Leonid A. Petrov, Research Associate in the Division of Pacific and Asian History at Australian National University, writes, “Differences in political views and economic systems must not divide but should rather enhance the value of partnership and help complement each other’s strengths. By intensifying diplomatic ties, expanding economic cooperation and providing humanitarian aid both countries can make a significant contribution to the peaceful resolution of the Korean nuclear problem and prepare the basis for durable peace and prosperity in the region.”

This trip report by Keith Luse, Senior Professional Staff Member in the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, notes discussions with DPRK officials over the countries nuclear program. The report includes the comment, “One million tons of HFO was committed, with one-half to be delivered in-kind. Five hundred thousand tons of HFO (in equivalent), should have been delivered in equipment and materials. Only two hundred thousand tons of HFO has been delivered so far. We are adjusting the speed of disablement to the speed of the five parties”.

Siegfried S. Hecker, Professor at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) at Stanford University, writes, “the most important risk-reduction actions now are to stop the production of more plutonium and to stop export of existing plutonium and nuclear technologies. The current situation puts us within reach of stopping plutonium production for the foreseeable future. The five parties should do everything in their power to get the DPRK to finish the disablement expeditiously and to move on to dismantlement.”