have a serious consequence. ambassador bosworth, i believe north korea continues to be a critical threat to our national security and the security of our friends and allies in the region. ..

and principal allies in the region. this is not a unilateral american eckert and through who frequent consultations with the other parties to the six-party talks and u.n. security council, we've made multilateral action the centerpiece of what we are trying to do with the north koreans. as for how one makes progress over time, i would counsel only patience and perseverance, and i think we have to remain steady. we have to continue to indicate that some of the things they are doing are dangerous and unacceptable to us and we have to be prepared to respond as we are now responding for the u.n. security council resolution, through sanctions and consultations with our partners in the region. we also have to be prepared to continue to indicate that for us engagement and dialogue and

diplomacy remains the only real way to solve this problem. that doesn't mean you acquiesce and everything north korea wants. far from it. but i think if we remain patient and persevere in our policy the chances of eventual progress are good. >> ambassador, there's been numerous press reports kim jong il selected his youngest son to be a successor and some analysts suspect the recent nuclear test was part of an effort to ensure smooth transition of power to his preferred error. padilla think the ability to move forward on negotiations is limited while kim jong il remains in power and more specific what you think an impending power of transition would have on north korea still on that program and willingness to participate in negotiations and also in this regard if kim jong il's youngest son has been selected, give me a sense when you think it might mean for policy toward north korea.

>> as far as we are aware there has been no formal designation of anyone as kim jong il's heir, so to some extent this is the reflection of speculation in the press which may or may not prove to be founded were unfounded. in the meantime what i think i would say in response to your very good questions is to quote someone quote earlier by the chairman, and that is secretary bill perry when he was the secretary of defense who advised we should deal with north korea as it is and not as we would wish it to be so regardless of who is in power of north korea and who is the president and who as the leader i feel we have to deal with north korea on the basis of what it does and small but we think would be a likely alternative. >> i understand the united nations resolution has been agreed to that would expand and toughen the multilateral sanctions toward north korea and i recognize you're probably able to share very little of that

because it is an ongoing discussion but i am interested to hear what specific mechanisms exist or will be used to enforce new and existing sanctions and by raising this because u.n. security council resolution 1718 which passed an 2006 appeared to be a strong multilateral toole and band atomic explosions and long-range missile launches and imposed a limited financial sanctions as well and partial trade arms. however as you well know the measures have been widely ignored and on and forced and thereby basically rendering a multilateral effort to toothless. what steps are we taking to ensure this new resolution if it passes doesn't have the same fate? >> one of the things that would be provided by this resolution assuming it is adopted is the dprk sanctions committee would have an enhanced mandate to

focus on compliance investigations and outreach and also a panel of experts would be established under other sanctions regimes to support the committee's effort to monitor and improve the implementation obvious that for the u.s. or our government, a position of urging all u.n. members to comply fully with this new resolution of our response to what north korea is doing. sanctions resolutions are useful and important largely to the extent they are implemented very much believe we will push to ensure other countries implement these resolutions as fully as we do. >> thank you, ambassador and mr. sherman. >> thank you, senator feingold. senator corker? >> thank you, ambassador, for

being here. you certainly have your work cut out for you. in your testimony you mention your findings on your recent trip include that china shares deep concern about north korea's recent actions and strong commitment to achieve denuclearization. there's a wide you, mr. ambassador, that if china really had to squeeze the north korean neighbor on the issue of the denuclearization, they could accomplish this in the way that really no other country on the globe can do. did you find their concern to be deeper and their commitment to be stronger than before the missile test and nuclear test,

and would he speak to this lightly held view that i mentioned, that china really could accomplish this if they were of mind to? >> i think first it is fair to say that we found china very concerned, acutely concerned about what north korea has done and is doing in the nuclear field and the area of missile technology. they recognize perhaps more than anyone else these moves by north korea can have a very deleterious effect on security arrangements throughout northeast asia and specifically on the korean peninsula, and they realize this is not in their interest. i can't speak for the government of china obviously, only to say that hour in priscian is we came away from these very intensive consultations in beijing that north korea seized the current situation and the evolution of

the situation in very large the same way that we do. as to what north korea, i'm sorry, with regard but china is or is not. prepared to do and what the potential action might be a reluctant to publicly comment about that. i think that is largely up to china and i would say we have to judge china on the basis what it does over the next several months. but china is also a country that has grave concerns about instability in the region, and i think we will continue to work with them very closely and to try to ensure we can as we have to date to operate very much on a common front, and indeed with other partners in the region. >> apart from multilateral approaches, to china can you tell specifically are you able

to tell us specifically at this open hearing what bilateral actions china has already taken before these tests to resolve the situation with regard to the nuclear weapons? >> i am reluctant to get into that because it has to do with what china is doing as a sovereign country in its own interest but i would say that we are satisfied that china is moving in all of its connections within the region and specifically and its connections with north korea to get focus and reality to this effort that this is a subject on which there are bilateral communications but beyond saying that in a general sense, i really don't want to become too specific. >> okay, do you reject the assertion by some that and some

respects north korea serves as a counterbalance for china and that it's not all negative with regard to china? >> again, i can only comment on the basis of will we learn when we talk to the chinese and in that sense i think i am convinced that they are acutely concerned about what north korea is doing and they see no good vantage to them or anyone else from what north korea is doing. >> it is clear to me that you are quite satisfied at this point with the response of the chinese government and response to these tests >> we are continuing of

consultation with the chinese as we move forward and we are each of the believe that kind consultation and coordinated action is essential if we are going to bring about the kind of solution to this problem we think is desirable and needed. >> the third option we have as the united states is enhancing our military capacity. what are our options for doing that? can you discuss those publicly? >> we already have a very strong defense posture in the western pacific. >> how will we enhance that? >> i don't need to be evasive but i am not willing to get into the business of my colleagues at the deep defense department and the president's business how we might do that if it is so desired. >> mr. ambassador, are we taking any small steps would have we taken any small steps over time that have improved the u.s.

north korean relationship in any respect? and i ask you about employment across the border. in my home state of mississippi we've entertained medical doctors from north korea, and i don't know if that accomplish this much, except for an exchange of ideas we think those are too small steps we are taking. is there any reason to be encouraged at all by some other things that are going on? >> i think, senator, one of our strengths as a nation is our willingness to engage in humanitarian activities aside from political considerations. so, i would applaud the efforts of any american entity to try to bring about some improvement in

the very desperate condition of the north korean people. that is the basis on which the u.s. government has provided food aid the last several years and it's the basis which a number of private non-governmental organizations have operated within north korea and we have never and i don't believe we will in the future try to use these activities as leverage for political ends. we deal with north korea on official government to government basis but personally i can speak to everyone in the at ministration and indeed the u.s. bureaucracy this willingness to engage in humanitarian activities is one of the hallmarks of the country and that gives me great pride. >> if i might, mr. chairman, we would no doubt in the aegean humanitarian efforts for the good that it does.

do you have any information you could share with the committee who gets the credit among the north korean people? >> i have no specific information it is mostly anecdotal. i have reason to believe through my conversations with some of the u.s. organizations that have been doing this over the years that by and large the north korean people understand from where this assistance is coming and in some cases i think in recent years the food we provided even comes with american flag on the back which is still there when it's distributed to the people of north korea. so i think the north korean people will please understand better than we might expect the himeno terrie in process of the united states and its people. >> thank you, senator. senator dorgan? >> thank you very much for being here. i just want to underscore the point that senator wicker made

it the beginning of this hearing about the two journalists, and i understand the limitations of this hearing. i must tell of the gross human rights violation by north korea and taken the lead could taking human pawns in some way as they see it for negotiations with the united states or regards to their other issues and it's something that we just need to continue to raise and printout that how outrageous that type of action is. now, number three in's human rights records is deplorable generally. the state department's 2008 human-rights report documents elon jury list of the regime's practices. i have the opportunity to chair the helsinki commission and we deal on a regular basis of human rights and one of our points is

how we can use those reports in a more effective way to try to help the people of these repressive regimes and i just want you to perhaps share with us but we can do to try to advance human rights in north korea. i know we have a long list but i hope part is to try to improve government functioning as it relates to the basic rights of the people of north korea. >> i think i can assure you, senator, human rights concerns remain very much on the agenda of the perspective relationship with north korea, and in the case of the detained journalist, we are exploring all possible ways to bring about their release on humanitarian grounds. beyond that as i indicated i am not able to go, given privacy act considerations and other things. >> and my question was more

general than just the two journalists. i certainly want you to do everything you can to secure their release and we have all expressed expressed our views but it goes beyond the two journalists. the human rights records of north korea are outrageous, one of the worst in the world. >> without question to read and we are moving under legislation passed last year moving ahead to designate a special envoy for north korean human rights and i would expect and hope that could be done the next several weeks. >> let me raise one more issue in my time and that is obviously the risk of north korea becoming more sophisticated and nuclear weapons is obvious and they are testing to try to deliver that type of nuclear weapon as a major concern but it's also the transfer of the technology or

weapons to terrorist organizations or non-state actors that have to be a major concern. i heard you in response to senator kerry's question talk about potential sanctions that would block the export of weapons. i just really want to get a sense from you as to how effective we can be to make to where that type of technology is not exported to terrorist organizations or non-state actors. >> we will do everything possible to monitor the situation, and if we believe there is evidence or there is an indication of the proliferating activities, we will respond in a very strong fashion. i would know what this is a very difficult thing to do obviously and it is one of the major reasons, not the only reason

that one of the reasons why for the obama administration the ultimate goal remains very verifiable denuclearization because if the korean peninsula is denuclearized then there is really no risk of knute werries asian but we will never be prepared to settle for a policy that on the concentrates on proliferation and ignores the root cause which is the nuclear station if north korea. >> i certainly agree with that. if we had the capacity the proliferation issue is quinn to be there. we know that, and the best way to deal with that is the policy at the peninsula being nuclear weapons. so i agree with you. i just want to underscore the point not only direct threat of north korea having weapons capacity about what it could be as a supplier to other regions

and other organizations including terrorist groups. we know that there has already been smoking guns here and we just need to understand the risk factors and take the appropriate actions and i think that proceeding from the united nations security council makes a great deal of sense working with our partners to get a more effective help from the major countries in the region including china is our best chance to secure a policy to accomplish our goal of removing this threat. >> i agree with that. >> thank you. >> senator casey. >> thank you mr. chairman, and mr. ambassador we are grateful for your service and your testimony today. i wanted to raise primarily to issues, maybe three but the first one centers on china. i was noticing in your statement in pertinent part he said china

has important role to play influencing the path north korea follows. you spoke of your trip and china shared, quote, deep concern about north korea's recent actions to turn the commitment to effective implementation of security council resolutions. i was going to ask about resolution 1718 passed in october, 2006 and enforcement thereof since of the past as you know and we can easily track this, china's aid and trade and investment in north korea has expanded how can the obama administration and you are playing a central role on this encourage china to enforce u.s. sanctions and take a more assertive posture towards north korea. any thoughts on that?

>> i think what happened with regard to 1718 and this is no excuse, but what happened is soon after that was passed we found ourselves back in multilateral negotiations with the dprk. i think house we go forward and has been the case the last few months the subject implementation of u.n. security council resolutions both the existing ones, 1718 and now of course prospectively the new one is the subject of active consideration in the relationship not only with the chinese but the countries of the region so i think you can expect as we move forward we are going to continue to be concerned about implementation and other. >> anything you recommend? i know you were not in the business recommending what the congress should do but any recommendations how congress can be helpful on that narrow

question of enforcement of the resolution? >> well, i think i'm never hesitant to recommend what congress should do, but -- [laughter] >> that's ok for today. >> but i do think congress has a role in this and as the congress expresses its views those can hopefully be reinforcing of the positions we are taking in bilateral government to government relationships with our partners. >> and also, on that issue, maybe i will move on, wanted to move to the question of the six-party talks. what is your sense of, what's your sense of the likelihood of the six-party talks being the engaged in the near-term and then if he would comment on i

know in the statement you talked about and it was helpful i think to have set forth a four pronged strategy the fourth one being if north korea shows what a serious willingness diplomatic engagement, how do you see that play out what i guess optimally how would you like it to play out in terms of the role any further or near term six party talk the engagement house well as any kind of bilateral strategy? >> optimally i would like to see the north koreans signal strongly they are preparing to return to negotiating mode. the other members of the six parted process including very important united states are all prepared to go back to the six party process. i think it has proven to be effective mechanism. now it's not perfect and anyone who has been engaged in multilateral efforts will tell you that as you expand beyond

the to the process becomes ever more complicated by the quantum factor but nonetheless, the six party process provides a platform within which each of last can examine what the others are doing, where we can resolve issues, where we can coordinate efforts with regard to a common purpose and with regard to north korea. and so, i am hopeful at some point hopefully and preferably not in the distant future north korea will come back to the table and i think i can say all other members of the six party process share the desire of the united states to see that happen as soon as possible. >> and getting back to a question senator cardin raised about the selling were exporting technology that relates to the nuclear weapons, d you have any sense, i know we all are engaged

in any strategy to solve the technology or -- the concern is mostly about what they are doing? >> i think that there is no question the north koreans are aware of our attitude on the subject and beyond saying that i believe they know there would be consequences for any such activity. i really don't want to go much further in my statements. >> fair enough. >> finally and i only have a minute left and i will be brief on this. the north koreans recently announced they suspended the 1953 armistice that entered the corrine board. is there any practical effect on that? how do you see that? >> well, first of all it is not

welcomed news obviously, but the practical effect of it at this point i think are not that. we would like to see them come back into the frame work. there are some mechanisms provided by the armistice that will be helpful and i have no reason at this point to believe the north koreans are going to reject those systems paid as i indicated earlier in response to the question, looking out beyond where we are now in a broad focus i think the obama administration believes it is time to begin talking seriously with the affected countries about a permanent replacement for the armistice of 53. that was 50 years ago and in some ways concerning and lamentable a state of war still technically exists on the korean peninsula. >> thank you. -- before, senator casey. before senator shaheen i just

want to say committee process we have promised durham -- we have the prime minister coming and after your questioning if the ambassador we are going to switch panels and i want to have time to hear from the second panel of experts and if i could ask the ambassador to pass by on the way out we would appreciate that and finally senator boxer asked me to mention that she shares the concern about the imprisonment of laurel lane and she invites them to join in signing with respect to the administration's approach. senator shaheen. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ambassador basra, thank you for being here and your service. i would point out to our graduate of dartmouth and to a sprout in new hampshire.

>> thank you. >> you can't steal them. he still lives with us. [laughter] >> we are working on that. according to the recently released reports, north korean exports jumped 23% last year compared to the previous year and imports jumped 33%. to follow-up little bit on what senator kec was referencing with respect to china, what do these statistics say about our ability to isolate north korea economically and what affect that sanctions had on the country? >> i think first of all, senator, it's important to note those are percentage increases of very low base levels. i haven't personally analyzed the data sufficiently to be able to tell exactly what it means. i think one thing it probably reflects particularly on the import side is a very