미국 정보기관은 북한에 인접한 상공에서 검출된 방사능을 분석하여 10월9일 핵실험에 대한 몇 가지 중요한 단서들을 알아냈다고 한다. 10월17일 뉴욕 타임스는 '핵실험을 한 것은 플루토늄彈으로 밝혀졌다'고 보도했다. 이는 북한이 파키스탄의 협조를 받아 진행했던 우라늄농축工程이 아직 핵폭탄 제조에 쓰일 정도로 진전되지 못한 것을 나타낸다. 미국의 뉴멕시코주 로스 알라모스 국립연구소의 전 소장인 지그프리드 S. 헤커 교수(스탠포드 대학)는 '북한은 비교적 정교한 장치를 폭파시켜려 했으나 內爆(implosion: 핵분열을 일으키기 위해서 고성능폭약을 터뜨리는 것)이 제대로 이뤄지지 않았던 것으로 보인다'고 말했다.

뉴욕 타임스는 핵실험에 사용된 플루토늄은 아버지 부시 대통령 시절이 아니면 북한이 NPT(핵비확산조약)에서 탈퇴한 2003년 이후에 재처리된 것이라고 추정했다. 뉴욕 타임스는, '클린턴 행정부의 경우 북한에 대한 군사공격계획을 앞세워 1994년 제네바 협정을 통해 북한의 영변원자로를 동결시켰지만 부시는 그런 군사적 위협도 가하지 않고 강경론만 펴는 바람에 결국은 핵폭탄을 10개까지 만들 수 있는 플루토늄을 북한이 재처리하도록 방치했다'고 비판했다. 클린턴 정부 시절의 국방장관이었던 윌리엄 페리는 '아주 짧은 기간 조치를 취할 시간이 있었지만 그 기회는 닫혀버리고 이젠 플루토늄이 마굿간을 나가버렸다'고 말했다.

---------------------------------------------------------













WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 — American intelligence agencies have concluded that North Korea’s test explosion last week was powered by plutonium that North Korea harvested from its small nuclear reactor, according to officials who have reviewed the results of atmospheric sampling since the blast.

Skip to next paragraph
Related
U.N. Press Release and Text of Resolution (un.org)The officials, who would not speak for attribution because it was an intelligence matter, were responding to specific questions about what had been learned about the nature of the weapon.

As administration and intelligence officials watched for indications that the North might be preparing a second test, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned North Korea on Monday that it risked even further isolation if it took such a provocative action.

American officials have reported recent activity at the test site, leading some to believe that another test might be carried out soon.

The intelligence agencies’ finding that the weapon was based on plutonium strongly suggested that the country’s second path to a nuclear bomb — one using uranium — was not yet ready. The uranium program is based on enrichment equipment and know-how purchased from Pakistan’s former nuclear chief.

Nuclear experts said that the use of plutonium to make the bomb was important because it suggested that North Korea probably had only one nuclear program mature enough to produce weapons.

“This is good news because we have a reasonably good idea of how much plutonium they have made,” said Siegfried S. Hecker, the former chief of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and now a visiting professor at Stanford University. Mr. Hecker, who has visited North Korea and is one of the few foreigners to have seen parts of its nuclear infrastructure, said that it was his guess that “they tried to test a reasonably sophisticated device, and they had trouble imploding it properly.”

The supply of plutonium materials is known from the days when international inspectors kept tabs on the fuel rods in the North’s reactor, and intelligence analysts estimate that North Korea has enough material to make 6 to 10 plutonium bombs.

Politically, the results of the test may revive last week’s finger-pointing about who is more responsible for the Korean test: Bill Clinton or President Bush.

As president, Mr. Clinton negotiated a deal that froze the production and weaponization of North Korea’s plutonium, but intelligence agencies later determined that North Korea began its secret uranium program under his watch. The plutonium that North Korea exploded was produced, according to intelligence estimates, either during the administration of the first President Bush or after 2003, when the North Koreans threw out international inspectors and began reprocessing spent nuclear fuel the inspectors had kept under seal.

Unlike the Clinton administration in 1994, the current Bush administration chose not to threaten to destroy North Korea’s fuel and nuclear reprocessing facilities if they tried to make weapons.

That threat in 1994 — which was ultimately resolved with an agreement to freeze the weapons program — was made by William J. Perry, who was the defense secretary then. In an interview on Monday, Mr. Perry said: “There was a brief window to catch this plutonium before it was made into bomb fuel. It’s gone. It’s out of the barn now.”

After a week of some lingering doubt about whether the test had indeed been a nuclear detonation, the office of John D. Negroponte, director of national intelligence, confirmed that much in a statement issued Monday.

“Analysis of air samples collected on Oct. 11, 2006, detected radioactive debris which confirms that North Korea conducted an underground nuclear explosion in the vicinity of Punggye on Oct. 9, 2006,” said the statement, putting on the record a conclusion that officials first disclosed Friday, the night before the United Nations Security Council voted on sanctions. “The explosion yield was less than a kiloton,” the statement added.

It gave no further details, and the officials who described the early findings did not disclose more beyond the conclusion that plutonium, not uranium, was the device’s core.

The determination that the blast was nuclear was announced a day before Secretary Rice was to depart for a trip to Japan, South Korea, China and Russia. She will go to the capitals of the nations that have been engaged in the six-party talks over North Korea’s nuclear program except, of course, North Korea.

The unanimous resolution adopted by the Security Council last week imposing sanctions on military material and luxury goods was proof of “a strong and firm hand and strong and firm response,” Ms. Rice said Monday during a State Department news conference. She said the international community wanted “to leave open a door for North Korea to take a different course if it wishes to do so.”

Pressed to respond to analysts’ assessment that desires by China and South Korea for continued economic and business exchanges with North Korea might trump demands for a stiff sanctions and inspections regime, Ms. Rice said her goal was to work out the details of putting the Council resolution into effect.

The Associated Press reported Monday from Dandong, China, that customs officials were examining trucks at the North Korean border as China complied with the United Nations sanctions.

However, China’s ambassador to the United Nations, Wang Guangya, indicated that his nation would not conduct similar searches at sea.

Mr. Wang made clear that China would not halt ships and board them to search for ballistic missiles or for bomb-making equipment or material that can be used to manufacture nuclear, chemical and biological arms.

“This is a resolution we have to implement,” he told reporters at the United Nations. “The question was raised whether China will do inspections. Inspections yes, but inspection is different than interdiction and interception. I think different countries will do it different ways.”

During the news conference on Monday, Ms. Rice said she was “not concerned that the Chinese are going to turn their backs on their obligations. I don’t think they would have voted for a resolution if they did not intend to carry through on it.”

Mark Mazzetti contributed reporting.

More Articles in International »







국정원, 전교조 등 5개 단체 北공작원 접촉혐의 내사중
관련단체 “합법적 교류·협력일 뿐”주장


국가정보원이 진행중인 386간첩단 사건 수사와 관련, 통일연대·범민련남측본부·민주노총·전교조·전국농민회총연맹(전농) 등 5개 단체 간부들이 중국에 가서 북한 공작원을 접촉해 ‘활동 지침’을 받은 혐의를 잡고 수사중인 것으로 알려졌다.
국정원은 5개 단체 인사 5명이 386간첩단 사건 핵심인물인 장민호씨의 주선으로 올해 8월 중국 선양(瀋陽)의 한 호텔에서 북한 통일전선부 소속 對南공작 담당 과장을 만난 정황을 포착한 것으로 전해졌다.
국정원은 당시 이 인사들이 북한 통전부 간부로부터 국내에서의 ‘활동 지침’을 전달받은 것으로 의심할 만한 자료를 입수한 것으로 보인다. 북한측이 내린 지침의 내용은 對北제재는 전쟁이라는 논리 확산, 韓美FTA반대, 反한나라당 연합전선 구축, 反美의 대중화 등인 것으로 알려졌다. 통전부는 對南방송과 해외교포의 포섭 임무와 함께 국내 親北조직 관리 등을 맡고 있는 조선노동당 對南공작 부서 중 하나이다.

이와 관련, 국정원이 내사중인 5개 단체측은 간첩사건 연루사실을 완강히 부인하고 있다. 이 단체 관계자들은 지난 8월 심양에서 북한측 관계자들과 접촉한 것은 사실이나, ‘우리겨레하나돕기운동본부(이하 겨레하나)’의 북한수재(水災)돕기를 위한 실무접촉 차원의 합법적 활동이었다고 밝혔다.
통일연대측은 “아직 확인된 내용은 하나도 없다”며 “대응가치를 못느낀다”고 답했다. 이 관계자는 “통일연대는 南北교류·협력 차원에서 북한 인사들과의 접촉이 많은데, 국정원이 그런 일상적 교류·협력까지 그런 식(간첩사건)으로 몰아간다면 말도 안 된다”며 “그렇게 하려면 한나라당이나 방북하는 모든 국민들을 수사해야 하지 않느냐”고 말했다.

전교조측은 “심양에 갔던 것은 ‘겨레하나’에서 水害 관련 물자지원 차원에서 갔던 것으로서 통일부에 사전·사후보고를 통해 정상적 법절차를 밟았던 것”이라며 “국정원이 쓸데없는 그림을 그리고 있다”고 비판했다.
민주노총측은 “당시 ‘겨레하나’의 남북교류 실무협의 차원에서 심양에 갔고 절차를 밟아 공공연히 갔던 것”이라고 말했다.
全農측은 “당시 심양에 갔던 것은 사실이지만 통일부의 合法절차를 거친 것 이었다”고 말했다.
범민련남측본부측은 “공식적으로 절차를 밟은 실무접촉 외에는 없었다”고 말했다.

담당부서인 통일부 지원협력2팀 관계자는 “해외에서 북한 당국과의 접촉은 지난 해 12월 승인(承認)사항에서 신고(申告)사항으로 法규정이 바뀌었고, 신고는 대개 1년 정도 긴 기간에 개괄적으로 이뤄지기 때문에, 8월에 5개 단체가 심양에서 북한 당국과 접촉했는지 여부는 확인하기 매우 어렵다”고 말했다.
그는 ‘겨레하나’라는 이름으로 심양에서 접촉 신고가 있었는지 여부를 확인하는 질문에 “‘겨레하나’라는 단체의 심양 접촉 신고는 없었다”고 말한 뒤 “그러나 “신고는 대개 단체(團體) 명의가 아닌 개인(個人) 명의로 하는 것이기 때문에 구체적으로 참석한 사람들의 이름을 알기 전에는 사실여부를 확인하지 못할 것”이라고 답했다.