U.S. dismisses DPRK demand on peace treaty

[StarfarerBill]

Source: Xinhua News Agency

WASHINGTON, Jan. 19 -- The United States on Tuesday dismissed a proposal by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) on negotiating a peace treaty, saying the first and foremost thing for Pyongyang is to return to the six-party talks.

"The appropriate next step is for North Korea to return to the six-party talks and to resume deliberations in this context. And within that context, it's possible to have bilateral interactions and other discussions, not just with the United States but with other countries," said Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs.

Pyongyang on Monday renewed its demands of negotiating a peace treaty and lifting sanctions before it would return to the six- party talks, saying failure for the discussion on concluding a peace treaty to start would consequently "push back the process of denuclearization."

"The U.S. position, which is very firm and in close coordination with our allies and friends in the six-party talks, is that it would be inappropriate at this juncture to lift sanctions or to revisit aspects of UN Security Council Resolution 1874, given the current circumstances," said Campbell.

"It's important that North Korea make clear that they are prepared to abide by previous agreements in 2005 and 2007," he added.

Read more: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-01/20/c_13143110.htm

[Hugabear]

1. Why is it so goddamned important that we stick with failed Bush-era policies?

Why would it be such a bad thing to negotiate a peace treaty with North Korea? Is 50 years of war not enough? Why do we need to continue to hold a dagger to their throat?

Also, what is so wrong with holding bilateral talks with the North Koreans? Whenever we've held talks with the Soviets/Russians, we didn't demand that every country bordering Russia be present. Whenever we hold talks with Israel and Palestine, we don't demand that Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt attend.

[groundloop]

2. Good points, but isn't part of this because Kim Jong Il is constantly seeking the spotlight

I looked at this more like a grade school teacher telling an unruly student that he can't get his way every time he throws a temper tantrum.

[420inTN]

3. What good is a peace treaty...

... with N. Korea while they are still technically at war with our allies S. Korea. Until N/S Korea sign peace treaties, why would we have a separate peace treaty with NK? That's why we are asking for a return to 6-party talks.

And Kim is acting like a pre-schooler jumping up and waving his hand saying, "Look at me! Look at me!"

[Igel]

4. Is breathing a Bush-era policy?

You breathed then, right? Bush breathed? Gotta be evil.

This policy is also a Clinton-era policy. And a Reagan-era policy. And a Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Eisenhower-era policy.

A 2-party peace treaty with the US is a mistake because it is not our war. We are there to help our allies. North Korea went to war with an area that it believed and believes is properly N Korean, against a government that it thinks is utterly without legitimacy. It *cannot* sign a peace treaty with S. Korea without recanting the premise for its war, which would mean that it views the proper state of N Korea not being at war to regain occupied territory but to live at peace and serve its populace.

Moreover, for the US to sign or even engage in 2-party talks would legitimize N Korea's claims, at least in its own eyes. Now, not legitimizing those calims hasn't proven very fruitful in the past, but legitimizing them is likely to prove at the least no more fruitful. It would say, in other words, that the real war was with the US, the imperialist hegemon in that part of the world, and not with the occupied people of S Korea. It would say that we're at peace, therefore there's no need for US troops in S Korea.

And it would say this even as N Korea is openly saying that properly it is the proper government of S Korea. In other words, it should retake US-occupied territory back to its fold when the US no longer occupies it.

N Korea : S Korea :: Hamas : Israel.

In this case, the ball is entirely in N Korea's court. In fact, it has been for the last 55 years.