North Korea is in a precarious position, surrounded by the superpowers of China, Russian, and Japan. It is in their best interests, and indeed, is welcomed, that positive relations with the US are established and that North Korea has the backing and support of the US within the Asian region. To not have said support would put North Korea in a very vulnerable position. With North Korea more desperate for US assistance, the negotiating strength lies with the US to ensure that the terms of the treaty are abided by.
There is no doubt that the other affected nations must be involved. However, the primary guiding force should be that of Korea and the States.
Yes, the Koreans continued their nuclear program despite the agreement. However, the US also failed to uphold its side of the bargain. Since then, Korea has stated that it will require assistance from the US to complete the curbing of its missile program. It has not requested such assistance from the Asian countries. That Korea and the US have been able to engage in successful cooperation on many other issues further indicates that both sides are open to working together.
Despite the involvement of the other nations, this is still a predominantly Korea-US discussion. Korea is requesting US assistance; the US is demanding that its requests be met and rejecting proposals it doesn't approve of. These are the two main players in this, and the solution lies largely with them.
It is in their best interests, and indeed, is welcomed, that positive relations with the US are established and that North Korea has the backing and support of the US within the Asian region.
This ideal simply doesn't reconcile with reality. The ideological differences between the US and North Korea make it extremely unrealistic that the regime of Kim Jong-Il will ever have the backing and support of the US. An agreement that would ensure the cessation of the NK nuke production, and allow inspectors full access to the country's facilities, is probably the best we can hope for.
With North Korea more desperate for US assistance, the negotiating strength lies with the US to ensure that the terms of the treaty are abided by.
The US has provided a large amount of food aid to North Korea since 1995, but they are hardly dependent on USAID's contributions. Their economy is almost entirely dependent on China and South Korea, which is why those two countries have infinitely more leverage than the US, when it comes to NK. That is also why Kim Jong-Il fears the presence of those two countries at the bargaining table.
However, the US also failed to uphold its side of the bargain.
That's not an entirely accurate representation. The US certainly delayed in beginning construction of the promised nuclear reactors, however the construction contract was signed, and the groundwork was being laid. There is no evidence that North Korea ever abandoned it's nuclear weapons program, or even intended to do so. Your proposed strategy has failed once, and there is no reason to believe it would succeed at anything but emboldening Kim Jong-Il, if tried a second time.
That Korea and the US have been able to engage in successful cooperation on many other issues further indicates that both sides are open to working together.
What other issues, comparable to the nuclear issue, have the US and North Koreans worked together on, that could be called a success?
These are the two main players in this, and the solution lies largely with them.
I maintain that any talks, not attended by at least China and South Korea, are doomed to failure. You've yet to provide any reasoning as to why you think bilateral talks would be successful this time around.
There is no doubt that the other affected nations must be involved. However, the primary guiding force should be that of Korea and the States.
Yes, the Koreans continued their nuclear program despite the agreement. However, the US also failed to uphold its side of the bargain. Since then, Korea has stated that it will require assistance from the US to complete the curbing of its missile program. It has not requested such assistance from the Asian countries. That Korea and the US have been able to engage in successful cooperation on many other issues further indicates that both sides are open to working together.
Despite the involvement of the other nations, this is still a predominantly Korea-US discussion. Korea is requesting US assistance; the US is demanding that its requests be met and rejecting proposals it doesn't approve of. These are the two main players in this, and the solution lies largely with them.
Reply
This ideal simply doesn't reconcile with reality. The ideological differences between the US and North Korea make it extremely unrealistic that the regime of Kim Jong-Il will ever have the backing and support of the US. An agreement that would ensure the cessation of the NK nuke production, and allow inspectors full access to the country's facilities, is probably the best we can hope for.
With North Korea more desperate for US assistance, the negotiating strength lies with the US to ensure that the terms of the treaty are abided by.
The US has provided a large amount of food aid to North Korea since 1995, but they are hardly dependent on USAID's contributions. Their economy is almost entirely dependent on China and South Korea, which is why those two countries have infinitely more leverage than the US, when it comes to NK. That is also why Kim Jong-Il fears the presence of those two countries at the bargaining table.
However, the US also failed to uphold its side of the bargain.
That's not an entirely accurate representation. The US certainly delayed in beginning construction of the promised nuclear reactors, however the construction contract was signed, and the groundwork was being laid. There is no evidence that North Korea ever abandoned it's nuclear weapons program, or even intended to do so. Your proposed strategy has failed once, and there is no reason to believe it would succeed at anything but emboldening Kim Jong-Il, if tried a second time.
That Korea and the US have been able to engage in successful cooperation on many other issues further indicates that both sides are open to working together.
What other issues, comparable to the nuclear issue, have the US and North Koreans worked together on, that could be called a success?
These are the two main players in this, and the solution lies largely with them.
I maintain that any talks, not attended by at least China and South Korea, are doomed to failure. You've yet to provide any reasoning as to why you think bilateral talks would be successful this time around.
Reply
Leave a comment