Washington appears to be anticipating some answers from Pyongyang in talks this week in Geneva, but it might have already gotten a response – from the Dear Leader himself. (Click 'Read More')

Read more

North Korea, U.S., bilateral discussion, nuclear, Geneva (all tags)

For all you Korea watchers -- Keep an eye out for the news this week and next. South Korea's newly appointed chief nuclear envoy Lim Sung-nam touched down in Washington today for talks with senior U.S. officials. He's expected to discuss the results of the 2nd round of inter-Korean talks last month in Beijing, exchange views on an envisioned 2nd round of U.S.-North Korea talks, and help prepare for South Korean President Lee Myung-bak's visit to Washington next week during which he will sit down with President Barack Obama. The Korea-US Free Trade Agreement ("KORUS FTA") and the North Korean nuclear issue are expected to top the summit agenda next week.

Read more

North Korea, President Lee Myung-bak, Chief S. Korean nuclear envoy Lim Sung-nam, nuclear, President Barack Obama (all tags)

In a joint news conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on May 9 in Berlin, South Korean President Lee Myungbak said,

"I offer a proposal to invite Chairman Kim Jong-il to the Nuclear Security Summit on March 26-27 next year if North Korea agrees with the international community that it will be firm and sincere about giving up nuclear programs."

This is in line with a similar comment he made after the 2010 Nuclear Security Summit in Washington in which he said would "gladly invite" Pyongyang to the follow on Summit if the regime rejoins and complies with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and demonstrates clear commitment to denuclearization.

There are two notable points in Monday's quote: Click Read More

Read more

Lee Myung-bak, North Korea, Nuclear Security Summit, nuclear (all tags)

Much attention is on the U.S. and South Korea that they may resume food aid to North Korea as UN food agencies prepare to release a report this week. Questions have already been raised as to whether it will help warm diplomatic ties that would then lead to an eventual resumption of diplomatic dialogue over Pyongyang’s nuclear programs.

The U.S. and North Korea are said to be planning a meeting next month to discuss a possible resumption of rice to the North. The meeting is said to be aimed at discussing the conditions required before Washington makes a decision on feeding the North after massive food aid was halted in 2008. Such conditions include proper monitoring mechanisms to ensure that the rice would reach those in need and not to the North’s military.

The World Food Programme is expected to release a report on Friday, March 25th in Rome on the North’s food situation. Some North Korea watchers suspect Washington will eventually send food shipments in the name of humanitarian aid, but the question is how much.

Some critics even say it is a U.S. attempt to pay the North for a resumption of diplomatic dialogue, but Washington officials have consistently reiterated that they will not pay for talks.

Until now, the U.S. has refrained from sending food aid to the North after apparently having assessed the hunger situation as far less serious than that of previous years, and suspecting Pyongyang’s intentions. Many believe the North’s plea to the international community for food and citation of its economic woes are an attempt to stock up on massive gifts for its people next year. 2012 is when Pyongyang claims the doors will open to becoming a “mighty and prosperous nation” and is also the 100th birthday of the regime’s late founder, Kim Il-sung.

South Korea is also reportedly considering the continuation of food assistance but in the form of “branded food” including corn, beans, and vitamins, which are perishable and cannot be stored for long periods of time like rice.  North Korea has constantly been scrutinized for siphoning off rice aid to feed its military and not the hungry. One senior Seoul official has called the potential branded food provisions “smart aid” to be delivered to babies, children and the malnourished. Seoul had halted aid to the North after the sinking of the Cheonan naval corvette and shelling of Yeonpyeong Island last year.

Read more

North Korea, food aid, WFP, nuclear (all tags)

The Egyptian revolution has raised hopes of democracy in the region and beyond. But North Korea is a different story. Click here for the full story or click read more below.

Read more

North Korea, Egypt, Mubarak, Kim Jong-il, 70th birthday, nuclear (all tags)

South Korea has reportedly accepted North Korea’s proposal for high-level military talks. Pyongyang’s proposal came on Thursday immediately following U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao’s Wednesday summit, which called for the resumption of inter-Korean dialogue and denuclearization. So it appears there was prior coordination between Beijing and Pyongyang ahead of the U.S.-China summit. It also appears preparatory cross-border talks at the working-level could commence in early February. However, the two Koreas are in for some very tough discussions, and the results of the preparatory meeting will determine whether and when formal military talks take place.

It would be the first time in about three months since the two Koreas held military discussions. Last September, Pyongyang was unwilling to discuss the sinking of the Cheonan ship and the shelling of Yeonpyeong Island.

This time, Seoul’s Unification Ministry says Pyongyang proposed discussing the sinking of the South’s Cheonan ship and artillery attacks on Yeonpyeong Island.

Why the sudden seemingly conciliatory gesture? (Click "read more").

Read more

inter-Korean military talks, North Korea, nuclear, Six Party Talks (all tags)

We’ve seen this play before:

Act I Scene I: North Korea works on nuclear development.
Act I Scene II: The U.S. says “Woah~” Responds with engagement and/or sanctions. Signs of some “progress” become noticeable, but then, another impasse.
Act II: The U.S. gets distracted elsewhere, ignores North Korea for a few months, maybe years, slapping more sanctions every time Pyongyang engages in provocations.
Act III: North Korea tests a nuclear device and blasts missiles.
Act IV: The U.S. (and international community) resumes engagement, offers goodies for nuclear dismantlement, positive signs appear, but dialogue breaks down again.
Act V Scene I: A new U.S. administration comes in, and attempts to do something different: Ignore North Korea and blame Pyongyang for another impasse.
Act V Scene II: North Korean provocation (missiles, nuclear tests, nuclear facility tinkering, etc).
Act V Scene III: U.S. reaction: condemns, knocks on North Korea’s door, contains the situation, and then ignores some more until the next provocation.
Act VI: Repeat Acts I~V.

This is more or less how the North Korean nuclear saga has played out. For twenty years.

The Obama administration came into office saying it will “not buy the same horse twice” vowing to do things differently from his predecessor. But it doesn’t take long to recall that the Bush 43 administration took a similar path: It began with engagement in the Six-Party Talks, then turned hard-lined, and then softened its stance toward the end of its second term when it hit roadblocks in the Middle East.

The Obama administration may have begun with the extended hand, but quickly reverted to Act V: Ignore North Korea, and only react to North Korean provocations. Of course because of Pyongyang’s 2009 missile and nuclear tests.

Pyongyang is expected to test a third nuclear device. Now we’re also hearing about a light-water reactor to produce plutonium and a pilot uranium enrichment facility with 2,000 centrifuges -- the tools for bomb-making. It’s a matter of time until we hear another kaboom in North Korea and witness a boost in U.S. frequent flyer miles to contain the problem once again.

Perhaps some in this town are waiting, maybe even hoping, for another nuclear test. That way, Pyongyang can deplete its plutonium stockpiles and be further isolated and squeezed, which currently seems to be a bipartisan hope. After all, there are more urgent headaches overseas: Afghanistan.

But that doesn’t solve the problem, nor does it prevent the North’s nuclear pursuits as we’re witnessing now. More nuclear testing means it’s trying to miniaturize to tip a missile. And the latest construction work at Yongbyon indicates it wants to refill its plutonium stock.

North Korea is centered on juche (self-reliance), and Hecker’s latest report shows Pyongyang turning inward once again.

We must remember that North Korean behavior is not exclusively geared toward the U.S. It’s also preparing for a leadership succession, and has a fast-approaching deadline to become a “mighty and prosperous nation by 2012.” Kim’s minions are probably working around the clock to make sure their Dear Leader is not embarrassed with empty promises in the face of his domestic (and even international) audience, and that Great Leader Kim Il-sung is revered with the utmost respect during his 100th birthday celebration.

The Obama administration has not been entirely wrong to pursue its current “strategic patience” policy -- it tried sometime different, and it may have been serving its purpose. But we’re now seeing that this policy may actually be adding to the vicious cycle.

The only way this administration can truly set itself apart from previous administrations is to proactively try to resolve the North Korean nuclear problem. Yes, North Korea probably won’t surrender its nuclear ambitions under the current Kim Jong-il regime. But chances are his son Kim Jong-un won’t either.

Cracking the problem begins with persistent engagement. Talking to adversaries is usually viewed as a reward. But in North Korea’s case, we may have now witnessed that not talking is the ultimate reward – it's granted time for nuclear development and more provocations. History has shown that when North Korea is engaged in dialogue, it refrains from provocative actions. Inaction could result in the U.S. resigning itself to accepting North Korea as a de facto nuclear weapons state. And more nuclear actors could emerge following the “Pyongyang model.”

Sure, it’s increasingly difficult to engage in backdoor diplomatic dialogue without it being leaked to the press, which would then lead to heightened expectations for a breakthrough, and then lead to sheer disappointment and criticism if that one baby step didn’t produce substantive results. If a series of talks don’t lead to progress, then the blow is even greater.

But the nuclear game will only become more difficult to beat if Washington stands idly by without directly gauging its playmate’s position. Not talking only increases the intractability of problems, and keeps the stage curtain up forever.

World history has shown that the seemingly impossible has been made possible because of aggressive and ambitious -- sometimes at first idealistic -- initiatives. Foreign policy should always be crafted from a realistic and pragmatic foundation. But sometimes, a sprinkle of ambition and creativity can make history.

Read more

North Korea, nuclear, diplomacy, Six-Party Talks, nuclear policy (all tags)

I've posted a new fact sheet and analysis on the Center's website on North Korea's latest promotion of its diplomats who played instrumental roles in negotiating with the U.S. The promotions are an apparent move to strengthen the regime’s foreign policy. Who was promoted and what does this mean for future negotiations on its nuclear programs? Find out more on  our website.  

Read more

North Korea, Kang Sok-ju, Kim Kye-gwan, Ri Yong-ho, U.S. policy, nuclear (all tags)

A panel of experts on Monday discussed the utility and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear umbrella, or extended deterrence, in East Asia in the wake of a nuclear North Korea. The experts agreed that the U.S. policy of extended nuclear deterrence is doing little to stimulate North Korean denuclearization, but has been effective symbolically.  

Leading the discussion at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, DC on “North Korea and the U.S Nuclear Umbrella in North East Asia,” Dr. Patrick Morgan of the University of California said that the U.S. originally had several aims for extending nuclear deterrence to allies in North East Asia:
-    to protect and reassure allies;
-    to project U.S. power and become part of the region’s security management structure;
-    to constrain allies by reducing the impetus for them to go nuclear;  
-    to build “better communities” by historically allowing for substantial adjustments in the capacities of states in the region such as China and Japan.

Read more

North Korea, nuclear, Nukes on a Blog, Inter-Korean relations (all tags)

August 25, 2010

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter is in North Korea to secure the release of Aijalon Mahli Gomes, a 30-year-old American missionary who was sentenced in May to eight years of hard labor and fined $700,000 for illegally entering the North. Carter met Pyongyang’s nominal leader Kim Young-nam and may even sit down with Kim Jong-il. The trip is significant because the release of an American civilian has once again brought a former U.S. president out of retirement at a time when tensions are high between Washington and Pyongyang as well as on the Korean peninsula. What’s more, it comes at a time when the Dear Leader’s health is said to be deteriorating. History has shown that the political environment tends to warm after a former U.S. president flies to the rescue. Why send Carter now and what can we expect from his trip? Click "read more."

Read more

Jimmy Carter, North Korea, hostage, Gomes, nuclear (all tags)