Potential for Progress in New North Korea Nuclear Talks Uncertain

After more than a year of stalling, North KoreaPyongyang wants formal pledges from
has agreed to resume negotiations about itsWashington that it would not attack the North in
nuclear weapons programs next week in Beijing.addition to massive aid. Pyongyang has cited a
But experts and officials note this is the easynumber of reasons and rationales for refusing to
step.negotiate, including a charge that the United
After the good news about the resumption ofStates retains a "hostile attitude."
disarmament talks come the big questions. HowShi Yinhong, a professor of international relations
much progress will there be? How long might itat China's People's University in Beijing, says
take to reach agreement? Ultimately, will Northresolution of this conflict depends on compromise
Korea ever abandon nuclear weapons completely?by North Korean leader Kim Jong Il and President
The United States, Japan, South Korea, China andBush. "Even if the six-party talks get started this
Russia have been urging North Korea since 2003month, I personally feel that prospects for the
to give up its nuclear weapons programs, whichfinal settlement are quite bleak," he said. "Will Kim
were developed in violation of internationalJong Il be willing to give up his nuclear arms
agreements.programs? Will the United States change its
Then last year, after three rounds of inconclusivefundamental position?"
six-nation talks in Beijing, North Korea abandonedHistorically, experts note North Korea has dragged
the process, announced it already possessedout negotiations as long as possible, adapting
nuclear weapons, and - at one point - implied ithostile and conciliatory tones in turn, to see which
might be preparing to test them.tactic works and in order to extract as many
Intense diplomatic consultation and someconcessions as possible. Park Young-ho, a senior
economic inducements from South Korea appearresearch fellow at the Korea Institute of National
to have brought North Korea back to the table.Unification, says this pattern is at play now. "North
But what will be the benefits of moreKorea has calculated what they can get from the
negotiations? Many experts say there are fewUnited States. But their tactics have not
options beyond talks. But some - like Professorsucceeded in inducing concessions from the United
Bruce Cumings, a North Korea scholar at theStates," he said. "That's why they returned to the
University of Chicago - warn that prolonging talkstalks."
only seems to benefit North Korea.Analysts say the promise of energy that the
"If the six-party talks don't work then NorthNorth desperately needs could make a difference.
Korea would have gained some time to makeElectricity, along with tons of fertilizer and food
more nuclear weapons," said Professor Cumings.aid, are vital to the survival of the impoverished
"We'll still be in a very dangerous situation, and thecommunist nation.
re-division of this region along lines like back in theIn June last year, the United States offered to
Cold War would continue."provide an energy package to the North in
The current nuclear crisis erupted in Octoberexchange for disarmament. The details of the
2002, when the United States said North Koreaoffer have not been made public, but U.S.
had admitted to running a secret, uranium-basedSecretary of State Condoleezza Rice says the
nuclear program in violation of a 1994 agreement.offer is still on the table.
Under that deal, a Japanese, South Korean andOn top of that, South Korea last week unilaterally
U.S. consortium was to supply fuel oil and buildoffered to send huge amounts of electricity
light-water safe reactors in the North. Inacross the border into the North in exchange for
exchange, Pyongyang agreed to close itsdisarmament. South Korean officials say the
Soviet-built nuclear plants, capable of producingproffered electricity would replace the power
plutonium to convert into nuclear weapons fuel.plants North Korea would have received under the
But construction of the light-water reactors wasfailed 1994 agreement, giving it access to
slow. Pyongyang argued the United States wassufficient energy within a few short years.
failing to meet its obligations, not only on energyThat still may not be enough to convince Kim
but also on a pledge to move toward normalizingJong Il. Chun Hong Chan, a politics professor at
U.S.-North Korean diplomatic relations. WashingtonBusan University, says Pyongyang is unlikely to let
maintains that the North Koreans have beenSeoul control its electricity supply. He also says
reneging on the 1994 agreement from the start,the North is unlikely to give up the one thing -
and never intended to give up their nuclearnuclear weapons - that gives it any leverage over
weapons development.its enemies. "If North Korea renounces its nuclear
Since the dispute became public, the North hasprograms for good, it means it cannot use the
expelled United Nations nuclear inspectors, pulledcard anymore, and I don't think a country like
out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, andNorth Korea will give up that card for good," he
threatened to build more weapons. Name-callingsaid.
and insults between the two sides have intensified.Despite the lack of certainty, experts say the
Now, the Bush administration wants North Koreaoffers on the table form a good basis for serious
to "completely, verifiably and irreversibly"negotiations. If an agreement is reached,
dismantle its nuclear programs - both uranium andhowever, another serious question arises: can all
plutonium-based - before giving economic andsides be trusted to deliver on what they promise?
security incentives.