largest nuclear energy producer, meeting 35 percent of its electricity needs with its 23 nuclear reactors. Its dependence on atomic energy is projected to grow to 60 percent by 2030. It also believes that easing American restrictions on its nuclear activities is important for its plan to become a global exporter of nuclear power plants.

Rick Gladstone contributed reporting from New York, and David E. Sanger from Jerusalem.