Despite the end of the Cold War, the threat of nuclear warfare has not ended, U.S. Ambassador-at-Large Robert L. Gallucci told 120 people at the Kennedy School last night.

Gallucci delivered a 30 minute address on the subject of nuclear non-proliferation, with specific emphasis on North Korea The speech was followed by a more general hour-long question and answer session.

"The nuclear proliferation situation is much better than it was, but we cannot relax," Gallucci said. "I can't tell you the time before [South Asian] countries are ready to launch, but I can tell you that you might be able to look at your wristwatch."

Gallucci, who was the chief negotiator during the 16-month negotiations on nuclear proliferation agreement with North Korea, said he now thinks that Pakistan and India are the greatest nuclear threats to peace.

"India and Pakistan are quite dangerous and Kashmir is the ignition point," Gallucci said. "The availability of ballistic weapons puts even the continental United States in danger."

Gallucci spent much of the question and answer session defending the United States' policy regarding North Korea.

He responded to charges by audience members that the payment to North Korea for dismantling its nuclear weapons established a dangerous precedent.

"This case is one of a kind. There will never be a situation exactly like it. Besides, it is not like we're telling other states things they didn't already know."

He also pointed out that the other alternatives, such as an economic embargo or a pre-emptive strike on military facilities were no better.

"I can't answer the central question posed to all negotiators, which is, could I have gotten more for less?" Gallucci said. "What I do know is that the program in North Korea could have caused fundamental change in the security landscape of northeast Asia, and now this program has been stopped in midstream."

Park Shin-II, South Korea's Consul-General, said he was impressed with the talk.

"He made a very convincing case [for the U.S. policy]," said Park. "I have seen other presentations, but this one was pretty complete."

Philip R. Sharp, director of the Institute of Politics, said that the speech provided an interesting look into the workings of the government.

"What I thought was interesting about his talk was that you saw that the priorities of the negotiator are not necessarily the same as what the public thinks the goals are," said Sharp, a former U.S. representative.