North Korea made a surprising peace pledge this year. Kim Jong Il’s new year resolution is to create a nuclear-free Korean peninsula. The statement has brought new hopes for the daunting task of denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. Although the international community has welcomed the positive gesture made by North Korea, doubts continue to persist for North Korea’s actions in the past have undermined the possibility of a nuclear-free Korean peninsula. According to the statement, North Korea seems eager to carry forward its bilateral negotiations with the United States. The question is, however, how successful would these bilateral negotiations be if South Korea is kept out of the loop? Moreover, will the six-party talks resume this year? These are some of the several apprehensions concerning North Korea’s nuclear programme.

North Korea quit the six-party talks as well as the bilateral talks with the US last year in response to international criticism over its long-range rocket test. Subsequently, hopes for denuclearization were further eroded after the second nuclear test in May 2009. North Korea justifies its nuclear programme as a means to deter the Unites States; how valid, however, are such reasons? North Korea became party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1985, yet continued with its nuclear programme along with its involvement in covert proliferation activities. North Korea has continued to test missiles without any adherence to international norms thereby undermining the six-party talks. Earlier during the six-party negotiations, North Korea remained on the negotiating table on one hand, and continued with its covert activities on the other. The negotiations were nothing but a bargaining chip for North Korea to receive economic aid and concessions from the negotiating parties. It, therefore, seems that the nuclear programme is representative of North Korea’s military desire rather than US threat.

In its 1 January 2010 message, North Korea gave several clues vis-à-vis its policies for the year. Accordingly, North Korea is looking forward to better relations with the West as well as its neighbours for the economic betterment of the country and is therefore willing to renegotiate the nuclear issue. The international community has learnt lessons from its past negotiations with North Korea where the regime has displayed a tendency to switch tactics. Therefore, to prove its adherence to the new year resolution, North Korea must display good faith and return to the six-party talks. It is important for North Korea to realise that negotiations with United States alone cannot resolve the issue. South Korea, Japan, China and Russia, the North’s neighbours, are major stakeholders too. In this regard, China should take responsibility for resuming the six-party talks and must act as an arbitrator again. An agenda for accounting the nuclear activities of North Korea in the past must be put forward at the very beginning of any such negotiations;  without raising this issue, further goals cannot be achieved.

The upcoming Review Conference for the NPT (NPT RevCon) is significant this year, especially in the case of North Korea. Although North Korea has begun the new year with a positive approach towards denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, it is important that such statements are matched by actions as well. North Korea, therefore, should become a party to the NPT once again. This will open channels for all  concerned parties and would also be the most formidable step towards the denuclearization. On its part, North Korea should voice its concerns regarding the Negative Security Assurances (NSA), which has been an outstanding issue at the NPT RevCon; the nuclear threat from United States has always been regarded by North Korea as the primary motive behind its nuclear programme.

As far as the North’s relations with South Korea are concerned, the Lee Myung Bak regime took a hard line approach towards North Korea. The year 2009 also witnessed a naval confrontation between the Koreas. The naval confrontation was a direct consequence of South Korea’s decision to participate in the US led Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). Kim Dae-jong’s regime had taken several steps for improving relations between the two nations; President Lee, however, opted for hard-line policies instead. Lee Myung Bak’s efforts must aim at resumption of talks between the two Koreas in the present context. While South Korea is also aiming at a nuclear-free Korean peninsula, this goal cannot be achieved without improving relations with the North.  North Korean must understand that  tactics of nuclear blackmail would now be futile and it has to adhere to treaties and declarations. The North has to pursue its resolution for denuclearization with a respect for international norms. This would in turn ensure cooperation and improvement in the living conditions of an impoverished North Korean population.