A positive trend

Changes in the mindsets of the United States and North Korea were evident on many accounts. For example, events that could be detrimental to mutual trust in the last few months, such as the joint military exercise between the United States and South Korea and North Korea's missile tests, did not trigger the strong reactions they previously had.

Now that both countries believe that they should improve bilateral relations, they will take more steps to enhance mutual trust. The release of the funds is only the beginning. In the next phase, the two countries are expected to have more interactions, and the other countries involved in the six-party talks will have to consider how to accelerate the discussions.

There already have been signs that the talks will speed up. The Bush administration is eager to achieve a decisive result before the 2008 presidential elections. Following the June visit to North Korea by Christopher Hill, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs who heads the American delegation to the six-party talks, the United States plans to send Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to the country. The United States also hopes to hold a foreign ministers' meeting in the framework of the six-party talks in early September and to complete the disablement of North Korea's nuclear facilities by the end of the year.

Alexander Vershbow, U.S. Ambassador to South Korea, said that if North Korea makes a strategic decision to dismantle its nuclear programs, the United States would start negotiations with the country on a lasting peace regime on the Korean Peninsula before the end of 2007. Negotiations would cover issues such as formally ending the Korean War (1950-53) and reducing troops stationed along the border between North Korea and South Korea, he said. Hill also indicated that the Bush administration would hold discussions on a formal peace accord before the end of the year, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Apart from making a clear promise to abandon its nuclear programs, North Korea is more responsive than it was last year. Shortly after South Korea started to ship the heavy fuel oil, North Korea informed the United States that it had shut down the Yongbyon nuclear facility. On July 13, North Korea's military proposed holding direct talks with its U.S. counterparts and inviting United Nations representatives to attend.

The international community is also stepping up efforts to resolve the North Korea nuclear issue. The South Korean Government is reportedly considering major issues such as holding a south-north summit and a four-way summit of South Korea, North Korea, the United States and China and declaring the end of the Korean War. Mohamed ElBaradei, IAEA's Director General, said recently that the international community had lost too much time and it must increase its pace. Regarding North Korea's demand for a light-water reactor, he said that this provision would not be a problem as long as the international community could verify that the country used nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.

All these positive aspects are likely to materialize. The meeting of the heads of the delegations explored actions in the next phase, mainly North Korea's declaration of its nuclear programs and the disablement of the Yongbyon nuclear facility. These steps will lead to an irreversible dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear programs, a longtime goal of the United States. Against this backdrop, the six-party talks are expected to move into the fast lane.

Despite the positive signs, some problems still call for serious concern. The United States and North Korea have long been at odds over whether the latter has a uranium enrichment plan. Negotiations on this issue are vital to the next phase. But because the two countries will discuss this issue bilaterally, uncertainties will increase. This non-transparency may also cause trouble to the six-party talks.

How to share the costs of demolishing the Yongbyon nuclear facility and what kinds of and how much food and energy assistance will be offered to North Korea, and how the parties concerned should contribute to it are also troublesome questions because the parties' interests vary. Japan, previously a big assistance provider, might adopt a passive attitude because of disputes over North Korea's past abductions of Japanese citizens.

There are three possible outcomes: First, the United States may take a permissive stance toward Japan given the two countries' military alliance, which will hinder the progress of the six-party talks. Second, Japan may be forced to conform. Third, Japan may be left out of the game. This issue will be a major challenge for Japan.

In addition, whether the United States can start the process of removing the designation of North Korea, as a state-sponsor of terrorism and remove the country from its current designation under the Trading with the Enemy Act, as required by the February 13 joint document, is of pivotal importance. The future progress of the six-party talks mainly will hinge on U.S. actions.

The author is an associate research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies

(The viewpoint of the article does not necessarily represent that of Beijing Review)