Author Christine Aune claims it is time to end the Korean war

Recently Donald Trump became the first US president to ever set foot on North Korean soil and greeted Kim Jong-un the North Korean leader. The two together stepped onto South Korean soil and greeted its president Moon Jae-in.

The three then had a 50-minuted meeting in the South Korea's Freedom House. As he left the demilitarized zone (DMZ) Trump said: “We moved mountains.The meeting was a very good one, very strong... We’re not looking for speed, we’re looking to get it right.”

Christine Ahn, the founder and executive director of Women Cross DMZ, and the international coordinator of the global campaign Korea Peace Now! Women Mobilizing to End the Korean War, claimed in a recent article: "To get it right, the first step the Trump administration should take is to offer North Korea a security guarantee, whether in the form of an end of war declaration or a non-aggression pact. It may have been, after all, what convinced Kim to meet Trump at Panmunjom."

Relations have improved over last year

Just one year ago, North and South Korean soldiers faced off against each other. There were guard posts, landmines and loud speakers booming out propaganda across the DMZ. Yet today, the guard posts are removed and many of the landmines have also been removed. North Korean, South Korean and American security forces were able to stand side-by-side at Panmunjom. This is a testament to the relative success of last year's April 27 Summit in Panmunjom, where both Moon and Kim announced that there will be no more war on the Korean peninsula and that a new era had begun. This meeting was a prelude to the Singapore meeting where Trump and Kim promised that they would establish new relations that would build a lasting peace and involve the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

Much progress has been sabotaged by Trump hawks

Hard-line hawks in the Trump administration insist that North Korea must completely denuclearize before negotiations to improve relations can take place. It remains quite unlikely that Kim will accept such conditions as was shown at the failed summit at Hanoi.

There are different accounts of why that summit failed, as noted in the record of the summit on Wikipedia: "The 2019 North Korea–United States Hanoi Summit, commonly known as the Hanoi Summit, was a two-day summit meeting between North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un and U.S. President Donald Trump, held at the Metropole Hotel in Hanoi, Vietnam, on February 27–28, 2019. This was the second meeting between the leaders of the DPRK and the United States, following the first meeting in June 2018 in Singapore. On February 28, 2019, the White House announced that the summit was cut short and that no agreement was reached. Trump later elaborated that it was because North Korea wanted an end to all sanctions. North Korean Foreign Minister Ri Yong-ho asserted that the country only sought a partial lifting of five United Nations sanctions placed on North Korea between 2016 and 2017."

Trump administration wanted to move to meet Kim

After Chinese President XI Jinping visited North Korea and re-affirmed the alliance of the two countries, the Trump administration wanted to ensure that they could keep talks alive with the North. The eighth Trump-Moon Summit in South Korea after the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan provided such an opportunity.

On June 27th the North Korean Central News Agency released a statement by Kwong Jong Gun of the Foreign Ministry: “Even though we are to think of holding a dialogue with the U.S., we need first to see a proper approach towards the negotiation on the part of the U.S. Negotiation should be conducted with a counterpart who has a good sense of communication, and it could also be possible only when the U.S. comes up with a proper counterproposal"

US says it is committed to a more flexible approach to talks

Days before the summit,special representative to North Korea Stephen Biegun was on the ground. He reiterated the U.S. willingness to follow a “flexible approach.” The Foreign Ministry of South Korea said that the US is prepared to hold constructive talks with the North in order to move the commitments made in the June 12 Singapore Joint Declaration between Trump and Kim forward. This will involve a parallel process towards peace and denuclearization, in a step-by-step fashion. Trump's designation of Biegun to lead the working level talks was said to meet the North Korean demand that there be a counterpart who has a good sense of communication.

Building trust will take time

There has been nearly seventy years of tensions and war between the two Koreas. It will take a step-by-step resolving of issues to build up trust and a complete resolution of all the issues. Insisting on an all or nothing deal is unlikely to work. A crucial part of any agreement must be ending the Korean War and working toward a peace agreement which are one root cause of the nuclear standoff.

An end of the war declaration would be a good first step to show North Koreans that the US is indeed ready to transform the hostile relationship but a peace agreement would be even more powerful. This is what North Koreans, South Koreans and even China have called for. The present 1953 ceasefire should be replaced by a peace agreement.

How would such a declaration affect denuclearization?

Henri Feron a scholar at the Center for International Policy said: “While North Korea is unlikely to fully trust U.S. security guarantees, it will definitely see it as a positive signal worthy of reciprocation. On the other hand, for the U.S. to refuse to provide such guarantees will be interpreted in [North Korea] as clear evidence of continued hostility.”

Previously published in the Digital Journal

North Korea accuses Trump administration of hostile actions while publicly urging dialogue

(July 4)The North Korean mission to the UN issued a statement yesterday critical of the Trump administration, claiming that while the US was publicly suggesting dialogue with the North, the country is engaging in hostile actions against them.

Statement comes after Trump's visit with Kim at the DMZ zone

At the visit Trump and Kim Jong un appeared to get along fine as usual. However, just a day before that historic visit, the US was involved in a joint letter that called for all UN member states to expel all North Korean workers.

US calls for all North Korean workers to be expelled from UN member states

The US State Department ordered the expulsion of North Korean workers in UN member states, as it alleges that North Korea had violated a cap on importation of petroleum products. The North Korean workers are hardly responsible for this situation even if the charge is true. The move just ensures that no funds are received in North Korea from its workers abroad.

Division within the Trump administration

While Trump talks repeatedly of diplomacy with Kim and has predicted very positive results, there are hawks within the Trump administration, such as John Bolton, who want to take a hard line against North Korea. At the recent Hanoi summit, the US insisted on complete denuclearization before removal of tariffs resulting in failure and Trump leaving.

The hawks likely want Trump to stay with the same demands. North Korea has seen the US continually expand hostile actions against it while at the same time saying publicly that it wants a diplomatic solution. US hostile actions worsen the situation, rather than encouraging a diplomatic solution. It will create doubts within North Korea about US sincerity in wanting a diplomatic solution.

Bolton reacted angrily to reports of weaker demands on North Korea: "The Trump administration is considering a nuclear deal with North Korea that would ask it to freeze its nuclear weapons program, dropping prior demands to dismantle it entirely, The New York Times reported Sunday. According to the report, White House officials are weighing a deal that would leave North Korea's existing nuclear arsenal and missile battery in place — a situation US policy has long considered intolerable."

Bolton was furious at the report and denied that any such plan was being considered as reported in a recent Digital Journal article.

Previously published in the Digital Journal

South Korean president tries to set up a new summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un

President Moon Jae of South Korea says that he intends to set up a new summit between President Trump of the US and Kim Jong-un as soon as possible to return to the peace process and nuclear diplomacy.

South Korea wants to save negotiations with the North

After the recent Hanoi summit between Trump and Kim failed to reach an agreement, South Korea has been trying to save the process even though some US and North Korean officials have expressed pessimism in public statements. Neither side seems to be changing its position. South Korea must determine whether each side will come up with some compromise that would make a new summit feasible. Trump is unlikely to agree to another summit, the third, before upcoming elections if he feels it could fail.

A recent Reuters article notes: "Moon and U.S. President Donald Trump agreed in talks in Washington that a top-down approach led by leaders is essential to facilitate further progress in nuclear talks, Chung Eui-yong, the South Korean national security adviser, told reporters."

US seems not open to gradual denuclearization

The last talks seem to show that the US wants complete denuclearization by North Korea before it will provide any relief from sanctions. A New York Times article before the Hanoi meeting sets forth the position of North Korea: "North Korea has so far suspended nuclear and long-range missile tests and destroyed its underground nuclear test site. It has also offered to dismantle a long-range rocket launchpad and engine test facility and invite international experts to watch. But it insists that any further actions it can take — including the permanent destruction of the Yongbyon nuclear complex, a key facility for producing nuclear bomb fuel — will come only if the United States takes corresponding actions."

However, the US shows no interest in giving anything to North Korea that might provide an incentive for talks to renew again. Trump says that the present level of sanctions are at a fair level and the US wants to keep them that way. However as a recent article puts it: "That’s potentially a blow to Moon’s bid to get Kim back to the table, as sanctions relief for denuclearization is a big centerpiece of the deal that was sought in Hanoi. The US has now not only walked away but no longer appears to be willing to offer anything."

Trump has supported a third summit

Trump is willing to hold a third summit with Kim but said it was not a fast process. Trump said: "It could happen. A third summit could happen. And it's step by step. It's not a fast process. I've never said it would be. It's step by step." A South Korean statement after the meeting between Moon and Trump said that Moon would push for another meeting.

Moon wants inter-Korean summit again soon

A South Korean official said that nothing had been decided about the timing and location of a next inter-Korean summit. However, Moon said he would contact the North about holding a summit between the two countries. Trump asked Moon to brief him as early as possible on North Korea's latest thinking. In spite of no progress with the US, the two Korea's may still be able to improve relations through bilateral negotiations.

Previously published in the Digital Journal

NBA basketball star makes fourth visit to North Korea

(June 14) The former NBA star Dennis Rodman claims he was "just trying to open the door" as he visits North Korea for the fourth time. He said he would not raise the issue of Americans detained in the country.

However, Otto Wambier 22 , a US student who had been detained for a year and a half has been evacuated from the country for medical reasons. He has been in a coma for more than a year after falling ill shortly after his trial in Pyongyang in March of last year.

Rodman has called his visits "basketball diplomacy". On his last visit he sang "Happy Birthday" to Kim Jong Un at a stadium in the capital Pyongyang. Kim is a great basketball fan. He is one of the few Americans meeting with North Korean officials at this time of escalating tensions between North Korea the US and South Korea. Kim has been firing missiles regularly and also continues his nuclear program. Although there are four Americans being held now by North Korea, Rodman said he would not discuss them. Rodman said: "That is not my purpose right now. My purpose is to try and go over there and keep bringing sports to North Korea. That's the main thing. I'm pretty sure that I can do something that is positive." Rodman has called Kim a friend for life.

That Rodman is going back is a bit surprising as he kept getting intoxicated on the 2014 trip and it was reported at the end Kim refused to meet with him because of his condition. Rodman endorsed Donald Trump for president. Rodman shares Trump's anger at bad press. At the 2014 visit he said to CNN: “I don't give a s‑‑‑ what … I don't give a rat's a‑‑ what the hell you think. I'm saying to you look at these guys here,” he barked at CNN's Chris Cuomo. “Look at them. They're down here for one thing. They came here... We are the guys here to do one thing. We have to go back to America and take the abuse. Do you have to take the abuse that we're going to take? Do you, sir?” At the time, Charles Smith, another NBA player who accompanied Rodman said: "Dennis is a great guy, but how he articulates what goes on — he gets emotional and he says things that he’ll apologize for later." Shortly after he came back Rodman went into rehab. His agent, Darren Prince said that Rodman was "embarrassed, saddened, and remorseful for the anger and hurt his words caused." It seems that Kim Jong Un still considers him a friend.

When Rodman was asked if he had spoken to Trump about the trip he said: "I'm pretty sure he's pretty much happy of the fact that I'm over here trying to accomplish something that we both need." Rodman's last trip had caused outrage in the US. Senator John McCain said at the time: "I think he is an idiot". Many claim that the visit provides positive propaganda for Kim and criticise Rodman for not bringing up Kim's human rights violations. The Rodman trip is being sponsored by PotCoin , a cybercurrency for legal marijuana according to the New Zealand Herald.

It remains to be seen what positive results if any come from the meeting. Rodman said he would discuss the results when he returned home.

Given the dismal level of relations between the United States and North Korea at least Rodman's visit, although not official, may at least help to ease tensions. It could even lead to some move by Kim to ease tensions. As another Digital Journal article notes Rodman gave Kim a copy of Trump's the Art of the Deal. No doubt some in America will see this as providing aid for the enemy!

Tension increases between US and North Korea as egos clash

North Korea and the U.S. trade threats and provocations as tension between the leaders of the two countries increases creating the danger of disastrous clashes.

In the west, the press emphasis is on North Korean actions such as nuclear and missile tests. The North Koreans take these actions as defensive responses to U.S. and South Korean actions. The U.S. and others consider them as provocations. Such actions as a U.S. aircraft carrier steaming toward North Korea and joint war games with the South Koreans that involve a simulated attack on North Korea, nor the installation of the THAAD anit-missile system are not regarded as provocations but legitimate responses to the threat of North Korea in the western press.

North Korean rhetoric does not help the situation, as Kim Jong-un threatens nuclear attacks in response to any military action against it. However, many people are concerned that after the US strike in Syria, the U.S. may take unilateral military action against North Korea. Russian officials have voiced their concern. However, Defense Secretary James Mattis tried to downplay these concerns and insists that the carrier strike group is just in the western Pacific and is not going to South Korea for any particular reason and is not intending to do anything when it arrives. However, it is clearly a show of force. The Mattis explanation contradicts what President Trump told Fox Business news that the armada was full of powerful warships, that North Korea was looking for trouble, and the U.S. intended to solve the problem. The tabloid press jumped into the competing narratives and reports that the Navy Seals who killed Bin Laden are now training to take out Kim Jong-Un!

China appears to have agreed with Donald Trump that North Korea is a threat but wants to deal with the situation through non-military means. China has already acted to ban coal shipments from North Korea:A fleet of North Korean cargo ships is heading home to the port of Nampo, the majority of it fully laden, after China ordered its trading companies to return coal from the isolated country, shipping data shows, China banned all imports of North Korean coal on Feb. 26, cutting off the country's most important export product. China's customs department issued an official order on April 7 telling trading companies to return their North Korean coal cargoes, said three trading sources with direct knowledge of the order.There are also reports that China is preparing for trouble on its 1420 kilometer border with North Korea.

China is said to be deploying about 150,000 Chinese troops to the area according to South Korea's Yonhap news agency. However, China's Xinhua news agency has not reported this deployment. Russia also has a short border area with North Korea in the far north-west of the country. There is no land crossing except for a railway. There is actually a railway car that goes from Pyongyang the North Korean capital to Moscow a distance of 10,272 kilometers or 6,383 miles, the longest direct, one-seat ride, passenger rail service in the world.

Trump and others claim that everything has been tried to get North Korea to stop its nuclear program but nothing has worked. Nothing has worked permanently but as Noam Chomsky points out:1994, Clinton made—established what was called the Framework Agreement with North Korea. North Korea would terminate its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. The U.S. would reduce hostile acts. It more or less worked, and neither side lived up to it totally, but, by 2000, North Korea had not proceeded with its nuclear weapons programs. George W. Bush came in and immediately launched an assault on North Korea—you know, "axis of evil," sanctions and so on. North Korea turned to producing nuclear weapons.Bush tore up another sensible proposal in 2005. What we have now is threats not suggestions for diplomatic solutions, as in the recent flurry of tweets by Donald Trump threatening North Korea.

We are faced with two leaders often characterized as mad with huge egos confronting one another. It is not a situation conducive to global security. Sorry, I forgo Trump is now "presidential", after attacking a Syrian air base with Tomahawk missiles, according to CNN's Farad Zakaria and many others. An attack on North Korea against a mad leader will no doubt be even more presidential.

US threatens North Korea with military action

(April 2) Last month in South Korea, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned that a military option was still on the table in dealing with North Korea's nuclear weapons program.

The threats continue as President Donald Trump has declared that he would be willing to go it alone if China fails to alter North Korea's behavior. Trump said in an interview: "China will either decide to help us with North Korea or they won't. If they do, that will be very good for China, and if they don't, it won't be good for anyone." Trump is scheduled to meet with Chinese president Xi Jinping in the U.S. He intends to bring the issue up.

The Chinese president may also bring up the deployment of the Thaad missile system in South Korea an act that both China and Russia see directed against them as discussed in a recent Digital Journal article.

Trump considers China is responsible for allowing North Korea to continue with its nuclear program. He said he intended to use trade as an "incentive" to talk China into fixing it. There is not the slightest thought that China might have any grievances with the U.S. actions in North Korea. Nor do the extensive war games of the U.S. with South Korea that apparently mimic a pre-emptive invasion of the North ever register as being regarded as a provocation by North Korea. Trump said in an interview: "If China is not going to solve North Korea, we will." When asked if he believed the U.S. could solve the problem on its own he said "totally". There was no mention of South Korea it would seem.

North Korea claimed to have tested a nuclear warhead last September and this year it has fired several missiles and tested a new rocket engine. U.S. defense officials claim that North Korea might be able to use the rocket engine it just tested to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile. Many South Koreans worry that the deployment of the U.S. missile defense system may endanger them as shown in the appended video of a demonstration from about six months ago.

US to remove North Korea from Terror List

So far North Korea has not been complaining too much about the agreement with the US and things seem to be progressing without too many hitches but we will see. I would be surprised if North Korea manages to get off the terror list until the US is satisfied its nuclear program is well shut down if not dismantled.
The situation between North Korea and the US is in stark contrast to that with Iran. Libya has complained that it did not receive all the benefits promised from dismantling its nuclear etc. programs.

N.Korea says U.S. to remove it from terrorism list
http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29305120070903?sp=true

Mon Sep 3, 2007

By Jon Herskovitz

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea said on Monday the United States had
agreed to
remove it from its list of countries that support terrorism, a move
Pyongyang has long sought to receive more aid and hopefully end its
status
as a global pariah.
http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29305120070903?sp=true

___________________________________

Release of North Korean money delayed

It seems as if history repeats itself. Notice that it is the US that still has not been able to release the money. I just wonder if there are not even more requirements that the North Koreans have that are not being met. The US is apparently only releasing part of the money, money that is not "dirty" in their opinion. The US still refuses to allow US financial institutions to deal with the banks. The exact problems are not set out in the article.


Difficult to Meet NK Deadline: US Envoy



By Lee Jin-woo
Staff Reporter



Christopher Hill, left, U.S. envoy to the six-party talks, and his Japanese counterpart Kenichiro Sasae are surrounded by the media after their talks at the Foreign Ministry in Tokyo, Monday. /Yonhap
The United States has put more pressure on North Korea to cooperate in resolving a complicated banking issue, which has been a stumbling block to implementing a denuclearization accord reached in the six-party talks in February.
But Washington remained positive about the eventual implementation of the Feb. 13 agreement.

``We are working hard to do everything we can,¡¯¡¯ State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told a daily press briefing on Monday. ``And we encourage North Korea do so as well.¡¯¡¯

With only four days to go before the Saturday deadline, members of the nuclear disarmament talks, involving South and North Korea, the U.S., China, Russia and Japan, have been struggling with releasing $25 million that had been frozen at Banco Delta Asia (BDA), a bank in Macau, under U.S. sanctions.

The money transfer has been delayed by complicated regulations and restrictions. A U.S. Treasury delegation sent out to Beijing to help work out the issues returned home last week.

The 60-day deadline for the first stage of nuclear disarmament process was set out in the Feb. 13 accord signed in the Chinese capital by the six nations.

``We would hope that all the parties that are involved in the talks understand that this is based on good faith actions,¡¯¡¯ the spokesman said.

Christopher Hill, top U.S. envoy to the six-party talks, arrived in Seoul Tuesday as part of his tour of three Asian nations, including China and Japan, to seek ways to resolve the banking issue.

Hill acknowledged it would be difficult to meet the deadline but downplayed its significance, saying the two sides were still headed in the right direction.

``Obviously every day this banking matter holds us up, and it makes it more difficult to meet the precise deadline,¡¯¡¯ Hill was quoted as saying by Agence France-Presse (AFP) in Tokyo before leaving for Seoul.

The chief U.S. nuclear negotiator will meet with his South Korean counterpart Chun Yung-woo during his stay in Seoul before leaving for Beijing on Thursday, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

Today, Hill is also expected to meet with Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico, who led a U.S. delegation to Pyongyang to secure the remains of U.S. soldiers killed in the 1950-53 Korean War.

Richardson, a Democratic presidential candidate, will cross the inter-Korean border today. He has said the North assured him that it would turn over the remains of six U.S. soldiers.

The North¡¯s top nuclear envoy Kim Kye-gwan told the U.S. delegation on Monday that his country would invite international monitors to verify the shutdown of its primary nuclear facilities the moment the frozen funds are released.



things@koreatimes.co.kr

Some progress in North Korea nuclear standoff

If the US does not lift sanctions tben the deal will be off. Given the level of distrust between the two countries it would not be surprising to find the agreement unravel once again. While all this is going on the UK decides to upgrade its Trident Missile program with not even a little squeak from the US or anyone else except rebels in the Labor Party. What a tremendous waste of money.

Wednesday » March 14 » 2007

U.N. chief inspector says North Korea committed to getting rid of nuclear program

Alexa Olesen
Canadian Press


Wednesday, March 14, 2007



CREDIT:
The chief U.N. nuclear negotiator Mohamed ElBaradei arrives at a press conference in Beijing. (AP Photo/Elizabeth Dalziel)

BEIJING (AP) - North Korea is committed to shuttering its main nuclear reactor within a month as long as Washington meets its promise to drop financial sanctions, the chief U.N. nuclear inspector said Wednesday after a one-day trip to Pyongyang.

In the first trip by the International Atomic Energy Agency since its inspectors were kicked out four years ago, agency head Mohamed ElBaradei said North Korea discussed how it would shut its main reactor and welcome back UN inspectors.

The assessment was an encouraging sign that a month-old nuclear disarmament pact between North Korea, the United States and four other countries remains on track, if, as ElBaradei said, "fragile."

He said North Korean officials told him they were "fully committed" to implementing the deal and that they were "ready to work with the agency to make sure that we monitor and verify the shutdown of the Yongbyon" nuclear reactor.

The reactor is believed to have produced the plutonium for the nuclear weapon North Korea detonated in a test blast on Oct. 9.

Yet the next month will be crucial, with the agreement laying down timetables for North Korea's disarmament and rewards for doing so. Already there were signs of rough going.

"The agreement is still quite fragile, precarious, so I hope all parties will see to it we continue to solidify that agreement," he said.

North Korean officials told ElBaradei they were waiting for the United States to drop financial sanctions against it, he said.

The frozen accounts in the Banco Delta Asia, including US$24 million (euro18.2 million) in North Korean assets, have been a sore spot for the North Korean government.

A U.S. government official said Monday the Treasury Department is expected to make an announcement this week that could help overseas regulators identify highest-risk and lower-risk account holders. This risk assessment in turn could be used by Macau to release money that has been frozen. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

"Until we see what the U.S. is doing on the banking sanctions and how North Korea reacts to that we really must be very cautious about whether they will shutdown the reactor," said Selig Harrison, director of the Asia program at the Washington-based Center for International Policy.

"This is the most serious threat to the Feb. 13 agreement," he said. "The whole thing could bog down on that issue very easily."

Harrison that if the United States decides on a partial lifting of sanctions against the North, Pyongyang would likely respond in kind with a partial implementation of their commitments.

The U.S. alleged the bank helped North Korea distribute counterfeit currency and engage in other illicit activities. Banks around the world, meanwhile, severed ties with North Korea for fear of losing access to the U.S. financial system.

ElBaradei said he was told that North Korea was committed to the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula but that getting it back into the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty - it withdrew in January 2003 - would be a slow, incremental process.

"All we can do now is make sure the process does not derail," he said.

ElBaradei was originally meant to meet with the North's chief nuclear negotiator Kim Gye Kwan but the schedule was changed at the last minute but ElBaradei dismissed concerns that he had been snubbed.

Kim "was sick, he fell ill after coming back from New York," ElBaradei said. "It is not true that he was too busy."

He met instead with another vice foreign minister of the same rank, Kim Hyong Jun, as well as Ri Je Son, head of the North's General Bureau of Atomic Energy and Kim Yong Dai, vice president of the Supreme People's Assembly.

Harrison also said ElBaradei's failure to meet with Kim was unlikely to signal a reluctance to cooperate with the agency. In the past, IAEA delegates visiting North Korea would not expect to meet with high Foreign Ministry officials, meeting instead with Atomic Agency officials.

"I would not read too much into that," he said.

International talks involving the United States, North Korea, South Korea, Japan, Russia and China that are to look at progress made since the denuclearization deal was agreed on Feb. 13 are to begin Monday in Beijing.

Also planned are working group sessions between those countries on economic and energy cooperation, peace and security in Northeast Asia and the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula as part of the landmark pact. Those meetings are to take place through the weekend.

The North Korean nuclear crisis began in 2002, when Washington alleged that Pyongyang had a uranium enrichment program in addition to its acknowledged plutonium program. North Korea then withdrew from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and expelled ElBaradei's inspectors.

The North is to eventually receive 1 million tons of heavy fuel oil for abandoning all its nuclear programs. U.S. officials have stressed this must include an alleged uranium enrichment program, which the North has never publicly admitted having.


© The Canadian Press 2007

Was North Korea faced to make a deal?

It is strange that food shortages and economic problems would force a deal now. North Korea has had these problems for years and still carried on with a nuclear program. Perhaps it is the sanctions against luxury goods that has hurt the Great Leader's penchant for Western Luxury Goods.


Article at this http://rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Farticle%2FtopNews%2FidUSSEO16189720070216
North Korea likely forced into nuclear deal: envoy
Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:04AM EST
By Jack Kim

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea was probably pushed to take a deal to shut down its nuclear reactor in return for aid because of its faltering economy and limited diplomatic options, a senior South Korean official said on Friday.

In a breakthrough deal, impoverished North Korea agreed this week to seal its main nuclear reactor and the source of its weapons-grade plutonium in return for an initial 50,000 tonnes of fuel or economic aid of equivalent value.

"I think they may have exhausted all the cards they had with the nuclear test," South Korea's chief nuclear envoy, Chun Yung-woo, told a forum. "Considering how difficult the North's economy and its energy situation are, they would have to think long and hard before giving up on this scale of benefits."

Following decades of military build-up and nuclear development, North Korea said last October that it had conducted its first nuclear test.

But its industries are in tatters and its agricultural production falls short of feeding its people. The reclusive communist state has long relied on ally China and neighbor South Korea for aid.

Multiple missile launches in July and then the October nuclear test angered China, prompting Pyongyang's biggest benefactor to join U.N. Security Council trade and financial sanctions on the North and briefly cut off crucial energy aid.

South Korea, a key donor of food and fertilizer, suspended that aid last year after the missile tests.

Chun said South Korea had no qualms over footing the bill for the first 50,000 tonnes of fuel under the Tuesday deal.

"Paying for it first doesn't mean we'll be paying more, so even from a symbolic point of view, I think it's appropriate for us to pay first," he said.

If Pyongyang shuts down and seals its Yongbyon facility within 60 days, energy-hungry North Korea would receive another 950,000 tonnes of fuel oil, or equivalent aid, when it takes further steps to disable its nuclear capabilities.

The deal also calls on North Korea to make a complete disclosure of all its nuclear facilities, including the disputed existence of a highly enriched uranium program.

Chun said Pyongyang was content to get U.S. agreement to discuss the state of ties between the two countries, and it would involve reciprocal visits by Kim Kye-gwan, Pyongyang's envoy, and U.S. negotiator Christopher Hill to each other's capitals.


© Reuters 2006. All rights reserved. .

Behind Bush's North Korea Reversal

There is a stark contrast with the manner in which the US is dealing with Iran and Iraq (and SYria) and North Korea. While critics speak of rewarding bad behavior it seems that having nukes is a powerful bargaining chip. Perhaps this article is correct that the neo-cons are losing power. But why then does the neo-con program seem right on track with respect to Iran. Perhaps the element of realism that is creeping in is just that the Mid-East is the important neo-con area that will facilitate US control of crucial energy supplies. North Korea has nothing but a populace often on the verge of starvation. Except for its conflict with the US it can probably work out accomodation with the South once its nuclear programme is no longer regarded as menacing.


MSNBC.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hirsh: Behind Bush's N. Korea Reversal
Bush’s North Korea accord is a reversal for the administration —and a sign that the administration’s hardliners are falling from grace.
WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Michael Hirsh
Newsweek
Updated: 4:34 p.m. CT Feb 13, 2007
Feb. 13, 2007 - More than anything else he has done in his second term, George W. Bush’s embrace of a fuel-for-nukes accord with North Korea shows that he is adjusting to the harsh realities of diplomacy—and straying ever further from the ideology of regime change. The proof: the president has cut a deal that is likely to help a member of his notorious “Axis of Evil,” Kim Jong Il, stay in power longer, even while it may make the world safer.

The agreement announced today represents a major change in attitude that goes beyond North Korea. The most evident sign is that the accord, under which Pyongyang will immediately get 50 tons of emergency fuel oil with nearly a million more tons to come, is plainly a reversal of the administration’s previous principled stand against the “nuclear blackmail” that it accused Bill Clinton of engaging in. Until this week the administration refused to reward “bad behavior”—secret weapons programs—by promising dictators like Kim goodies in return for giving up nukes. “There’s a little bit of tripping over earlier rhetoric,” says Michael Green, the senior director for Asia on the National Security Council in Bush’s first term.

Another sign that a shift in attitude is afoot is the answer that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice gave at a news conference today, when she was asked about comments made by John Bolton, her just-departed U.N. ambassador. Bolton told CNN that the deal "sends exactly the wrong signal to would-be proliferators around the world: 'If we hold out long enough, wear down the State Department negotiators, eventually you get rewarded’.” Bolton urged Bush to reject the deal. When Rice was asked, “Do you think there's any substance to his criticism?” she replied tersely: “No, I don’t.” She then made it clear that Bolton, the one-time favorite of Dick Cheney and other hardliners, was so far out of the loop that he didn’t know what he was talking about. “I can assure you that the president of the United States knows every detail of this agreement,” she said.

Former senior administration members say the North Korea deal is evidence of two big changes: one, several key hardliners have left, and the influence of others, including Cheney, is waning; and two, that Bush is now consumed with Iraq, Iran and the Middle East. “It was so clearly against the approach we had tried to impose,” says a former top Bush nonproliferation official. “Why now? I can think couple of reasons. One is that he is completely overwhelmed with the Middle East and desperate for a political victory anywhere. And a lot of people who were against engagement have either left the administration, like Bolton and Bob Joseph [Rice’s former under secretary for counterproliferation], or are otherwise preoccupied, like the vice president with the Scooter Libby trial [in which Cheney’s former chief of staff is accused of perjury].”


Another significant sign came the day before the agreement, when Bush was asked in a C-SPAN interview whom he thought were the most underrated presidents. “Well, George H.W. Bush is one of them,” the president said. “He followed President Reagan, who was such a really strong president that people have yet to take a look at my dad.'' For Bush watchers who had long portrayed the son as a committed Reaganite in a state of rebellion against his father’s centrist administration, this was a striking statement. Six years into an administration marked by a reluctance to negotiate its way out of trouble—most recently when Bush rejected the advice of his father’s secretary of State, Jim Baker, about sitting down with Iran and Syria—Bush seems to have a new appreciation for his father’s moderate views about “talking to the enemy.”

All of which leaves the question: is the North Korea pact a good deal? Critics said it was full of pitfalls—not least of which is that it doesn’t directly address the disposition of Pyongyang’s alleged arsenal of several nuclear weapons, nor its secret uranium-enriching program. Asked about this, Rice said that if North Korea is to get rewards beyond the first phase, it will have to give up everything. “The joint statement covers the fact that the North is to declare and abandon, dismantle all of its nuclear programs,” she said. “And everybody understands what 'all' means.”

Other critics also said that the deal could have been negotiated six years ago, before the North had already tested a nuclear weapon. And even some former moderate officials of the Bush administration agreed with Bolton’s view that the accord sends a worrisome signal to other rogue states. “The North Koreans wanted two things. They wanted serious negotiations. And they wanted separate talks on financial issues. We told them to go screw themselves until Oct. 9, when they tested. Then we say OK. To me that’s troublesome. You’re reinforcing bad behavior,” said the former senior nonproliferation expert. Under the agreement, Kim’s regime is getting the kind of recognition it has long sought. Rice and the foreign ministers of the other major parties—China, Japan, Russia and South Korea—are to meet with the North Korean foreign minister for the first time after the initial 60-day phase, during which the North is to shut down its Yongbyon nuclear plant and list all its nuclear programs.

Still, nuclear experts say the agreement promises a safer region—and world—than a situation in which a desperate and out-of-control North Korea continues to manufacture nuclear material and weapons. And the deal has a couple of big advantages over the 1994 Agreed Framework, the Clinton-era pact under which the North was to get 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil each year and billions of dollars’ worth of civilian nuclear equipment in return for freezing and "eventually" dismantling its plutonium program. “The price tag is small compared to agreed framework,” says Green. In addition, between pressures applied together by the United States and an unusually cooperative China, the North Korean regime is under unprecedented severe financial and economic strain.

But even Rice admitted that “this is still the first quarter. There is still a lot of time to go on the clock.” Says Green: “I can imagine a dozen ways North Koreans could make mischief with this deal,” including perhaps refusing to acknowledge its secret uranium program. But for the Bush administration, it is a first: a new deal for the Axis of Evil.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17136874/site/newsweek/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2007 MSNBC.com

More on the North Korea US et al agreement

The material below comes from this site. The fact that John Bolton disapproves of the agreement is a positive sign as far as I am concerned. Both sides lack faith in the other though and there are many issues still to be resolved but at least the deal seems a positive start. As this article notes it seems to involve a repudiation of past conditions that the Bush administration has placed on negotiations. We will see what happens when it is examined by the administration further. I watched a report on the agreement on CBC TV. One commentator claimed that it was Condoleeza Rice who made the deal possible. She convinced Bush according to him that a deal was possible and this would show that he could successfully negotiate conflicts and also the deal would call attention away from Iraq. If things go badly in Iraq I doubt that any success of this deal will do much to defray attention from the bad news. Perhaps opposition in congress will prevent funding of the US aid to North Korea and lead again to unraveling of the agreement.



NUCLEAR DIPLOMACY:



The Washington Post has a decent summary of the deal struck between the United States and North Korea:




In a landmark international accord, North Korea promised Tuesday to close down and seal its lone nuclear reactor within 60 days in return for 50,000 tons of fuel oil as a first step in abandoning all nuclear weapons and research programs.

North Korea also reaffirmed a commitment to disable the reactor in an undefined next phase of denuclearization and to discuss with the United States and other nations its plutonium fuel reserves and other nuclear programs that "would be abandoned" as part of the process. In return for taking those further steps, the accord said, North Korea would receive additional "economic, energy and humanitarian assistance up to the equivalent of 1 million tons of heavy fuel oil."



The full text is here. John Bolton hates it, but he did make one astute point: "This is the same thing that the State Department was prepared to do six years ago. If we going to cut this deal now, it's amazing we didn't cut it back then." No kidding. It seems likely that North Korea would have accepted this offer before it tested a nuke last year. So why wasn't it done then? Seeing as how North Korea probably won't ever give up what nuclear weapons it now possesses, that looks like a glaring blunder in hindsight.



That said, it's certainly good news that the Yongbyon plutonium facility will be shut down and sealed, so credit to the Bush administration. On the other hand, Robert Farley's take seems accurate: "While a success on its own terms, this agreement represents an utter rejection of the Bush administration's approach to North Korea thus far. Carrots, instead of sticks, brought compromises. Nuclear weapons were the subject of diplomacy, not the precondition." Contrast this with the administration's approach to Iran, in which disarmament is the precondition of talks, rather than the hoped-for final goal.



I also wonder how this agreement will fare back in Washington. As Fred Kaplan has pointed out, the Agreed Framework struck by the Clinton administration in 1994 foundered, in part, because Republicans in Congress failed to fund the light-water reactors promised to North Korea. We'll see if Democrats behave differently this time around. Also, Bolton told CNN, "I'm hoping that the president has not been fully briefed on it and he still has time to reject it." So anything's still possible. And, of course, Kim Jong Il could always act erratically and back out all of the sudden...



--Bradford Plumer