The dispute between the United States and North Korea continues to spiral out of control, with each step taken by one side predictably leading to a counter move by the other. Washington continues to depict the situation as one that pits North Korea against the rest of the world, while Pyongyang insists its quarrel is with no one but America.
To be sure, both sides are right. The core issue is the integrity of the Agreed Framework, signed by the US and North Korea in 1994 in Geneva. But many other countries are closely involved, in particular South Korea and Japan, which may well find themselves targets of weapons that the North Koreans are developing. Also closely involved are China and Russia.
The US continues to refuse to engage North Korea by entering into dialogue, arguing that the North Koreans - who violated the terms of the Agreed Framework by embarking on a covert nuclear programme - should not be rewarded. However, dialogue as such should not be considered a 'reward'. Dialogue, by definition, is something that both sides enter into, rather than a concession made by one side to the other. Besides, if the US refuses to negotiate with North Korea, it is difficult to see how a peaceful solution to the current crisis can be achieved. For, make no mistake, there is a crisis on the Korean peninsula, even if Washington refuses to use the word.
In fact, the US has gone out of its way to show there is no crisis. Secretary of State Colin Powell has presented North Korea as a de facto nuclear power, arguing that adding five or six bombs to its nuclear arsenal is not alarming. But this is the wrong approach. There is general agreement among the major powers that the Korean peninsula should not be allowed to become a nuclear zone.
Robert Gallucci, the ambassador-at-large during the Clinton administration who negotiated the 1994 agreement with North Korea, said in Washington that the choices facing the US today are the same as those in 1994.
These are: a military strike against the nuclear facilities, economic sanctions, acceptance of North Korea's nuclear status, or negotiations. 'If you remove negotiations as an option, what have you got left?' he asked.
The dream of the Bush administration, he said, is that the North 'would somehow arrange to destroy its enrichment programme, witnessed by the International Atomic Energy Agency'. But since the two inspectors have just been thrown out of the country, Washington should realise that option was never more than a dream.
