Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Sunday Morning
Interview With John Tkacik
Aired January 05, 2003 - 07:19 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
RENAY SAN MIGUEL, CNN ANCHOR: As the diplomatic efforts continue, let's take a look at North Korea's nuclear capabilities. Joining us from Washington to discuss the situation is John Tkacik; he has spent more than two decades with the State Department and is now with the Heritage Foundation.
Mr. Tkacik, thanks for being with us this morning.
JOHN TKACIK, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: My pleasure completely.
SAN MIGUEL: We have been watching North Korea, or the IAEA, and other countries have been watching North Korea for about eight years now. We know they have plutonium, but do we know for sure that they've build bombs with it?
TKACIK: Well, we don't know, but there've been several inspectors in the processing facilities in Yangbyon, North Korea, that have taken samples and have declared that there are fairly grave discrepancies between what their samples show and what the North Koreans declared.
So, I think that it's a pretty -- it's an odds on chance that the North Koreans have refined enough plutonium for at least two bombs. The issue now becomes whether they will continue that.
SAN MIGUEL: And, you know, if you've developed a bomb, then don't you then, you know, test it, I mean, that's you know, underground or by other means? Not only do you then know that you have a bomb -- that or you have a program that works, but also you announced to the world that you are indeed a nuclear power.
TKACIK: Well, sometimes that's worked -- that works, you know that Pakistan had a bomb for about 10 years and never tested it. Israel, has, is presumed to have 144 bombs and has not tested one, but in North Korea's case, one would expect this.
Now, we have seen the type of test platforms for the lenses, the conventional explosive lens that covers a nuclear core, and we've seen them test those. But, we have not seen the underground test pits, and we haven't seen any cabling that indicates that they're preparing one.
So, it's up in the air as to what probative value that would have.
SAN MIGUEL: So, with the inspectors out, is it just as simple to say that there's just no way now to keep track of North Korea's nuclear programs, or are there other means of doing that?
TKACIK: Well, Mohammed El-Baradei, who's the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has already said there's no way, that -- not only that, he said this is a grave threat to the international non-proliferation principal. I think a -- he's also called this nuclear brinkmanship. Now, this is an Algerian who works for a major U.N. agency, I have to accept him at his word, that this is, that this is it, there's no way to monitor North Korea's development from the inside.
We do have a way of monitoring it from the outside, which is the national technical meetings. The signals intelligence we get, we also have satellite intelligence, and we also have various types of technology that can detect the kind of radiation, gamma radiation signatures that we'd need. So, we do have a way to get it to the outside.
SAN MIGUEL: We got about 45 seconds left here, and you mentioned Mohammed El-Baradei. There is -- there are reports that the IAEA will give the North Koreans one more chance to cooperate, to let the inspectors back in, before the agency takes it case to the United Nations -- a good idea or a bad one?
TKACIK: Well, I don't think that it serves any purpose now, it basically delays, it, it sort of kicks the ball the road. I think perhaps what the administration would like, is to have the North Korean issue, sort of spread out for another year or so, and that way we can move our focus from Iraq, when that's done, to North Korea, and I think that the only, the only possible alternative here is to go a fairly robust economics sanctions regime, from the U.N. Security Council.
SAN MIGUEL: We're going to have to leave it there. John Tkacik, with the Heritage Foundation, thanks so much for your time, we appreciate it.
TKACIK: My pleasure completely.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired January 5, 2003 - 07:19 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
RENAY SAN MIGUEL, CNN ANCHOR: As the diplomatic efforts continue, let's take a look at North Korea's nuclear capabilities. Joining us from Washington to discuss the situation is John Tkacik; he has spent more than two decades with the State Department and is now with the Heritage Foundation.
Mr. Tkacik, thanks for being with us this morning.
JOHN TKACIK, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: My pleasure completely.
SAN MIGUEL: We have been watching North Korea, or the IAEA, and other countries have been watching North Korea for about eight years now. We know they have plutonium, but do we know for sure that they've build bombs with it?
TKACIK: Well, we don't know, but there've been several inspectors in the processing facilities in Yangbyon, North Korea, that have taken samples and have declared that there are fairly grave discrepancies between what their samples show and what the North Koreans declared.
So, I think that it's a pretty -- it's an odds on chance that the North Koreans have refined enough plutonium for at least two bombs. The issue now becomes whether they will continue that.
SAN MIGUEL: And, you know, if you've developed a bomb, then don't you then, you know, test it, I mean, that's you know, underground or by other means? Not only do you then know that you have a bomb -- that or you have a program that works, but also you announced to the world that you are indeed a nuclear power.
TKACIK: Well, sometimes that's worked -- that works, you know that Pakistan had a bomb for about 10 years and never tested it. Israel, has, is presumed to have 144 bombs and has not tested one, but in North Korea's case, one would expect this.
Now, we have seen the type of test platforms for the lenses, the conventional explosive lens that covers a nuclear core, and we've seen them test those. But, we have not seen the underground test pits, and we haven't seen any cabling that indicates that they're preparing one.
So, it's up in the air as to what probative value that would have.
SAN MIGUEL: So, with the inspectors out, is it just as simple to say that there's just no way now to keep track of North Korea's nuclear programs, or are there other means of doing that?
TKACIK: Well, Mohammed El-Baradei, who's the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has already said there's no way, that -- not only that, he said this is a grave threat to the international non-proliferation principal. I think a -- he's also called this nuclear brinkmanship. Now, this is an Algerian who works for a major U.N. agency, I have to accept him at his word, that this is, that this is it, there's no way to monitor North Korea's development from the inside.
We do have a way of monitoring it from the outside, which is the national technical meetings. The signals intelligence we get, we also have satellite intelligence, and we also have various types of technology that can detect the kind of radiation, gamma radiation signatures that we'd need. So, we do have a way to get it to the outside.
SAN MIGUEL: We got about 45 seconds left here, and you mentioned Mohammed El-Baradei. There is -- there are reports that the IAEA will give the North Koreans one more chance to cooperate, to let the inspectors back in, before the agency takes it case to the United Nations -- a good idea or a bad one?
TKACIK: Well, I don't think that it serves any purpose now, it basically delays, it, it sort of kicks the ball the road. I think perhaps what the administration would like, is to have the North Korean issue, sort of spread out for another year or so, and that way we can move our focus from Iraq, when that's done, to North Korea, and I think that the only, the only possible alternative here is to go a fairly robust economics sanctions regime, from the U.N. Security Council.
SAN MIGUEL: We're going to have to leave it there. John Tkacik, with the Heritage Foundation, thanks so much for your time, we appreciate it.
TKACIK: My pleasure completely.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
