[Editorial] U.S., N.K. need to realize ’action-for-action’ pledge

Representatives of the countries participating in the six-party talks are busy making contact with each other ahead of the start of the second phase of the fifth round of talks that begins December 18 in Beijing. The talks are resuming for the first time in 13 months. The world is watching, and there is a war of nerves between North Korea and the United States as each tries to secure an upper hand. If either between the two of them does anything that impedes progress at the talks, they will find themselves criticized by the other nations to the talks and by the international community at large.

It is inappropriate for top Pyongyang negotiator Kim Kye-gwan to say that North Korea will only be ready to move forward on the joint statement signed in Beijing last year if financial sanctions against it are dropped. U.S. sanctions are supposed to be discussed at a working level group operating parallel to the talks. Discussion of the joint statement is a matter separate from the sanctions issue. If the sanctions Kim is talking about include those imposed by the United Nations, then what he said was even more inappropriate. UN sanctions were introduced in response to Pyongyang’s test of a nuclear explosive device, and are by their nature something that will loosen up naturally, when there is progress on the North abandoning its nuclear program. Their removal cannot be made a precondition to progress at the six-party talks, because that would be in direct conflict with the contents of the joint statement, which calls for the North’s nuclear program to be done away with.

The U.S., in the meantime, has done a lot to make North Korea question its motives. That being the case, if the talks are going to go smoothly, the U.S. needs to refrain from making the North think its approach is going to be to push Pyongyang into a corner. Washington instead needs to provide some reasonable options that would alleviate the North’s worries. For starters, if the financial measures the U.S. has imposed do not originate in a hostile policy toward Pyongyang, there is no reason the issues the sanctions are a response to cannot be resolved during the current opportunity. Instead of always demanding the North make substantial moves towards discarding its nukes, the U.S. should announce its own plans for commensurate actions that are concrete and gradual. The U.S. needs to give ample understanding to the anxieties the North Korean regime is feeling, and make sure this understanding is conveyed to Pyongyang.

The greatest obstacle to progress at the six-party talks is the mutual distrust that exists between the U.S. and North Korea. It’s the reason why both parties hesitate to be the first to take the smallest of positive measures, which is in turn why the joint statement underscores the principle of "word for word" and "action for action." The current situation demands that these two countries demonstrate their desire to act on that principle. Naturally, you cannot expect either to produce a schedule for simultaneous action after just a couple of meetings. This new round of talks must, at the very least, surmount obstacles like the U.S. financial sanctions issue, and thereby lay the groundwork for the first phase of simultaneous action.

Please direct questions or comments to [[e-mail]]