U.S. May Offer Technology to N. Korea as Bargaining Tool : Asia: New reactor would lessen chance Pyongyang could make nuclear arms. But cost, other problems loom.

The Clinton Administration and its allies have gradually figured out what sort of bribe it would take to persuade North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program: more advanced nuclear-power technology.

Now they are zeroing in on the hard questions: What countries are going to pay for it and how? Who will provide the new technology to North Korea?

In talks with the United States, North Korean officials have made it clear that they would like to have what is called a light-water reactor--that is, nuclear technology that is more modern and more efficient than anything in North Korea’s existing nuclear facilities.

That idea is being seriously considered by the Administration because such advanced technology reduces the possibility that North Korea would be able to convert byproducts into fuel for nuclear weapons.

Light-water reactors produce a lower-quality plutonium than the gas-graphite technology the North Koreans are now using. U.S. officials believe North Korea has produced enough plutonium in its facilities at Yongbyon to make one or two nuclear bombs. And two months ago, Pyongyang removed spent fuel rods that could also be used to produce plutonium for about five weapons.

“If they get rid of their gas-graphite technology, that would be much better than the status quo,” one Administration official said. From the North Korean point of view, a light-water reactor would provide much-needed power for the country’s energy-starved economy.

Problem solved? Hardly. The price tag for a light-water reactor is roughly $2 billion. And there are all sorts of laws that would prohibit the United States or its allies from supplying any kind of nuclear technology to an outlaw regime like North Korea, with which the United States has no diplomatic relations.

So, at the moment, Assistant Secretary of State Robert L. Gallucci--the Administration’s top negotiator with North Korea--is traveling the globe, visiting South Korea, Japan, China and Russia, largely in an effort to resolve the legal and diplomatic tangles surrounding light-water reactors.

Should Japan and South Korea, the countries most threatened by a North Korean nuclear weapon, pick up the entire tab? Should the United States contribute too? What countries, or companies, would supply North Korea with the light-water technology? Who would provide the financing? What would happen to the export-control restrictions?

Those are the sorts of questions Gallucci must resolve if he is to have any chance of making a deal over North Korea’s nuclear program. The United States and North Korea are scheduled to meet in Geneva next Friday to resume the negotiations that were broken off when President Kim Il Sung died July 8.

For the moment, at least, Administration officials are trying to play down the scope of these difficulties.

“The important thing here is less the obstacles than on just getting there,” said one U.S. official working on North Korean issues. “We’re open to anything that works.”

But there are already signs of resistance in Washington to the idea of providing North Korea with new nuclear technology.

Some Administration officials are said to have balked at the suggestion of spending U.S. funds to help North Korea. Resistance in Congress seems to be high too.

After all, critics ask, even if Pyongyang eventually puts all its nuclear facilities under international safeguards, it is only carrying out its obligations as a signer of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Why should it be rewarded?

Sen. Frank H. Murkowski (R-Alaska) recently won Senate approval for new restrictions on any U.S. financial assistance to the Pyongyang regime. And many existing laws, including the Trading With the Enemies Act, already bar U.S. aid to North Korea.

U.S. officials have voiced hope that, in the end, South Korea and Japan will help pay for all or most of the costs of a light-water reactor for North Korea. Officials in these countries have made vague statements suggesting that they would be willing to support the idea but have given no firm commitments.

In addition to questions of money, there are also disputes over which country’s technology might be used for a light-water reactor in North Korea.

The United States uses light-water technology in most of its nuclear plants, as do South Korea, Britain, France and other countries. So does Russia, and Moscow has talked about supplying four light-water reactors to North Korea.

A Russian light-water reactor might be cheaper than one using Western technology. And it might be installed more quickly, diplomats say, because Russia has already done the feasibility studies that would be required if some other system were used.

However, in the wake of the Chernobyl disaster, there would also be many problems in ensuring the safety of any Russian reactor.

It’s also conceivable that South Korea could supply the light-water technology. But diplomats worry that the Pyongyang regime is simply too proud and insecure to accept technology from the South.