Framework agreement among six parties possible, scholars

After intensive bilateral talks on September 14, parties to the second phase of the current fourth round of six-party talks failed to reach consensus on a common document. Deep-seated resentment is the main reason behind the lack of mutual political trust between the United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and their failure to narrow differences. But it's still possible, experts say, for a framework agreement to be reached through negotiations on the basis of reserving differences.

The lack of mutual political trust and some historical factors all contribute to the huge differences between the two sides on the peaceful use of nuclear energy and the scope of nuke dismantlement, said Gu Guoliang, deputy director of the Institute of American Studies under Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Though the two parties signed an Agreed Framework in 1994, neither of them carried it out seriously. On the other hand, according to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, every country enjoys the right to peaceful use of nuclear energy. So each side sticks to its own version of argument.

Wang Dehua, research fellow with Shanghai Research Center for International Studies and vice president of Shanghai Institute for International Strategic Studies, believes that the dispute between the United States and the DPRK in fact involves a country's fundamental interest. By demanding the DPRK to give up all its nuclear programs, including civil nuclear facilities, the United States is unjustly depriving a country of its right to peaceful use of nuclear energy.

On the question of utilizing nuclear energy, Washington adopted double standards. It should acknowledge DPRK's right to peaceful use of nuclear energy, said Wang.

The ongoing talks have entered a stage of substantial discussions, with the focus still on the scope of nuclear abandonment and the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

Talking about how to achieve a breakthrough, Gu said that currently the most important thing is the political will of the two sides: whether the DPRK is really willing to give up its nuclear programs and whether the United States earnestly cares all DPRK concerns.

The six parties all agree on the ultimate goal of denuclearization on the Korean peninsula, said Gu. If both the United States and the DPRK have the above-mentioned political will, then it's possible for them to reserve differences and firstly reach a framework agreement on the objective of denuclearization through consultations and negotiations. Based on that, the parties can conduct further negotiations and talks, help the DPRK and the United States to build up political mutual trust, and take measures to finally reach their goals.

Now all parties are bargaining on kernel questions, each of whom in the hope of maximizing its own interests. At such a moment, if both the DPRK and the United States can make necessary compromise, there will be ample room for maneuver, said Wang.

South Korean Vice Foreign Minister Lee Tae-shik said earlier that in order to persuade the DPRK to give up its nuclear programs, Washington has offered Pyongyang the most favorable terms in recent 50 years.

US chief negotiator Christopher Hill also showed more flexibility in his attitude if compared to what some hardliners of the Bush Administration expressed earlier, indicating sincerity from the US side in resolving questions.

The six party talks is an opportunity, and I believe in the possibility of reaching an agreement on the final objective through consultations and negotiations, said Gu.

By People's Daily Online