23 April 2008: The American representatives involved in the Chinese sponsored six-party negotiations maintain that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) has been reluctant to comply with all binding nuclear declarations and that no resolution has of yet been achieved. The initial deadline for the initiatives concerning North Korea’s nuclear faculty were set to be met by December 31 of 2007. North Korea’s failure to produce all necessary material at that time has caused a temporary lull in the negotiations. The stalls in the talks have prompted questions about Kim Jong Il’s sincerity to halt his nuclear pursuits and comply with the accord’s demands. Yet, the concerted effort to end this stalemate has reopened negotiations and clarified the demands of both sides. 

Assistant Secretary of State and top nuclear negotiator Christopher Hill and his forum counterparts remain guardedly optimistic about the multilateral negotiations despite criticism of the talk’s stalled progress. Although North Korea has failed to disclose all details of its nuclear program according to the parameters of the negotiations, the fact that the talks have tentatively resumed reveals a strategic choice on the part of North Korea to comply with international demands and eventually dismantle its nuclear program and present accounts of activities in return for economic and political benefits.

North Korean officials had previously claimed that all declarations outlined in the negotiations had been met and that they were entitled to the energy and economic aid promised for their compliance. However, deficiencies in their presentation of information kept any such agreement from being made. North Korea has failed to disclose full accounts of past efforts to enrich uranium, plutonium amounts reprocessed for weapons purposes, and the number of warheads and bombs they had produced. They have also avoided the issue of their involvement in questionable transnational weapons trading activities. They have, however, made strides to disable their Yongbyon nuclear reactor complex, which has been a key requirement in the negotiation process.

The parties involved have too, vested an interest in a peaceful resolution and eventual denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula to shift their diplomatic strategy, which is based on rewarding incentives for North Korea’s cooperation. This strategy of diplomatic engagement has fallen under scrutiny by those who feel that the intentional delays in presenting genuine data calls for a hard lined approach of sanctions and possible military action. The initial incentives agreed upon for the first round of concessions included the delivery of 50,000 tons of heavy oil fuel as emergency energy assistance and removing North Korea from the list of terrorist states.

As immediate regional neighbors China, South Korea, Russia, and Japan recognize this situation as one to be dealt with extreme caution and have been committed to end North Korea’s debilitating isolation in return only for a promise of peaceful nuclear disarmament and continued transparency on the issue.

China, a tradition ally of North Korea and its main supplier of food and fuel has been tested by the belligerence of Kim Jong Il’s nuclear proclamations. China is invested heavily in maintaining the stability of the Communist North Korean regime but has demonstrated that it, in no way, supports its attempts to develop nuclear weapons. China’s initiative to coordinate the six-nation negotiations speaks volumes of its apprehensions towards DPRK militarism and its acknowledgment that its influence alone is not enough to deter Kim Jung Il from pursuing weapons of mass destruction. China has acted as an intermediary of sorts in these negotiations, preventing the democratic nations involved from settling on further disciplinary sanctions and focused the talks rather on positive reinforcement.    

The United States, initially having to be coxed into the talks amidst Chinese pressure has remained surprisingly resolute in its diplomatic commitments despite North Korea’s sparse concessions. A new round of meetings have been proposed to take place in the coming weeks in which it is expected that North Korea will finally divulge all of its weapons information in return for the swift removal of North Korea from the list of states who sponsor terrorism and the delivery of much needed energy and humanitarian aid. However, when asked if he expects a resolution to come from the meetings, Christopher Hill replied that a resolution is a far sighted goal and that time and patience is needed just to discuss parameters of a possible agreement.

North Korea’s years in isolation created within the country an environment of desperation. The regime has had to choose between providing food for its impoverished population or bolstering its military capabilities in the face of regional instability. The latter prevailed. North Korea adheres to a philosophy of national self preservation above social investment, a decision which has resulted in both denying North Koreans an ample food and energy supply and inciting international condemnation for its nuclear aspirations.

It seems evident by the persistence of its neighbors and a weary international community that a nuclear capable North Korea is out of the question when it comes to the stability of Northeast Asia. There are few alternatives to North Korea’s full compliance. Kim Jong Il has no doubt recognized his bargaining capabilities and some say was attempting to delay negotiations in hopes to barter a more agreeable deal with a new U.S. administration. Despite these delays, the world remains unwilling to accept North Korea’s persistence to maintain weapons of mass destruction and is continuing to mount pressure for its eventual compliance.