hankyoreh

North Korea has submitted its declaration of its nuclear activities to China, since it holds the chair for the six-party talks. The United States, in turn, says Pyongyang is going to be removed from its list of state sponsors of terrorism and will be freed from the U.S. Trading with the Enemy Act. This means we have arrived at the end of the second phase of the three phase process (freezing, disablement, and dismantlement) for resolving the North Korean nuclear issue. In marathon terms, we’re at the turning point. This is an important accomplishment, one that follows the September 19th Joint Declaration of 2005 and the February 13th Agreement of 2007.

It was the will of the United States and North Korea that has brought us to where we are now. The work of the American delegation to the six-party talks, led by Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, has been particularly remarkable. This team of Americans calmed concerns in the United States and elsewhere about an alleged uranium enrichment program and allegations that the North had worked with other countries on nuclear development, and succeeded in moving the process forward. The live, televised destruction of the cooling tower at the North’s Yongbyon reactor was one result of their efforts. The North deserves to be recognized for its profoundly changed attitude in negotiating the implementation of nuclear disablement and about declaring its nuclear activities. You can see that Pyongyang has taken one step closer to that so-called “strategic decision” (giving up on its nuclear programs).

The future is, of course, not entirely bright. For starters, before proceeding to the third phase there will have to be verification of the contents of the declaration, and it appears that will take a considerable amount of time. Hard-liners in the United States could decide to raise their voices and exert a negative influence on what happens. The upcoming U.S. presidential election and Japan’s singular focus on the abductee issue could hurt the momentum. Making plans for how far-reaching the abolition of the North’s program should be, how that should take place, and what it should get in exchange will not be simple; neither will normalizing ties between the North and Japan nor building a peace regime for the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia.

The reason the six-party talks have gone through so many ups and downs over the past few years is because of the mutual doubts about one another’s motives and resolve. That the process has arrived at the end of the second phase means the distrust has been somewhat overcome. The nations party to the process now show considerable resilience, so we now have the real conditions needed for elevating the six-party dialogue to a higher level. If the trust is further built upon according to the principle of “action for action,” then there is no reason the talks won’t work better than they have so far.

It will be important for the nations participating in the six-party process to have an understanding of their common goals and to work together with persistence. South Korea, for its part, needs to hurry to restore its position of leadership in this process, one lost with the arrival of its new president. The half-way we still have to go will be far more important than the half-way we have come.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]