Archives

Dick K. Nanto, Specialist in Industry and Trade Foreign Affairs, Defense at the Congressional Research Service, and Trade Division, and Emma Chanlett-Avery, Analyst in Asian Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division at the Congressional Research Service, write, “U.S.-led financial sanctions on North Korea have disrupted that country’s trade. In the six-party talks, economic assistance (including fuel oil) is a major bargaining chip. Economic policy options include increasing or easing economic sanctions, preventing
shipments of illicit cargo, normalizing relations with Pyongyang, negotiating a trade agreement, allowing the DPRK to join international financial institutions, and removing the country from the terrorism list.”

Peter Hayes, Nautilus Institute Executive Director and David von Hippel, Nautilus Institute Senior Associate, write, “In the long run… it is critical that a substantial fraction of the energy aid agreed to at the Six Party Talks result in developmental outcomes for the people living in the DPRK. Falling short of this goal will leave the DPRK highly insecure, and one of the essential girders of a non-nuclear future for the Korean Peninsula, the social and political stability of the DPRK, will collapse.”

Peter Hayes, Nautilus Institute Executive Director and David von Hippel, Nautilus Institute Senior Associate, write, “This document is intended to provide a best estimate, given available data, of an internally-consistent year 2005 energy supply/demand balance for the DPRK, as well as balances for previous years prepared with similar methodologies… As this report is being finalized, the representatives of the countries participating in the Six-Party Talks on the DPRK’s nuclear program have come to an initial agreement on steps to be taken to address the differences between the parties. Provision of energy security is a critical element of a successful and robust resolution to the nuclear confrontation between the DPRK and the international community.”

Attachments are available here.

The Global Scenarios Workshop was convened by the Nautilus Institute at RMIT and Australia 21. This report from the workshop summarizes the narratives of the four scenarios developed at the workshop and uses these conceptions of the future to draw conclusions about threat perception, insecurity, and resiliency in the face of critical uncertainty. The report concludes that NGOs, civil society groups, and corporations all have an important role to play in issues of global problem solving and that “security is not an issue that can be left to governments alone.”

Tessa Morris-Suzuki, Professor of Japanese History in the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University and author of the forthcoming book Exodus to North Korea: Shadows from Japan’s Cold War, writes, “Today in Japan, relatives of those who “returned” to North Korea in the Cold War years watch the difficult process of nuclear diplomacy quietly but with intense concern? While the story of the Japanese kidnap victims has dominated news headlines, this tragic story of the 93,340 who were “returned” remains little known, and hostility to North Korea (as well as fears for the fate of relatives in the North) makes it difficult for the small group of survivors now living in Japan to raise their voices.”

David Albright, President of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), writes, “Certainly, questions remain about North Korea’s gas centrifuge program that must be resolved if an agreement is to move forward and nuclear dismantlement is to occur verifiably. But the flawed 2002 assessment must not be allowed to undermine this agreement or distort our reactions to declarations North Korea may make once it fulfills its obligations to dismantle its nuclear weapons program.”

The Third Session of the Fifth Round of the Six-Party Talks was held in Beijing among the People’s Republic of China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation and the United States of America from 8 to 13 February 2007. The delegations agreed on this joint statement on February 13th, 2007.

Leon V. Sigal., director of the Northeast Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council in New York and author of “Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea“, writes, “Will President Bush give Kim Jong-il — and himself — a similar face-saving way out? He could start by urging banks that have frozen North Korea’s hard currency accounts to release the proceeds of its legitimate trade and then engage in sustained diplomatic give-and take for a change.”

Tatsujiro Suzuki, Senior Research Scientist, Socio-economic Research Center, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI), and Visiting Professor, Graduate School of Public Policy, the University of Tokyo, writes, “The primary driving force behind Japan’s reprocessing program is the management of spent nuclear fuel. The back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle, i.e. management of spent fuel and waste, would pose significant financial, political, and social risks to Japan’s nuclear power program. Japan should explore alternative socio-political solutions, including multinational approaches, to its complex spent fuel management issues.”

The International Crisis Group an independent, non-profit, multinational organization, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict, writes, “A loose network of makeshift shelters focused on humanitarian aid has evolved into a politically-charged but fragile underground railroad on which some North Koreans can buy safe passage to Seoul in a matter of days, while others suffer years of violence and exploitation. If they are to minimise the exploitation of the most vulnerable and enhance the much-needed aid this network delivers, concerned governments must commit to a sustainable solution.”