Tim Savage, Deputy Director of the Nautilus Institute’s Seoul office, writes, “In the short term, we are thus unlikely to see a rapid return to negotiations, or any kind of capitulation to pressure on the part of North Korea. Instead, we are likely in for a long period of containment and stalemate, while the surrounding nations wait to see the outcome of the ongoing succession saga in Pyongyang. The only problem with this approach is that North Korea — as it showed once again with its recent volley of missile tests — does not like to be ignored, and has several tools for getting attention.”

Amii Abe, Visiting Fellow at the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation, writes, “In summation, though North Korea has strong suspicions against the U.S. and has lost the enthusiasm to negotiate with Washington, they still need to talk with the U.S. at the end of the day… First of all, we need to pay attention not only to Kim Jong-Il or the next successor, but also to the hard-liners who affect decision-making in North Korea… Secondly, imposing new sanctions is necessary, but is not enough… to change the situation, the U.S. needs more fundamental action than ever before; to deal with the DPRK’s focus on the legacy of the Korean War.”

Selig S. Harrison, Director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy, writes, “Progress towards denuclearization would require U.S. steps to assure North Korea that it will not be the victim of a nuclear attack… Realistically, if the U.S. is unwilling to give up the option of using nuclear weapons against North Korea, it will be necessary to live with a nuclear-armed North Korea while maintaining adequate U.S. deterrent forces in the Pacific.”