Tuesday's deal between North Korea and five other
nations, including the United States, to take the first concrete steps toward
nuclear disarmament in exchange for aid and normalized relations marks a long-awaited
diplomatic breakthrough for U.S. President George W. Bush and a clear victory
for "realists" in his administration.
The deal, which was announced after several days of talks in Beijing, was immediately
denounced as a defeat by one of the administration's former leading hawks, retired
UN Ambassador John Bolton, who is considered close to Vice President Dick Cheney.
"It sends exactly the wrong signal to would-be proliferators around the
world," Bolton charged in a CNN interview. "It contradicts fundamental
premises of the president's policy he's been following for the past six years,
and, second, it makes the administration look very weak at a time in Iraq
when it needs to look strong."
But a statement issued by the White House removed any doubt that President
George W. Bush stood behind the accord.
"I am pleased with the agreements reached today at the Six-Party Talks
in Beijing," the statement, which was issued in Bush's name, declared.
"These talks represent the best opportunity to use diplomacy to address
North Korea's nuclear programs."
Whether the deal, which lays out steps to be taken by all six parties
Russia, Japan, South Korea, as well as China, the U.S., and North Korea
to be taken over the next 60 days, will act as a precedent for possible direct
negotiations with Iran, the other surviving member of Bush's "axis of evil,"
over its nuclear program remains to be seen.
But there is little doubt, that, if all goes smoothly during that period, the
hand of administration realists, centered in the State Department, will be strengthened
vis-à-vis the hawks. They remain largely concentrated in Cheney's office
and in the National Security Council staff and have long opposed direct bilateral
talks between Washington and Pyongyang of the kind that apparently made Tuesday's
accord possible.
Indeed, as recently as last spring, they had prevailed on Bush to prevent his
top negotiator on Korea, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia Christopher
Hill, from conducting one-on-one talks with his North Korean counterpart, Kim
Kye-Gwan, "outside of the Six-Party Talks."
But some eight months, several North Korean ballistic missile firings on U.S.
Independence Day, and one North Korean nuclear test later, Bush agreed to appeals
by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the two men meet in Berlin in January
to hash out the basic elements of the deal announced Tuesday.
"I think they could have gotten this agreement a long time ago, and I
think there was a good possibility that it would have headed off the North's
acquisition and test of fissionable material," said Don Oberdorfer, a Korea
specialist at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies here.
"It's only now that the administration is willing to deal with them in
serious ways."
Tuesday's deal will require Pyongyang to shut down its Yongbyon nuclear facility,
readmit inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to verify compliance,
and prepare a "complete" accounting of all its other nuclear facilities
and programs within the 60 days.
Within 30 days, the U.S. Treasury will review and partially lift financial
sanctions imposed in late 2005 to punish Pyongyang for alleged counterfeiting
and other illicit activities, while Washington will also help finance an initial
shipment of 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil (HFO) to the North. The U.S. will
also begin the process by which North Korea can be removed from its list of
state sponsors of terrorism.
In addition, the parties will create five working groups to work out outstanding
issues with Pyongyang, including its total denuclearization, how aid will be
tied to progress in denuclearization, normalization of diplomatic relations
with Japan and the U.S., and a peace agreement that would put a formal end to
the Korean War and establish a new regional security mechanism.
Given sufficient compliance over the 60 days, the foreign ministers of all
six parties will meet to assess progress and launch a second phase of the process
that would include the continued supply of HFO to North Korea in exchange for
the disabling of all of Pyongyang's nuclear facilities.
In a briefing with the press here after the announcement, Rice stressed that
the accord marked only a beginning in what many analysts believe will be a long
and tortuous process with no guarantee of ultimate success. "This is still
the first quarter," she told reporters. "There is still a lot of time
to go on the clock, but the six parties have now taken a promising step in the
right direction."
Analysts from both the right like Bolton and the left pointed
out that the core of the agreement was very similar to the 1994 Agreed Framework
worked out between the administration of President Bill Clinton and Pyongyang.
That deal called for the provision of HFO and other energy assistance, including
two light-water nuclear reactors provided by Japan and South Korea, in exchange
for a permanent freeze on the North's plutonium program at Yongbyon.
In 2002, however, the Bush administration, based in part on investigations
of the network of Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan, accused North Korea
of violating that accord by secretly working on another program to produce highly-enriched
uranium (HEU) for weapons. Washington cut off supplies of HFO, and in response,
Pyongyang threw out the inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency
and withdrew from the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
North Korea has steadfastly denied it ever had an HEU program, and many analysts
believe the conflict could pose a major obstacle to progress on Tuesday's agreement.
Other potential problems loom equally large. While North Korea has committed
itself to complete denuclearization under another Six-Party agreement reached
Sept. 19, 2005, the latest accord provides no specific details about the disposition
of the plutonium produced so far by Yongbyon enough, according to the
U.S. intelligence community to produce eight or even more bombs. It is also
silent about North Korea's advanced missile-development program
Those uncertainties will likely make the accord vulnerable to attack, particularly
from hawks who have long warned that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il cannot
be trusted and has no intention of giving up his arsenal because, in their view,
his regime's survival depends on it.
Democrats, who have long supported the kinds of bilateral talks that led to
Tuesday's agreement, may also be tempted to score political points against the
administration by pointing out that Tuesday's agreement could have been reached
back in 2003, before North Korea had actually exploded a nuclear device.
"It's important that the Democrats in particular hold their fire and not
take this as an opportunity to say, 'Hey, we told you so,'" said John Feffer,
a Korea specialist who runs the Web site Foreign Policy in Focus. "There's
still a faction within the administration that no doubt wants to derail this,
and Democratic gloating will only strengthen it."
Rice and Hill argued that Tuesday's agreement was an improvement over the 1994
Framework and would have been difficult to reach before now. They stressed in
particular the regional context in which the accord was negotiated, especially
China's leadership role in obtaining it and strong vested interest in assuring
compliance.
(Inter Press Service)