Getting mileage from North Korea talks

Two North Korean diplomats recently met New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson - who, as UN ambassador, negotiated with Pyongyang under president Bill Clinton - and proclaimed their desire for talks with the US.

'The North Koreans feel that, by giving us the two American journalists, they've made an important gesture,' he said.

Pyongyang certainly knows how to spell chutzpah. The government of Kim Jong-il is owed nothing. It is a relic of the cold war, a Stalinist remnant in which some 23 million people suffer and even starve. The impoverished and backward nation would matter little but for its nuclear weapons programme. With the latter, however, Pyongyang can command international attention.

It has now formally invited the US to send an envoy for talks. How to respond? Seven steps would help the US promote peace and stability on the peninsula.

First, keep expectations low. Otherwise sober-minded analysts and policymakers occasionally proclaim the latest 'breakthrough'. Yet North Korea thrives on isolation, and relies on brinkmanship as a negotiating technique. Diplomatic progress is possible, but neither certain nor even likely.

Second, negotiate with North Korea. Refusing to talk is a grade-school tactic that has got the US nowhere. Washington should engage in both bilateral and multilateral discussions.

Third, beware of making the perfect the enemy of the good. An increasing number of analysts doubt the North will ever give up its existing nuclear materials and weapons. On the other hand, Pyongyang still might be willing to halt any expansion of a programme currently capable of yielding only a handful of weapons. Although a nuclear-free peninsula remains a worthy goal, a freeze might be a more realistic short-term objective.

Fourth, treat North Korean provocations with bored contempt. The US needs to reward the North when it acts responsibly and punish or ignore it when it acts badly.

Fifth, let other countries, which have the most at stake, take the lead. North Korea is primarily a problem for its neighbours. A messy regime collapse would let loose refugees on South Korea and China, not America. A North Korean nuclear arsenal would, similarly, most threaten the region.

Next, press China in particular to take a more active and forceful role. Economic sanctions are largely futile without the co-operation of China. Yet, so far, Beijing has been more concerned about preventing a North Korean collapse and forestalling creation of a united Korea allied with the US. If China acted responsibly, Washington could offer to share in the cost of caring for any refugees created, while promising not to take geopolitical advantage of Beijing.

Finally, withdraw US forces from South Korea. It has a vast economic and technological lead over its northern antagonist and is fully capable of defending itself. And, conventional US forces do not help resolve the nuclear issue.

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to president Ronald Reagan