FM Spokesman on US Describing "Cheonan" Case
as "Violation of AA"
as "Violation of AA"
Pyongyang, July 6 (KCNA) -- The DPRK Foreign Ministry spokesman gave the following answer to a question put by KCNA on July 6 as regards the fact that the U.S. is describing the "Cheonan" incident as an "act of violating the Korean Armistice Agreement:
The U.S. has placed the south Korean authorities at the head in its persistent demand that the "Cheonan" incident be discussed at the "Military Armistice Commission", alleging that this incident constitutes the "violation of the Korean Armistice Agreement."
It is a historical fact known to the world that the Korean Armistice Agreement, from the moment of its signature, became subject to a systematic violation and abrogation by the U.S.
The U.S. systematically abrogated essential elements of the Korean Armistice Agreement; It violated Paragraph 60 of the Armistice Agreement stipulating that a political conference of a higher level be held to settle through negotiation the questions of the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Korea and the peaceful settlement of the Korean question. It also went on to violate Paragraph 13 of the AA banning the introduction of equipment for military operation from outside of Korea.
In 1991, the U.S. had made a unilateral decision of designating a puppet army "general" of south Korea, which is neither party to the armistice agreement nor a member of the "United Nations Command", as the senior member of the "UNC" side to the "MAC" and eluded its responsibility from that seat, thus completely paralyzing the MAC.
The U.S. had already destroyed by itself the Armistice Agreement and its mechanism. It does not stand to reason that the US is now trying to take them into the "Cheonan" incident.
Herein lies an ulterior aim sought by the U.S.
As time goes by, growing suspicion about the "results of investigation" announced by the south Korean authorities continues to spread across the world whereas the international community is expressing greater sympathy with our proposal to send an inspection team.
Being cornered, the U.S. and south Korean puppet authorities are playing cheap tricks with the issue of consultation forum in an attempt to block the involvement of our inspection team and blur the truth behind their fabricated plot.
The U.S. wanted to take the advantage of the fact that we do not recognize the "MAC" and came up with the idea of "discussion at the MAC"; however, it is a miscalculation.
The U.S. argues that the incident can be discussed at the "MAC" because there is a "precedent of DPRK-U.S. general-level talks" dealing with violations of the Armistice Agreement.
However, the truth behind the "Cheonan incident" has not been unveiled yet; hence, as of this moment, we cannot even talk about the violation of the Armistice Agreement.
We have already clarified our position as regards this matter; an inspection team of the National Defence Commission must be sent to uncover the truth of the incident; working-level contacts for north-south high-level military talks must be made to this end.
The United Nations Security Council should abide by the principle of objectivity and impartiality so as to distinguish truth from falsehood and take heed of our proposal aimed at giving priority to the work of getting to the bottom of the incident.
The U.S. has placed the south Korean authorities at the head in its persistent demand that the "Cheonan" incident be discussed at the "Military Armistice Commission", alleging that this incident constitutes the "violation of the Korean Armistice Agreement."
It is a historical fact known to the world that the Korean Armistice Agreement, from the moment of its signature, became subject to a systematic violation and abrogation by the U.S.
The U.S. systematically abrogated essential elements of the Korean Armistice Agreement; It violated Paragraph 60 of the Armistice Agreement stipulating that a political conference of a higher level be held to settle through negotiation the questions of the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Korea and the peaceful settlement of the Korean question. It also went on to violate Paragraph 13 of the AA banning the introduction of equipment for military operation from outside of Korea.
In 1991, the U.S. had made a unilateral decision of designating a puppet army "general" of south Korea, which is neither party to the armistice agreement nor a member of the "United Nations Command", as the senior member of the "UNC" side to the "MAC" and eluded its responsibility from that seat, thus completely paralyzing the MAC.
The U.S. had already destroyed by itself the Armistice Agreement and its mechanism. It does not stand to reason that the US is now trying to take them into the "Cheonan" incident.
Herein lies an ulterior aim sought by the U.S.
As time goes by, growing suspicion about the "results of investigation" announced by the south Korean authorities continues to spread across the world whereas the international community is expressing greater sympathy with our proposal to send an inspection team.
Being cornered, the U.S. and south Korean puppet authorities are playing cheap tricks with the issue of consultation forum in an attempt to block the involvement of our inspection team and blur the truth behind their fabricated plot.
The U.S. wanted to take the advantage of the fact that we do not recognize the "MAC" and came up with the idea of "discussion at the MAC"; however, it is a miscalculation.
The U.S. argues that the incident can be discussed at the "MAC" because there is a "precedent of DPRK-U.S. general-level talks" dealing with violations of the Armistice Agreement.
However, the truth behind the "Cheonan incident" has not been unveiled yet; hence, as of this moment, we cannot even talk about the violation of the Armistice Agreement.
We have already clarified our position as regards this matter; an inspection team of the National Defence Commission must be sent to uncover the truth of the incident; working-level contacts for north-south high-level military talks must be made to this end.
The United Nations Security Council should abide by the principle of objectivity and impartiality so as to distinguish truth from falsehood and take heed of our proposal aimed at giving priority to the work of getting to the bottom of the incident.
