Kenneth Fletcher
NS&D Monitor
9/26/2014
As negotiations continue on an extension of the U.S. civil nuclear agreement with South Korea, the Council on Foreign Relations is recommending that the current agreement be extended until 2021 so that a study underway on proliferation risks can be taken into account. Congress earlier this year passed a two-year extension on the U.S.-Korea ‘123 Agreement,’ which currently expires in March 2016. Discussions on the new agreement have hit hurdles on South Korea’s rights related to enrichment and reprocessing technologies. But the think tank is looking to a short-term extension. “Washington should extend the current agreement and pledge to make a follow-on agreement contingent on the results of an ongoing study that will determine the feasibility and proliferation risks of South Korea’s proposed solution to the stalemate,” CFR Senior Fellow Scott Snyder wrote in a policy memo released this month.
Some lawmakers and nonproliferation advocates have pushed for a “gold standard” in all civil nuclear agreements restricting rights to develop enrichment and reprocessing technologies without advance consent from the United States. However, the Obama Administration says it is taking a case-by-case approach in negotiating the agreements. South Korea has been a sensitive case because of the tensions on the Korean peninsula and its desire to develop enrichment and reprocessing technologies. Both countries launched a 10-year joint study on the issue in 2011 to examine issues such as pyroprocessing and spent fuel management, which CFR believes should form the basis of an extension. The current expiration of the agreement “still may not buy enough time to solve the impasse in negotiations,” according to the CFR memo. “The alternatives to an extension—discontinuing cooperation or forcing a new deal—would be economically and politically costly for both the United States and Korea.”
Should South Korea Buy Into URENCO USA Plant?
Notably, CFR also recommends South Korea buy an investment stake in a uranium enrichment provider, specifically citing the URENCO USA plant in New Mexico. “A South Korean ownership stake in enrichment services would still require U.S. approval for export of fuel to South Korea, but it might alleviate Seoul’s concerns that its inability to independently manufacture nuclear fuel or offer fuel-enrichment services would leave South Korean–made reactors vulnerable to price fluctuations in the event that there is a limited supply of uranium on the international market,” the memo states.
Japan Talks Should be ‘Benchmark’ for South Korea Negotiations
Additionally, negotiations with Japan on its civil nuclear agreement coming in 2018 should be a “benchmark” for talks with South Korea, the CFR memo states. Provisions in the deal would thus “also be granted to South Korea if Seoul can adequately address proliferation and safeguards issues as part of the U.S.-ROK joint research study,” the memo states. “This approach would give Washington additional leverage to strengthen nonproliferation safeguards with Tokyo, demonstrate U.S. sensitivity to South Korea’s concerns about fairness, and bring consistency to U.S. policy.”
