Jim Lobe

Increasingly frustrated over its failure to get North Korea back to the negotiating table, the administration of President George W Bush is taking new steps virtually certain to escalate tensions with the third spoke in his original “axis of evil,’’ analysts said. Last Friday, the administration announced that it was reviewing plans for future US food-aid shipments to Pyongyang, although it denied a Wall Street Journal report that it had cut off shipments through the end of this year. The Pentagon confirmed Friday that it was sending 15 F-117 stealth fighters to South Korea, apparently due to concerns that Pyongyang may test a nuclear weapon at any time. While these moves were certain to increase tensions, US State Department, or foreign ministry, officials hinted that Washington may be more flexible regarding North Korean demands for bilateral nuclear talks, provided these take place within the framework of six-party talks which also involve China, Japan, South Korea, and Russia.

“If we can get going with the six-party talks, anything is possible,’’ Christopher Hill, the new assistant secretary of state for East Asian affairs, told the House of Representatives international relations committee Thursday.

The resulting impasse — now into its fifth year — has drawn increasing consternation and concern by much of the US foreign-policy establishment. With North Korea’s declaration in February that it is a ‘’nuclear state’’ and the possibility that a nuclear test may be imminent, a number of policy veterans have argued that it has become particularly urgent to forge a coherent policy focussed on achieving denuclearisation, rather than the more ambitious goal of regime change. On Thursday, for example, former President George Bush’s national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, a moderate, appealed for the administration to make a comprehensive offer either through bilateral or multilateral talks of ‘’security assurances, economic cooperation, and diplomatic recognition — in exchange for North Korea’s complete and verifiable elimination of its nuclear weapons programme.’’

The hardliners have long insisted that China, which convened the six-party process, is the key to bringing Kim to heel, either by arranging his overthrow through Beijing’s contacts with the North Korean military, or by threatening to cut off oil and other supplies to the North unless Kim agrees to US terms. According to some, Beijing, which they believe has life-or-death power over Kim’s regime, has far more to lose than Washington if Pyongyang tests a nuclear device. A successful nuclear test by North Korea will almost certainly be followed by a decision by Japan and probably South Korea and Taiwan to go nuclear. But, to Washington’s disappointment, China has so far refused to go along with this logic. While Beijing has made clear to Pyong-yang that it opposes any test that would confirm North Korea’s status as a nuclear power, its fear is a sudden collapse of the regime that could bring millions of refugees flooding across the border. — IPS