Back to reality on North Korea

By Tong Kim

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's third visit to Pyongyang July 6-7 was considered a failure, with no gains, no meeting with Kim Jong-un and no progress on a much-expected plan of action for denuclearization.

However, Pompeo claimed that his two-day talks with Kim Yong-chol, Pyongyang's point man for negotiations with the U.S., were “productive” and “made progress on all of the central issues.”

The talks produced a lesson learned that the North Korean negotiating strategy has not changed. They stick to their time-tested play book, developing the logic of their own argument, trying to set the order of the agenda to their advantage and delaying concessions they will eventually have to make. A phased approach, with simultaneous action, is the number one principle of nuclear negotiation for the North Koreans.

Two hours after Pompeo left Pyongyang July 7, the North Korean foreign ministry issued a statement describing the results of the talks as “regrettable” and “apprehensive.” According to the statement, “the U.S. side came up with its unilateral and gangster-like demand for denuclearization just calling for CVID, declaration and verification.”

The North Korean side wanted to discuss trust-building measures such as a declaration of an end to the Korean War and multilateral exchanges that will help improve relations with the U.S. The North wants to be assured of trust and confidence in U.S. guarantees of its security before it moves in a denuclearization process, which is the opposite order of U.S. priorities.

The North complained that the U.S. did not bring up the topic of a peace regime, one of the four elements of agreement in Singapore. Apparently, the North brought up its planned dismantlement of a missile engine test ground and suspension of ICBM production and repatriation of the remains of the American war dead.

By the way, it was not clear why North Korean officials did not show up at Panmunjom on July 12, where U.S. Department of Defense officials were waiting for four hours. It appeared there was no firm agreement to meet on that day. Or there may have been a communication problem. The two sides are now to meet on July 15 in a general-grade officers meeting. However, this issue is not directly related to denuclearization

The North understands what the U.S. is expecting from “the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” to which its leader committed at the Singapore summit. The North will keep resisting the “irreversible” part of CVID (Complete, Verifiable and Irreversible Denuclearization). Such terms as FFVD or PCVD should not matter, as long as they all refer to the same total and permanent dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear program.

It is interesting to note the North Korean argument that suspension of joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises is reversible, whereas the North's dismantlement of nuclear test sites is irreversible. The North's freeze on nuclear and missile tests does not require verification. Dismantlement of the missile test site will require verification.

Neither side has walked away from their commitment of “complete denuclearization.” Working-level talks will continue to implement the vaguely worded Singapore joint statement ― to establish a new relationship between the U.S. and the DPRK, to build a peace regime and to achieve denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

We learned from the failure of the 9/19 joint statement of the six-party talks, which had agreed on several issues including a peace regime and a normalized relationship between the U.S. and the DPRK, that the U.S. focusing only on denuclearization was a mistake. To avoid the same mistake, negotiated implementation of all elements of the Singapore agreement can and should proceed at the same time.

In the meantime, the U.S. is confronted with a daunting challenge: it is yet to set a timeline for denuclearization ― to obtain a full declaration of the North's nuclear infrastructure and nuclear stockpiles in the arsenal, to set up an intrusive inspection mechanism and to make the North agree on a final dismantlement and disposition.

Pyongyang did not raise the economic issue during the last U.S.-North Korea talks. Does this mean the North is no longer pressured by sanctions? If yes, the U.S. has lost useful leverage in negotiating with the North.

While there is no guarantee for success in nuclear talks this time, there is still high hope for a peaceful settlement on the peninsula.

Tong Kim (tong.kim8@yahoo.com) is a Washington correspondent and columnist for The Korea Times. He is also a fellow at the Institute of Corean-American Studies.