cooperation, and our strong alliance with security against the strong

>> it is a different dimension from the past which has been pushing for the u.s. case, and and is attributed to the this is attributed to the north and enablingle against this has assured our government will respond bilaterally with clarity and resoluteness trade -- resoluteness. thegovernment recommends trumpet ministrations announcements. most notably, the president heself has said that

considers that the u.s. alance wead even stronger. i am a priest -- appreciative to our that are maintaining relationship with u.s. and the coming years. i have no doubt that this meeting today will mark another miles known in developing our comprehensive alliance that contributes to peace and stability on the finance look, -- peninsula, and also in the entire world. will hear from rex tillerson. verytary tillerson: i am honored to be here with my ,riend, foreign minister yun and i am happy that you welcomed me so graciously. more than 60 years, our partnership has remained strong. our commitment will remain with this administration. to commit to the desk

meant the south korean people for their commitment to democracy. -- commend the south korean people to their commitment to democracy. the u.s.-south korean alliance peaceontinue to serve for and security on the gran peninsula and across the asia-pacific region. in facing whater was once a regional security this will not reach only its regional neighbors, the united dates and other countries. we urge north korea to achieve peacefuls to achieve silly with north korea have failed to make us safer. the u.s. and its allies have repeatedly assured north korea's leaders that we assure only

peace, stability, and economic prosperity for northeast asia. as proof of our intent, america has provided $1.3 billion in assistance to north korea since 1995. in return, north korea has detonated nuclear weapons that -- and dramatically increased ballistic missile lnches to threaten america andur allies. our commitment to allies is in the face of north korea's escalating global threat, it is important for me to consult with our friends. let me be very clear. the policy of strategic patience has ended. we are exploring a new range diplomatic security -- diplomatic, security, and economic measures. all options are on the table. north korea must understand that he only path to a secure, economically prosperous future is to abandon its development of nuclear weapons, domestic --

holistic missiles, and other weapons of mass destruction. we called upon other regional powers and all nations in demanding that the north korean government choose a better path and a different page -- future for its people. the united states is committed to supporting the defense of our allies, and we will continue to develop a conference a set of to counter the growing north korean ballistic missile threat. that is why the united dates in the republic of korea decided to take a defensive measure of the -- sadoying a tha 80 thaade to play -- missile-defense system. address thea to threat that makes this necessary, the escalating threat from north korea. the united states alliance with south korea is not built only on security, but commitment to our

core principles that have enabled the success of our nations, a strong economic partnership, people to people ties, and democratic values. i am encouraged by our productive discussions and pledged continuing american support for the security and prosperity of our two nations. thank you. minister yun: i want to open the floor to two members of the press from each country. first, the korean media. >> i would like to propose this question to secretary tillerson. are you saying that we need a new up roach to north -- new approach to north korea? i know to solve this nuclear program problem, china needs to play a more active part. in the toolkitls

exhausted? what more specific actions can we take in your opinion. and according to a press statement by the state department, i wonder going forward, what will be the korean government's position on this new approach? i pose this question to foreign minister yun. as itary tillerson: indicated in my remarks, 20 years of talks with north korea have brought us to where we are today. the r.o.k. and the united states have made it very clear that we are interested nothing but a peaceful and economically stable korean peninsula. this 20 years of talking has brought us to the point of where we are today. so the track that we are now going to see is a number of

actionsth ever greater ahead of us that involve which the united nations security council has already approved, and in china, which voted for those sanctions, and we are following -- calling on all countries to fully implement those sanctions. we are calling on china to fully implement those sanctions as well in client with the u.s. security council resolution it voted for. our -- bewe will be widening and a splitting threats will not ofd to their objective security and economic develop meant. byt can only be achieved

debut glamorizing, giving up their weapons of mass destruction, and only then will you be willing to face -- we be willing to face negotiation talks. un: regardingy this approach, secretary tillerson has given you a comprehensive response. i do not believe there is much at myself, but basically, as we stated in our opening remarks, the current north korean frets are of a different place from the pats. there is an eminent and great threat facing us. as such, this approach that we are pursuing, this joint probably more than it any point in the past we will be willing to utilize all of the resources available to us to permit this.

other types of effort fizzled. at the same time, as was mentioned by secretary tillerson, all of the stakeholders themselves, more than any point of time in the past, should cooperate together to make sure that north korea feels the pain for its wrongdoings and pay the cost, the price. for the aspects of that were not of our expectations, we should be deliberating how further we need to go to make sure that there is an acceptable outcome. in this process, one of the most important principles is that iraq didn't -- the r.o.k. and the u.s. will remain closely correlated with each other for a shared response so we can demonstrate our strong alliance. >> thank you.

mr. secretary, you mentioned a range of options, but i'm hoping you can drill down into a few civics we know are on the table one, for example, is the possibility of stepped up interdiction by china against shipping into north korea. another is the cyber campaign against the north korean nuclear ballistic missile program, and the third is the possibility of negotiating a freeze. i'm wondering whether the program is too far along for negotiating a freeze. could you address the pluses and minuses of those acidic programs, and the possibility for action on those? to the foreign minister, a simple question. can you guarantee the fed will go ahead, regardless of who wins the presidential election? thank you. secretary tillerson: with regards to escalating sanctions,

i do not believe we have ever fully achieved the maximum level of action that can be taken under the un security council resolution. full participation of all countries. we also have other sources of revenue to north korea that fall outside of his specific the specific sanctions, and other nations could take actions to alter their relations with north korea ends up in our efforts and happened about their nuclear and help andam -- support of giving up their nuclear weapons program. at this stage, i am not sure who would be willing to freeze, that would leave north korea with significant capabilities that would represent a true thrt and leave with a lack of american forces as well. regarding the question that

was proposed by the journalist from bloomberg, basically on the korean peninsula, the threat that we face from north korea, the circumstance will not change with a change of government in korea. that is the reality that we face. such, national security and the people's lives and should be safeguarded, and for that no matter which government comes into power in korea in the future, the gravity and urgency of the problem should be considered for making a wise decision, and in particular the diplomatic policies and security policies should remain consistent. responsible leaders of korea will probably have the same view . again, i would like to take a question from a korean journalists.

look -- >> welcome to south korea, mr. secretary. that this will be completed before the new south korean administration kicks in, [indiscernible] discuss theg to current difficulties when you meet in china, and is this issue going to be brought up in the u.s. sometime in the next month? secretary tillerson: i do believe that we will proceed with the installation of that and it is my expectation that the government in south korea will continue to be supportive of this system, because it is directed solely innocence of the arms case. it is with the armed forces as well. as to conversations with the

government of china, we will be discussing with them the serious poses toat north korea peace and stability in the korean pencil of, and beyond. north korea is now pursuing programs that would loth to present a clear threat attinental united states other parts of the world, so we will be discussing with china what we believe they should be doing to help mitigate this threat as well. as to their and punitive actions against south korea, because of the agreement to install the we believe these actions are unnecessary and troubling. we also believe it is not the way for a regional power to help resolve what is a various threat to everyone. to everyone.reat we would hope china would alter its position on punishing south korea for the system.

as i said, we have emphasized many times it is purely defensive in nature, and we hope they would help us engage with north korea to eliminate be reason that this system is even required. : i wouldinister yun let you take one more question from the u.s. press. mr. secretary, is there truly a new or different approach that does not include a military option? militaryoint does the option include retaliations against 20 million people in a metropolitan area? also they have suggested dropping the joint military drills. thatat a viable option could be discussed on this trip, turnn term in beijing --

in beijing, will you push officials to cut off oil to north korea? secrary tillerson: i will take the latter part of your question first. as to the suggestion of the chinese government that we should stand down our joint military operations in exchange for engaging in talks, we do not believe the conditions are right to engage in any talks at this time. we have no intention of standing down our joint military operations. those operations are an annual event, we have been carrying out these joint military operations and when40 years, those operations are to be undertaken is with clear transparency. we announced the world that we are going to be carrying these out so there is no surprise to anyone, and the purposes made quite clear to the north korean government as well. north korea does not provide any of us the same type of transparent the and for warning they choose to launch ballistic missiles. so again, conditions must change before there is any scope for talks to resume, whether they be

five or six party. question,part of your around military options. all of the options are on the table. certainly, we do not want for things to get to a military conflict. we are quite clear in our communications. but obviously if north korea thes actions that threatens south korean forces, or our own forces, that will be met with an appropriate response. if they elevate the threat of their weapons program to a level that we believe requires action, that option is on the table. we are hope full that by taking these steps, they have -- there are many steps we can take before we get to that point. we hope that will persuade north korea to take a different course of action. >> and the oil? secretary tillerson: to the

extent that china is supplying that oil, i think others are supplying that oil, some of it comes from russia, other sources. we will be calling on everyone to join in these actions, certainly all of the regional players, but others who have commercial relationships with north korea will be asking -- asked to take steps as well. yun: thank you. this concludes our joint press conference for the foreign ministers meeting. thank you very much. the ministers will leave the hall. >>