• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Article

Talks With North Korea

The announcement that the United States, North Korea and China will hold talks next week in Beijing over North Korea's nuclear program is a welcome development and an apparent victory for the Bush administration's decision to oppose direct, one-on-one talks with Pyongyang.

Link Copied
By Jon Wolfsthal
Published on Apr 16, 2003

The announcement that the United States, North Korea and China will hold talks next week in Beijing over North Korea's nuclear program is a welcome development and an apparent victory for the Bush administration's decision to oppose direct, one-on-one talks with Pyongyang. It remains to be seen, however, if the positions of the United States and North Korea can be brought together to address the severe security concerns raised by Pyongyang's active nuclear weapons program.

Since North Korea expelled International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors in December 2002, it has announced its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, restarted a plutonium production reactor, continued its development of a uranium enrichment capability and could be only months or weeks away from extracting weapons plutonium for its stock of 8,000 spent fuel rods. North Korea maintains that its withdrawal from the NPT became effective on April 10th, but some countries, including Japan, claim that they have not been directly notified by North Korea as required by Article X of the NPT and, therefore, North Korea's withdrawal is not yet in effect.

The United States maintains that it is prepared to launch a bold initiative toward North Korea but that it cannot do so while North Korea maintains an active nuclear program. Washington has publicly stated that North Korea must dismantle its uranium enrichment effort before broader talks can begin, lest such efforts be seen as rewarding bad behavior by North Korea. US goals of the talks next week are likely to center on steps North Korea must take to freeze and begin eliminating its nuclear program. While the North Korean position is not fully known, it is likely that North Korea will resist eliminating its nuclear program unless it can obtain concrete incentives and commitments from the United States on a host of issues, including a pact of non-aggression, lifting of sanctions, diplomatic recognition and economic assistance.

China's role could be critical in convincing North Korea to curtail its nuclear activities but could also constrain some U.S. efforts to pressure North Korea into compliance with its non-proliferation obligations. The absence of key U.S. allies South Korea and Japan, which both have direct security interests at stake in North Korea, is also likely to require delicate handling by the Bush administration as the tripartite talks move forward.

About the Author

Jon Wolfsthal

Former Nonresident Scholar, Nuclear Policy Program

Jon Wolfsthal was a nonresident scholar with the Nuclear Policy Program.

    Recent Work

  • Report
    Universal Compliance: A Strategy for Nuclear Security<br>With 2007 Report Card on Progress
      • +2

      George Perkovich, Jessica Tuchman Mathews, Joseph Cirincione, …

  • Article
    10 Plus 10 Doesn’t Add Up

      Jon Wolfsthal

Jon Wolfsthal
Former Nonresident Scholar, Nuclear Policy Program
Jon Wolfsthal
North AmericaUnited StatesEast AsiaNorth KoreaMilitaryForeign PolicyNuclear Policy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Pushing Beirut into an Armed Conflict With Hezbollah Is Insane

    The party’s domestic and regional roles have changed, so Lebanon should devise a disarmament strategy that encompasses this.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Corrupted by Absolute Power

    In an interview, Marc Lynch discusses his new book decrying the post-1990 U.S.-dominated order in the Middle East.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Why Does the Middle East Suffer “Forever Wars”?

    Because perpetual conflict enhances control, offers economic benefits, and allows leaders to ignore popular preferences.

      • Angie Omar

      Angie Omar

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?

    A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    A Military Balance Sheet in the U.S. and Israeli War With Iran

    In an interview, Jim Lamson discusses the ongoing regional conflict and sees an unclear picture when it comes to winners and losers. 

      Michael Young

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.