Senate Committee Passes Extension for South Korea Deal
Kenneth Fletcher
NS&D Monitor
1/17/2014
The Obama Administration is working on negotiations for a host of civil nuclear cooperation agreements in 2014, but will likely continue to face questions from lawmakers on provisions regarding enrichment and reprocessing in certain deals. Some lawmakers and nonproliferation advocates have pushed for a “gold standard” in the agreements, known as ‘123 agreements,’ restricting rights to develop enrichment and reprocessing technologies. In the spring of 2012 the Administration launched an interagency review of its 123 agreement policy, which wrapped up last month. “Where did we come out? As a practical matter, you can’t get the gold standard unless you are going to walk away from a lot of countries. But you do want the strongest commitment you can get not to pursue enrichment and reprocessing, and that’s what we will go after,” Richard Stratford, director of the State Department’s Office of Nuclear Energy, Safety and Security, said this week at Infocast’s Nuclear Export Controls Summit.
Insisting on a gold standard in all cases would lead some countries to focus on nuclear trade with companies outside the United States, such as AREVA, Stratford said. Most recently, enrichment and reprocessing rights have been a sticking point in negotiations with South Korea for renewal of a current deal, which expires in March. The Administration has requested Congress pass a simple two-year extension of the current agreement to allow it time to work out the issue. The House has already approved the extension, and this week a bill cleared the Senate Foreign Relations committee that includes a requirement for the Administration to provide Congress with a report on the progress of negotiations every 180 days. “This provides Congress with the opportunity to continue working with the Administration as the new U.S.-Korea 123 is finalized,” Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said at the bill’s markup.
Sen. Corker: Negotiators ‘At Loggerheads’ Over ENR
Committee Ranking Member Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) has been outspoken advocate of the gold standard. “Our relationship with Korea is robust, however, we do not always agree on all the issues, including sometimes in the areas of nonproliferation in civilian nuclear cooperation,” Corker said at this week’s markup. “We are here today extending the current nuclear cooperation agreement because our negotiators remain at loggerheads over a key issue: Korea’s request for advance consent to acquire sensitive nuclear technologies including enrichment and reprocessing capabilities in our negotiations on a new bilateral 123 agreement. These technologies can be used to produce nuclear material that could be diverted from civilian energy to a nuclear weapon. This is not something that I can support.”
But Stratford is optimistic that an agreement can be reached with South Korea in the two-year time frame. “I think that we will get where we have to be with the [Republic of Korea] for the simple reason that they are one of our most important nuclear trading partners. Setting that aside, we are not about to do anything that would harm the political relationship with our friends in South Korea,” he said. The two sides have agreed to meet on a quarterly basis. Stratford added, “The issue is whether or not we are prepared to give programmatic approval for reprocessing and enrichment in South Korea. That’s a difficult issue and we continue to discuss it.”
South Korea is interested in developing those technologies because they are “becoming a major nuclear supplier,” Stratford explained, but a 1992 joint declaration between North and South Korea restricts the spread of enrichment and reprocessing. South Korea has pointed to the fact that the North has repeatedly violated the declaration, Stratford said, adding, “The position that we’ve taken is, it doesn’t get us to the full implementation of the declaration any quicker if you proceed down the road of enrichment and reprocessing yourself.”
Taiwan, IAEA Agreements Less Problematic
Two less controversial agreements are renewals of deals with Taiwan and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Secretary of State John Kerry signed the IAEA agreement this week, and Stratford says he expects it to be sent to Congress next week. The Taiwan agreement was sent to Congress last week, where it is required to sit for 90 legislative days before entering into force. That deal includes the “gold standard” and is therefore not expected to raise issues.
However, a deal with Vietnam that was finalized in October is expected to raise more issues—it doesn’t include the gold standard, and instead has a nonbinding commitment to rely on existing fuel services rather than developing its own sensitive nuclear technologies. The Vietnam agreement is currently in the process of getting all required signatures before being sent to Congress, Stratford said this week. He added, “I anticipate that when Vietnam hits the Hill we’ll see a couple of letters saying ‘I’m not so crazy about this one.’”
China, Middle East Agreements Also On Horizon
Also on the horizon is the current 123 Agreement with China, which was negotiated in 1985 and comes up for renewal in 2015. The original agreement includes some unclear language regarding consent rights to reprocess. Stratford said that while China has suggested a simple renewal, “My fear is that if I convince the Administration to send up the old agreement with a one-paragraph renewal we are going to face some questions in Congress, who has done a lot of thinking since 30 years ago, and I’m not sure they’re questions I want to answer.” He has given the Chinese a model agreement to study, and plans for talks to pick up as the renewal date approaches.
Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are candidates for new agreements. “I got us this close to both Jordan and Saudi Arabia as of the summer of 2012, a year-and-a-half ago. Both of them were very close to being finished except for the issue of the gold standard,” Stratford said, noting that “the Middle East is different.” He added, “As a practical matter, if you send a Saudi agreement to the Hill without a commitment not to pursue enrichment and reprocessing, it is DOA. Everybody up on the Hill told me that.”
There remains a lot of uncertainty regarding the potential new Middle East agreements. “In the case of Jordan they really don’t have the money, so things are going very slowly, except maybe for Russia, who could say ‘Hey, I’ll build it and sell you the electricity,’” Stratford said. While money is not an issue in Saudi Arabia, it is uncertain whether the country will commit to a nuclear program. “The folks who run the oil business in Saudi Arabia weren’t so sure that the nuclear program was really a brilliant idea,” Stratford said. “So there are some things left to be done with respect to making fundamental decisions as to whether or not to proceed with a nuclear program in Saudi Arabia, at which point I think they will get back to us.”