There is no alternative but to negotiate with North Korea

/10/jonathanpower2.jpg”>

The diplomats and pundits were right: transition after the death of Kim Jong-il in North Korea, they said, might well produce an unstable and frightening situation. Kim Jong-un, his son, is a cut off the old block.

But they forget too easily America’s stance in the negotiations that began during the presidency of Bill Clinton. It led to major progress and the unprecedented visit to Pyongyang by his Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, which was meant to pave the way for Clinton’s own visit which was likely to lead to major changes in the relationship. (The demands of the Camp David Israel-Palestine-US negotiations in the last days of his administration meant it couldn’t be fitted in.)

After seven years of erratic US policies under President George W. Bush – met by equally erratic and bellicose North Korean ones – the Bush Administration’s negotiations ended up achieving almost the same as Clinton’s, albeit with no plan to take the final, big step, as Clinton had planned.

Well, not quite back to where the Clinton Administration had to leave off. On Bush’s watch Pyongyang tested its nuclear bomb.
This must count as one of President George W. Bush’s worst foreign policy feats. Commitments made in tense but productive negotiations were not honoured. (And the Republican majority in Congress in Clinton’s time also torpedoed commitments.)

Bush’s first Secretary of State, Colin Powell, was made a fool of. After he declared that the new Administration would try and complete the work of its predecessor, Powell was publicly repudiated. The insider work of Vice-President Richard Cheney and Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld pulled the rug from beneath him.

Fortunately, the negotiations were salvaged by Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, who took personal charge of the negotiations and empowered a skilful negotiator, Christopher Hill, to burrow through the labyrinthine confusion and misunderstandings that were now heaped one on top of the other.

Pyongyang’s twists and turns and often appalling misbehaviour were more tolerated. In September 2005, the US formally offered a non-aggression pledge and an offer, in principle, to normalize relations. It also resurrected discussion of the Clinton decision to help finance and build a ‘light water’ reactor that would help satisfy the North’s domestic power needs, without producing more bomb-making material. (The reactor sits half finished.) In return the North agreed to denuclearize and to open itself to international inspection.
Perhaps inevitably both sides interpreted the agreement differently. The North again became intransigent. In October 2006 it exploded an underground nuclear device. Yet Rice managed to persuade Bush to dilute the hostile rhetoric.
The Rice/Hill push continued forward. Fuel aid and food were offered as carrots. Surprisingly, the offer bore fruit. The North agreed to disable its nuclear weapons and other important facilities at its Yongbyon nuclear complex. It also said it would allow back UN inspectors.

But when Washington stalled on removing the North from its terrorism list Pyongyang also stalled. Washington capitulated on the terrorism list. A deal was made, with the added bonus of the North agreeing to open up undeclared sites as well, but with the proviso that inspections were agreed to by ‘mutual consent’, leaving Pyongyang a card to play.

It played it – over the question of how the US could verify what North Korea had agreed to, in particular the questions the US had over the suspected building of a uranium enrichment plant which could be an alternative source of bomb-producing material to the plutonium facility it had agreed to renounce.

The negotiations came to a shuddering halt when North Korea carried out a second nuclear test. (Barack Obama had become president four months before.) Later it revealed that it had built a uranium enrichment plant, albeit at that time only enriching uranium to the low requirements of producing electricity not bombs.

Obama tried to pick up the pieces. In February last year in return for 240,000 tonnes of food aid the new North Korean regime agreed to allow UN inspectors to monitor its suspension of uranium enrichment. The North also agreed a moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile tests.

The agreement did not last long. In April the North launched a rocket containing a satellite, arguing this was a scientific not a military endeavour. (It broke up in mid-air.) Obama, I think mistakenly, decided to cancel the agreement. The US was backed up by all the members of the UN Security Council.

In December the North launched a missile that could possibly reach the US (but not carrying a nuclear weapon). In February this year it carried out its third nuclear test. Now it says it is prepared to threaten a thermo-nuclear war.

The Obama administration is going to have its work cut out to resurrect serious negotiations. But the alternative of letting more time pass by is not an option.

© Jonathan Power 2013

Foreign affairs columnist, film-maker and author

Related Posts

The agreement is catastrophic both because of what it says and what it doesn’t mention. It reduces further the major asset of security policies: Freedom of action. Jan Oberg TFF director September 25, 2026 A couple of hours before the agreement was signed on September 22, 2026, I published the following 13 hypotheses about what it would most likely contain on TFF Substack (in English). I was wrong on only the first point. Contrary to what Trump had written on his Truth Social platform, it does not appear to come into force immediately. In fact, it turned out to be worse than even I had anticipated. After these hypotheses now come a number of reflections in light of what the agreement actually contains, and does not contain, as well as the way in which it has generally been presented by major media outlets and by the public-service broadcaster DR. My...
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.
By Jan ObergTFF co-founder and director February 11, 2026 PART 3 — ECONOMICS, TRADE & FINANCIAL SOVEREIGNTY A. Trade Measures & Market Signaling Economic pressure can be applied instantly and scaled without violence. Immediate Measures (within a week) Government boycott US goods and services  A very powerful signal which over time will be felt. Targeted tariffs on selected U.S. goods Symbolic but high-visibility sectors send a clear message. Suspend trade facilitation talks A peaceful pause that signals deep concern. Freeze U.S. participation in public procurement – military procurement in particular A nonviolent way to reduce influence. Competition law review of U.S. corporations A legal tool to scrutinise market dominance. Longer-Term Measures EU–Asia–Africa trade corridors Reducing reliance on U.S. markets. European supply chains for critical minerals Strategic autonomy in resource access. European Strategic Trade Authority Monitoring coercive practices globally. Euro-denominated commodity markets Weakening the dollar’s pricing monopoly. The EU must resume contacts and negotiations with Russia, focusing on energy cooperation To...

Recent Articles

Photo above: Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd’s Non-Violence outside UN Headquarters in New York. Kirill Levin, CC BY-NC-SA 2. Jan Oberg November 3, 2026 I am happy to be published in Horizons which is produced by the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development, CIRSD, in Belgrade. My contribution brings out a radical re-thinking of what concepts such as defence, security, deterrence – and peace – may mean if we want to create a more peaceful world. It also summarises a few things I have been working with the last few decades. Please read it here Og her er den på dansk, takket være Johnny Baltzersens lynhurtige oversættelse
UNITE-tillid, DREAM-velstand og andre konstruktive komponenter Normally we publish articles in English here. But this is a translation of a very important TFF document that should reach as many as possible in Denmark since this country’s government has been one of the most hardline in Europe and, up till now at least, has refused to use diplomacy and, instead, spent tremendous sums on arming Ukraine with the express goal of defeating Russia. Thus this – unique – article is in Danish. Vi er Johnny Baltzersen og hans Fælles Sikkerhed – Fælles Fremtid på Substack overmåde taknemmelige for at have oversat og publiceret TFF’s 2025-portfølje for fredsidéer med henblik på Ukraines fremtid. Vi håber den nu kan nå mange flere danskere – som også vil sprede den og skabe debat – nu den danske regerings og folketingspartiernes politik på dette område siden 2022 står nu – forudsigeligt – ved vejs ende....
Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....

TFF on Substack

Discover and subscribe to more peace materials on TFF Substack

Most Popular

Photo above: Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd’s Non-Violence outside UN Headquarters in New York. Kirill Levin, CC BY-NC-SA 2. Jan Oberg November 3, 2026 I am happy to be published in Horizons which is produced by the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development, CIRSD, in Belgrade. My contribution brings out a radical re-thinking of what concepts such as defence, security, deterrence – and peace – may mean if we want to create a more peaceful world. It also summarises a few things I have been working with the last few decades. Please read it here Og her er den på dansk, takket være Johnny Baltzersens lynhurtige oversættelse
UNITE-tillid, DREAM-velstand og andre konstruktive komponenter Normally we publish articles in English here. But this is a translation of a very important TFF document that should reach as many as possible in Denmark since this country’s government has been one of the most hardline in Europe and, up till now at least, has refused to use diplomacy and, instead, spent tremendous sums on arming Ukraine with the express goal of defeating Russia. Thus this – unique – article is in Danish. Vi er Johnny Baltzersen og hans Fælles Sikkerhed – Fælles Fremtid på Substack overmåde taknemmelige for at have oversat og publiceret TFF’s 2025-portfølje for fredsidéer med henblik på Ukraines fremtid. Vi håber den nu kan nå mange flere danskere – som også vil sprede den og skabe debat – nu den danske regerings og folketingspartiernes politik på dette område siden 2022 står nu – forudsigeligt – ved vejs ende....
Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....
Read More
knotted gun
Photo above: Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd’s Non-Violence outside UN Headquarters in New York. Kirill Levin, CC BY-NC-SA 2. Jan Oberg November 3, 2026 I am happy to be published in Horizons which is produced by the Center for International Relations and Sustainable Development, CIRSD, in Belgrade. My contribution brings out a radical re-thinking of what concepts such as defence, security, deterrence – and peace – may mean if we want to create a more peaceful world. It also summarises a few things I have been working with the last few decades. Please read it here Og her er den på dansk, takket være Johnny Baltzersens lynhurtige oversættelse
TFFPortfolioVign
UNITE-tillid, DREAM-velstand og andre konstruktive komponenter Normally we publish articles in English here. But this is a translation of a very important TFF document that should reach as many as possible in Denmark since this country’s government has been one of the most hardline in Europe and, up till now at least, has refused to use diplomacy and, instead, spent tremendous sums on arming Ukraine with the express goal of defeating Russia. Thus this – unique – article is in Danish. Vi er Johnny Baltzersen og hans Fælles Sikkerhed – Fælles Fremtid på Substack overmåde taknemmelige for at have oversat og publiceret TFF’s 2025-portfølje for fredsidéer med henblik på Ukraines fremtid. Vi håber den nu kan nå mange flere danskere – som også vil sprede den og skabe debat – nu den danske regerings og folketingspartiernes politik på dette område siden 2022 står nu – forudsigeligt – ved vejs ende....
JoGSS-Silent
Jan Oberg TFF director October 28, 2026 Exactly one month has now passed since I published my criticism of the introduction to the special issue on Johan Galtung published by the Journal of Global Security Studies, JoGSS, and of Tor Egil Førland’s chapter about Galtung which serves as a preview to his forthcoming biography of Galtung to be published by PRIO. See the original on The Transnational here and the same article on TFF Substack with many general and critical comments and, in particular, the people who decided to withdraw from the biography project in protest. The special issue itself was extraordinary. It was devoted to the intellectual legacy of one of the founders of peace research and contained a number of strong assessments of his personality, scholarship, intellectual trajectory, and public role. Such assessments are, of course, entirely legitimate. No scholar is beyond criticism, and neither was Johan Galtung....
Screenshot 2026-10-26 115647
An aspect of Iran’s culture and civilisation you’ve probably never heard about. Don’t be surprised if the US and Israel also try to bomb them. Jan ObergTFF director October 26, 2026 Today – under the “USraeli” threat of new “annihilating” bombings – opens the 7th International Conference on Peace and Conflict Resolution at Tehran’s University. As far as I can tell, this is the only permanent, advanced peace research institution in West Asia/the Middle East. Perhaps more countries in that region could be inspired? I mean, how many military “security” institutes and military academies do they have? Many peace research institutes and university departments have been established since the 1950s in the West. They are now all under attack; some have closed down, some have gone mainstream, yet others kept the name but do nothing to research peace and disseminate results or advice; instead, they cooperate with militarism’s platforms such...
Screenshot 2026-10-15 141837
Let’s discuss using AI to create peace – in contrast to boring geopolitics devoid of creative healing and visions. Jan Oberg TFF director October 15, 2026 I asked VEED to create a short video exemplifying how peace is preferable to war, then chose the lady as a template. Simple as that. In less than a minute, it produced this video, which any peace-loving person would appreciate. The only problem is that human intelligence (HI), at least the one that exists among Western decision-makers, isn’t half as moral or smart as AI. I have used AI to dialogue about peace and peace plans, creative conflict resolution and visions of a better future for humankind. It so happens that I am having more stimulating, intelligent, creative and moral discussions with AI than I could possibly have with any EU or NATO leader today. Yes, AI has very problematic and dangerous aspects; used...
girl-5894831_1280
Below are TFF-related media mentions, comments, videos and social media posts published elsewhere but not on this homepage. We happen to catch and list only a fraction. Regarding video comments and debates, we recommend that you go to the TFF Video Channel on Substack where many of them are reproduced. Jan Oberg is a contributor to China Daily – 52 million daily clicks – and Global Times, CGTN and CCTV (the national television), China Investment, Xinhua News Agency and several others. Articles and videos on these media very often multiply into countless Chinese (and Western media) that re-post them from these main media. Thanks to The China Academy, his analyses, interviews and comments are frequently posted on YouTube channels such as Thinkers Forum and Wave Media. These videos are often re-posted on Bilibili (China’s YouTube), the China Content Center on TikTok, and on the Chinese edition of TikTok, Douyin.com. This means reaching hundreds of millions of viewers worldwide over a year. While there are too many to catch on all these...