    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: William J. Clinton (1993, Book II)]
    [November 23, 1993]
    [Pages 2056-2060]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    The President's News Conference With President Kim Yong-sam of
    South Korea
    November 23, 1993

        President Clinton. Good afternoon. It is a great pleasure and an
    honor for me to welcome President Kim Yong-sam to Washington today.
    During my visit to Seoul in July, I had the opportunity to visit with
    President Kim at the Blue House, which is Korea's Presidential
    residence. I am honored to return his gracious hospitality today by
    welcoming him to our White House.
        I have a great deal of admiration for President Kim, who for decades
    has worked tirelessly to broaden Korea's democracy at great personal
    cost to himself. His democratic passage to the Presidency is an
    inspiring measure of Korea's progress, proof that freedom knows no
    regional bounds. I'm delighted his contributions to Korean democracy
    were acknowledged when he received the Averell Harriman award from the
    National Democratic Institute last evening.
        The discussions President Kim and I held today were far ranging and
    highly productive. We continued our conversation from the APEC leaders
    meeting in Seattle and expressed our mutual support for APEC's ideal of
    an Asian-Pacific region even more closely integrated through open
    markets and open societies.
        Today we discussed the actions President Kim is taking to advance
    that vision in his nation. He's taken a number of encouraging steps to
    remove barriers to foreign investment, open financial markets, and
    strengthen intellectual property rights. I'm also very encouraged by the
    good start of the U.S.-Korea dialog on economic cooperation. We must
    work now to implement the proposals raised in that dialog. Our economic
    cooperation will be especially vital as both our nations seek to achieve
    a new GATT agreement in the next few weeks. Like the United

    [[Page 2057]]

    States, Korea has both a crucial role and a substantial stake in
    bringing the Uruguay round to a successful conclusion.
        The most important piece of our discussions centered on North Korea.
    We are both concerned by North Korea's concentration of forces near the
    Demilitarized Zone and by its refusal to grant international inspectors
    full access to its nuclear sites.
        In recent weeks, my administration has been working with the
    Congress, South Korea, Japan, our partners in the United Nations
    Security Council and others to address North Korea's nuclear program in
    a firm manner. Today I reaffirmed to President Kim America's unyielding
    commitment to South Korea's security. My administration has made it
    clear to North Korea that it now faces a simple choice. If it abandons
    its nuclear option and honors its international nonproliferation
    commitments, the door will be open on a wide range of issues not only
    with the United States but with the rest of the world. If it does not,
    it risks facing the increased opposition of the entire international
    community.
        Our goals in this matter are clear: a nonnuclear peninsula and a
    strong international nonproliferation regime. To these ends, we are
    prepared to discuss with North Korea a thorough, broad approach to the
    issues that divide us, and once and for all to resolve the nuclear
    issue. But we cannot do that in the absence of a dialog between North
    and South Korea and while there is still growing doubt about the
    continuity of IAEA safeguards.
        North Korea's nuclear program and its continuing military threat
    pose serious challenges to both South Korea and America. Our two nations
    have worked together to overcome these challenges before. Our friendship
    was forged in the heat of war as our forces fought shoulder to shoulder
    to turn back aggression. Our friendship has continued over four decades
    since that war ended as the people of Korea have transformed their
    country into an economic and democratic model for the entire region.
        I've enjoyed working with President Kim to deepen the historic
    friendship between our two nations. And I look forward to working with
    him and with the Korean people in the days to come, on economic issues
    and on important issues of security.
        Mr. President.
        President Kim. Ladies and gentlemen, first of all I would like to
    thank President Clinton for his welcome extended to me at the White
    House today. Having met with President Clinton in Seoul in July and
    Seattle last week and here in Washington, DC, today, I feel like I'm
    meeting an old friend.
        President Clinton has aptly summarized what was discussed in our
    meeting this morning, so I would like to add only a few points to what
    he has mentioned. President Clinton reaffirmed the strong commitment of
    the United States to the security of Korea and made it clear that there
    would not be an additional reduction of U.S. troops stationed in Korea
    until the North Korean nuclear issue has been resolved.
        President Clinton and I agreed to continue our close working
    relationship to ensure peace on the Korean Peninsula as well as its
    regional stability. In particular, I welcomed and supported President
    Clinton's policy of continuing to maintain the strategy of forward
    deployment by the United States in the Asia-Pacific region, including
    the Korean Peninsula.
        As for the North Korean nuclear issue, President Clinton and I
    reaffirmed our shared belief that the resolution of this issue should
    not be delayed any longer, as it poses great threats not only to the
    security of Korea but also to the global nonproliferation regime. In
    particular, we agreed to make thorough and broad efforts to bring about
    a final solution, bearing in mind the grave concern the international
    community has demonstrated over this issue. Both of us expressed
    satisfaction over the close cooperation between our two governments on
    this issue. And we once again agreed that the maintaining a close
    working relationship is essential to the complete resolution of this
    issue.
        President Clinton and I shared our mutual satisfaction over the
    success thus far of the dialog for economic cooperation, a mechanism
    that we had agreed to establish in our meeting in July. We hope that our
    two countries will be able to draw up a long-term plan to expand our
    mutually beneficial economic cooperation.
        I also explained to President Clinton that the internationalization
    of the Korean economy, along with the liberalization and deregulation
    were major goals of the new economic policy that my government has
    actively pursued, and that the new economic policy would help broaden
    the scope of the Korea-U.S. economic partnership.
        During our discussion, I congratulated the

    [[Page 2058]]

    President Clinton, the success of the APEC leaders economic conference
    that was held in Seattle last week. And I would like to pay high tribute
    to the President for his outstanding leadership which helped to make the
    meeting a resounding success. We are convinced that this meeting will be
    recorded as an important milestone that heralds the coming era of a new
    Asia-Pacific partnership. Based upon the continued development of APEC,
    President Clinton and I reaffirmed our resolve to work closely together
    to build a new Pacific community.
        I'm entirely satisfied with today's meeting. I'm confident that our
    meeting will help Korea-U.S. relations to evolve to an even higher
    dimension of partnership.
        Finally, I again would like to express my gratitude to President
    Clinton for the warm welcome and hospitality.
        Thank you.

    North Korea

        Q. Mr. President, you've spoken of a new approach to get North Korea
    to open up its nuclear program to inspection. Did the two of you agree
    today on a new approach, and does that represent any relaxation in the
    U.S. stand? And if so, why wouldn't that be rewarding North Korea for
    its intransigence?
        President Clinton. We did not agree to relax anything. What we
    agreed was that the two of us, based on our own security needs, would
    reexamine what our policies are if the North Koreans are willing to
    allow IAEA inspectors and resume the serious dialog with the Republic of
    Korea; that we needed to make it clear that all of our security
    decisions would be made in light of that context. And I don't consider
    that weakening our position or changing it or rewarding aggression. In
    fact, what we want to do is to diminish the military tensions in the
    area. That has to begin by a willingness on the part of North Korea to
    allow the inspections and to resume the dialog.
        Yes, Helen [Helen Thomas, United Press International]?
        Q. Mr. President, it doesn't sound like you two are in sync on what
    to do about North Korea. And also, do you think that North Korea will
    accept our approach of more concessions?
        President Clinton. Well, we're asking them to make two concessions
    that they're already committed to do. And we're committing then that the
    two of us will reexamine our security approach in light of that. But
    we're not divided at all. We reached agreement. We, indeed, have
    reconciled the precise language that would be used by each of us in this
    statement today. So there is no division between the two countries on
    our position.
        Q. Will you call off the military maneuvers?
        President Clinton. That is something that would have to be decided
    by both of us at a later date, depending on what would be done or not
    done by North Korea. We've made no decision on that and no commitment on
    that, and we couldn't now.
        Q. Mr. President, I have two questions, one for President Kim and
    one for President Clinton. President Kim, it might be a little general
    question, however, you have denied several times that--the concept of
    the absorption unification; so that statement can be construed to the
    effect that you are giving up your constitutional authority to--
    [inaudible]--North Korea in the case of the self-destruction of the Kim
    Il-song regime and followed by the big anarchial situation like East
    Germany. And--[inaudible]--also give some clear statement for the North
    Korean people who are waiting for the new morning, as you said
    yesterday, for democracy and hope.
        And for Mr. Clinton, North Korea has managed a lot to wage a war if
    U.N. sanctions will be imposed on North Korea. And also on report,
    actually--[inaudible]--quoting a Pentagon classified material, Korea and
    the United States is losing if war broke out again in the peninsula. So
    that kind of information is giving some warning more and more to the
    general innocent people in both North Korea and South Korea. So what is
    the clear and maybe present remarks concerning that matter, the menace
    of the possible Korean war again?
        Thank you.
        President Kim. I would like to respond to your question first. It is
    our basic policy that we will not try to absorb North Korea. And I
    mentioned this to the Chinese leader, Mr. Jiang Zemin, when I met him in
    Seattle and also asked him to convey this message towards North Korea,
    because we know that North Korean regime is very concerned about the
    possibility of such an absorption be happening. And the Chinese
    President promised that he will do so, that is, to convey the message
    towards North Korea.
        Of course, it is very difficult to predict what

    [[Page 2059]]

    will happen in North Korea in the future. But I doubt the report that
    North Korea can launch a successful attack on South Korea and win the
    war. I very much doubt it. The reason is that South Korean Armed Forces
    has grown very strong, and in fact after the launching of the new
    government in Korea, we have replaced all those politicized military
    generals and established a professional military who will respond very
    effectively to any provocations or any attempt from North Korea. So
    combined forces of the United States and Republic of Korea, very stable,
    decisive, and very strong.
        As President Clinton mentioned when he visited Korea, we very much
    believe in the policy of the United States, the new government's policy,
    that as long as Korean people want the U.S. forces to be stationed in
    Korea, then there will be no reduction, no pullout of the U.S. troops.
        So I would like to once again reassure you that our defense
    capability and defense posture remains unchanged. And we are in a
    position that can deal with North Korea in a position of strength.
        President Clinton. With regard to the two questions you asked me,
    let me say that neither President Kim nor I are eager to go to the
    United Nations and ask for sanctions against North Korea. We had
    discussed with the leaders of Japan and China at the recent APEC meeting
    the fact that that is not a particularly attractive option. We have
    offered as clearly as we could to North Korea the opportunity to
    reassess our relationships, at least in terms of our security
    requirements, if they will simply follow their own commitments and honor
    them on the IAEA inspections and on resuming the dialog with the
    Republic of Korea.
        Now, as to your second question, I can only reiterate what I said
    when I was in Korea. I know of no one who seriously believes that the
    United States and the Republic of Korea would be defeated in a war of
    aggression by North Korea if they were to attack. And I made it as clear
    as I could that if they were to do that, they would pay a price so great
    that the nation would probably not survive as it is known today.
        Q. Mr. President?
        The President. Yes, Wolf [Wolf Blitzer, Cable News Network].
        Q. The International Atomic Energy Agency has suggested that there
    is a time sensitivity to going back into North Korea and inspecting the
    two nuclear facilities, a month or 2 months maximum. After that, they
    couldn't guarantee that North Korea was, in fact, abandoning some sort
    of nuclear weapons program. Is that, in fact, the case? Is there a month
    or two that you have now in order to resolve this issue?
        And a question to President Kim: Do you support this notion that if
    the North Koreans do accept some sort of inspection and resume a dialog
    with you, that the United States and South Korea should cancel the joint
    military exercises, Team Spirit, next year?
        President Clinton. First of all, there is some time sensitivity on
    this, based on what we hear from the IAEA inspectors. And that's the
    reason that we're coming forward now and trying to make another good
    faith effort to reach out and reason with North Korea.
        President Kim. With regard to the issue of inspection of the nuclear
    facilities in North Korea, President Clinton and I share opinion that
    still inter-Korean mutual inspection is very important. North Korea and
    South Korea seem to have different position with regard to the meaning
    of the exchange of special envoy. I think that North Korea is more
    interested in holding an inter-Korean summit meeting through this
    exchange of special envoys, whereas our side, Republic of Korea, is more
    concerned about removing the suspicions regarding the nuclear
    facilities, that is, mutual inspection by both Koreas of those
    facilities.
        There is a speculation that if North Korea accepts International
    Atomic Energy Agency inspection and resumes dialog with South Korea,
    then there will be concessions to be given to North Korea in return.
        I think this matter of suspending Team Spirit exercise should be
    dealt in its own. And of course, the United States and Republic of Korea
    will consult very closely about how to deal with the problem caused by
    North Korea's nuclear development. And in that sense, we are in full
    accordance with each other.
        Q. I'd like to ask a question, addressing the question to President
    Kim. You've said you cannot wait indefinitely, and when is the limit in
    time? How are you going to decide that is the limit? For President
    Clinton, you say thorough and broad approaches you would apply, and in
    Seattle during your press conference, you used the term ``comprehensive
    approach.'' Comprehensive approach, is it the same term that

    [[Page 2060]]

    North Koreans are talking about with regard to nuclear issues and other
    issues involved? And is there any difference between the----
        President Kim. I'll respond to your question first. The fact that I
    said we will not wait endlessly doesn't mean that we will necessarily
    set a certain deadline. And I don't think it is appropriate for me to
    specifically mention the possibility of setting a deadline. And perhaps
    I will make no more comments about that.
        With regards to your referring to the terminology of whether it will
    be comprehensive approach or whether it will be package deals, I see the
    possibility of these different terminologies creating confusion and
    misleading. Therefore, what we have agreed today between President
    Clinton and I--and I would very much want you to pay attention to the
    phrases that we have used today--is that we will make thorough and broad
    efforts to bring the issue to the final conclusion. And that stands on
    its own. And please make sure that you pay attention to these new
    phrases.
        Q. Mr. President, I'm a little confused by what you and the Korean
    President have offered today. Why after so many months do you believe
    that review of your security possibilities and talking to the Koreans
    about potential concessions in the future will cause them to change
    their minds when they have not at this point, so far, and when it
    appeared that there was some sort of actual concessions that you were
    getting ready to make?
        President Clinton. Well, any concessions--first of all, concessions
    is the wrong word. Any gesture we make, any move we make based on our--
    must be based on our appreciation of what the security situation is. And
    they are the ones, after all, who are out of line with the international
    law and their own commitments. So, we can't make any decisions about
    what we would do until we see what they do. That's all we're saying
    today. But we have clearly broadened the dialog on this, or given them,
    rather, the more specific thing would--we've given them a chance to
    broaden the dialog. We'll just have to see if they take us up on it.
        Thank you very much.

    Note: The President's 35th news conference began at 1:07 p.m. in the
    East Room at the White House. President Kim spoke in Korean, and his
    remarks were translated by an interpreter.