U.S. Department of State

Patrick Ventrell Acting Deputy Spokesperson
Daily Press Briefing

Washington, DC

April 9, 2013

DPRK/ROK

Security Posture at U.S. Embassy Seoul /

Threats and Provocative Statements from DPRK

Constant Contact with Regional Partners

Communication Channel with DPRK

DPRK International Obligations and Commitments

QUESTION: I just want to go to Korea.

MR. VENTRELL: Yeah.

QUESTION: Korean Peninsula.

MR. VENTRELL: Yeah.

QUESTION: What do you make, if anything, of the North’s latest attempt at fear-mongering by telling people that they might want to leave South – or that they should leave the South? This is a little bit further than telling embassies that they can’t guarantee their safety after Wednesday. This is actually – seems to be an attempt to disrupt the South Korean economy.

MR. VENTRELL: Yeah. Thanks, Matt, for the question. Just to reiterate, and this is what we said back in our U.S. Embassy Seoul message back on April 4th, in our message we reiterated to U.S. citizens that there’s no specific information to suggest imminent threat to U.S. citizens or facilities in the Republic of Korea, so the U.S. Embassy has not changed its security posture. We have not recommended that U.S. citizens who reside in or plan to visit the Republic of Korea take special security precautions at this time. So North Korea’s reported “advice,” quote/unquote, to foreigners that they depart South Korea only serves to unnecessarily and provocatively escalate tensions.

QUESTION: So you don’t – the fact at a nuclear-armed country has told foreigners to get out of South Korea because of a coming war, you don’t regard as a specific threat?

MR. VENTRELL: Matt, well, you well know that they have a pattern of this provocative rhetoric --

QUESTION: Exactly. So you don’t think that it’s credible? You think that they’re just – it’s just bluster?

MR. VENTRELL: I mean, again, we were very --

QUESTION: Because --

MR. VENTRELL: Go ahead.

QUESTION: Because if – in another circumstance, if a country warned Americans or any other foreigners to get out, you might think that that was an actual threat, no?

MR. VENTRELL: Well, look, we’ve been very clear over these past couple of weeks as these sort of provocative statements have come out on a routine basis that, of course, we’re taking all appropriate measures and we always review our security precautions and we always – we’re very much capable of defending ourselves and our ally. But in terms this specific statement today, our analysis remains the same as it was last week, that we’re not discouraging U.S. citizens from traveling to South Korea or encouraging them to take any special travel precautions.

QUESTION: Okay. And you don’t think that that is – that might be irresponsible in light of the situation?

MR. VENTRELL: Well, if we thought otherwise, we’d have a different recommendation. But that’s our recommendation.

QUESTION: Your – okay, so your recommendation to American citizens in Seoul or anywhere in South Korea is nothing’s going on, don’t worry about it, there isn’t any threat, even though a country with nuclear weapons and a huge standing army right on the border about 40 minutes away from the capital is threatening war?

MR. VENTRELL: Look, we’re clear-eyed about the threat, but at this time we’re not recommending --

QUESTION: Okay. You just don’t buy it?

MR. VENTRELL: We’re not recommending any specific actions by American citizens at this time.

Camille, go ahead.

QUESTION: Can you update us on any contacts that you guys have had with South Korean officials or with Chinese officials about North Korea?

MR. VENTRELL: Are you – something in specific you’re looking for?

QUESTION: No, I just wondered, have there been any new contacts in the last 24 hours about --

MR. VENTRELL: I mean, we’re in constant contact through our embassies with both the Chinese, the South Koreans, the Japanese, and others. And the Secretary, indeed, will be there later this – going into this weekend, so we’ll have a chance to continue to have a conversation about this.

QUESTION: Hi, Patrick. Actually North Korea usually inform (inaudible) in informal notice to the United States before its missile launch. So did you receive such a notice as of today?

MR. VENTRELL: I don’t have anything to read out in terms of communications between the DPRK and us at this point.

Go ahead, Nicolas.

QUESTION: Yeah. Are you in contact with the North Koreans through your so-called New York channel at the UN?

MR. VENTRELL: Well, you know we have a channel of communications. I don’t have any specific – anything specifically to read out about that. But the channel remains open, as necessary.

QUESTION: Okay. This question because yesterday there was a story in The Washington Post saying that this channel doesn’t work anymore; it’s not closed, but it doesn’t work properly.

MR. VENTRELL: It’s open, but I don’t think I’m going to characterize it further than that in this forum.

In the back.

QUESTION: Yes. If U.S. approaching talk with the North Korea except Six-Party Talks, what kind of an alternative system United have talk with – future talk with North Korea? Because of many – any – many kind of party talks is not work. I think Six-Party work in the talks workings is probably is nothing. So --

MR. VENTRELL: Well, the bottom line is that the onus remains on North Korea to take meaningful steps toward denuclearization. We are open and committed to authentic and credible negotiations to implement their previous commitments, including irreversible steps that lead to denuclearization. But while we’re – we’ve long said that we’re open to these improved relations with the DPRK, it’s got to live up to its international obligations and commitments.

QUESTION: So are you still think of Six – through the Six-Party Talks, it work with the North Korea negotiations?

MR. VENTRELL: I mean, that’s been one mechanism that we’ve engaged on this process, but they need to start living up to their recommendations and choose a different path.