Q : A quick reaction seems to be just not possible…
A : Obviously, it is not easy to reach an agreement, so it will take the time that is needed. I guess the North Koreans are aware of the fact that the Council is working on a reaction. We think it is important to work on the issue and not to go too fast: it is better to have a common understanding and reaction in a few days than disagreement today.
Q : Are you pressing for a resolution?
A : We support a strong reaction by the Council.
Q : How would you caracterize the implementation of resolution 1718 so far?
A : On 1718, it was a little bit soft. Obviously we have not done everything that could have been done on the implementation of 1718 it’s certainly one way forward for the Council.
Q : Why has it been so soft?
A : After the last resolution the idea was to put the emphasis within the Six-Party talks on dialogue, on diplomacy, on prevention. We all support the process of the Six-Party talks as long as they can go on and they are meaningful, which is not the case due to the obstruction of the North Koreans. So if they decide that the Six-Party talks are not a useful way to discuss and to move forward, then we will have to go back to a resolution of the Security Council.
Q : The big issue is with China, they are worried that almost any kind of reaction from the Council: the stronger the worst, in terms of impact on the Six-Party talks.
A : It is always the same question when you work in the Council. If you have a too strong reaction you will always have people who think that is will be bad for the political process. Some others say no, to get the process back on track, you need to put a bit more pressure. It’s the chicken and egg problem./.