On August 17, the Japanese Kyodo News Agency reported that the graphite reactor in Yongbyon had resumed processing nuclear fuel for the production of weapons-grade plutonium, referring to the Nuclear Energy Research Institute of North Korea. According to the Institute’s report, North Korea is not a member of the Non-proliferatio
The report underlines that North Korea has managed to miniaturize and decrease the weight of nuclear warheads. The exact amount of plutonium and enriched uranium obtained is not disclosed. It was also stated that it is planned to construct a light-water reactor with a capacity of 100 thousand kW in order to tackle the lack of electric power.
Let us recall that on September 27-30, 2007, the document “On the second stage of actualization of the Joint Statement” (dated September 19, 2005) was approved at the six party talks. According to the document, North Korea had to dismantle its nuclear facilities in Yongbyon – the operational nuclear reactor with a capacity of 5 mW, a radio chemical laboratory and a plant for processing nuclear fuel – by December 31, 2007. The operation of the main nuclear reactor in Yongbyon was stopped in time. On June 26, 2008, North Korea forwarded 4,000 pages of documents on its nuclear program to China. On the next day, June 27, it blew up the cooling tower of the reactor in Yongbyon.
Note that this step provoked discussions. On the one hand, it was an irreversible action demonstrating North Korea’s desire to solve the problem and make concessions. On the other hand, there was an opinion that the unstable operation of the Yongbyon reactor (amid the changing political environment, the reactor was launched, suspended, launched and so on) might cause the risk of a man-made disaster, and it was decided to dismantle it under the supervision of foreign experts, thus, killing two birds with one stone.
On April 2, 2013, “at the third stage of the missile and nuclear escalation”, North Korea stated that the operation of the Yongbyon reactor would be resumed, but the works proceeded slowly. And here is the first official confirmation despite the fact that the IAEA General Director Yukiya Amano stated that North Korea had an opportunity to produce plutonium at the Yongbyon reactor on June 6. Referring to the satellite images, he reported that the noticed activity of the graphite reactor with a capacity of 5 megawatts and the expansion of uranium enrichment facilities might indicate activities connected with the processing of plutonium. At the same time, Amano noted that the Agency could not be sure as the conclusions were made based on data from satellites.
On June 7, information from Amano was partially confirmed by the Reuters agency, which cited a high-ranking source in the US Department of State. The Press Secretary of the Russian President, Dmitry Peskov, announced that this was a “concern” when answering journalists’ questions on Russia’s stance on North Korea’s plans to produce plutonium. According to Peskov, all the states that support the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula are very concerned and continue to undertake diligent work with North Korea.
In February 2016, the Director of the US National Intelligence Service James Clapper also warned that Pyongyang would start plutonium production from spent nuclear fuel in the near future. Similar statements were made by organisations such as the American Korean Institute of the School of Advanced International Studies at the Johns Hopkins University in Washington and the US website 38 North that specializes in North Korean issues.
Recently, Reuters reported that North Korea was developing new types of nuclear weapon referencing the research of the Washington Institute for Science and International Security. In particular, they mentioned tritium production required for the development of thermonuclear weapons, and the restoration of the plant to produce plutonium from spent nuclear fuel at the nuclear research centre in Yongbyon. According to the source of the agency, spent nuclear fuel is taken from the reactor, cooled and delivered to the processing plant, where they produced the plutonium for their previous nuclear tests.
This information is closely related to the issues on the amount of potential nuclear devices North Korea has in its possession and when to expect a new nuclear test, which requires uranium and plutonium. According to a survey of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, North Korea had “issued” 10 nuclear warheads as of January 2016. However, the survey notes the lack of any evidence of the possible production and deployment of operational nuclear weapon by North Korea. On the other hand, the School of Advanced International Studies at the Johns Hopkins University believes that North Korea may produce up to 100 nuclear warheads over the next 5 years.
South Korean media state that if the statements of the North are true, this is a direct violation of the UN Security Council Resolution, which prohibits North Korea undertaking any activities related to nuclear weapon development. It means that new sanctions against North Korea are to be expected. As a representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea announced while commenting on the report of Kyodo News Agency, Seoul intends to discuss this problem with the countries and organisations concerned.
Of course Pyongyang’s actions correspond to the policy that we have described several times – securing tactical victories, Kim Jong-un is headed for strategic difficulties. His strategy requires constantly raising the stakes and in part causes the situation to break down. The question is what will be the reaction of the UN Security Council taking into consideration the fact that at the last session on the missile launches by North Korea, China demanded that a paragraph about the placement of THAAD missile defence facility in South Korea be included in the Security Council Statement. As a result, the final document, which condemns North Korea, was not adopted.
It is worth remembering that the North Korea nuclear threat is likely to be more dangerous for the nuclear non-proliferatio
Konstantin Asmolov, Ph.D. in History, Chief Research Fellow at the Center for Korean Studies of the Institute of Far Eastern Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”