Bush hails possible new N. Korea talks
By JENNIFER LOVEN
Associated Press

President Bush on Tuesday welcomed an agreement to bring North Korea back to six-party arms talks and said the United States will insist the communist regime abandon its nuclear weapons program in a verifiable fashion.

To lure the North back, Washington agreed to discuss the financial sanctions the U.S. imposed on North Korea a year ago for its alleged complicity in counterfeiting and money laundering to sell weapons of mass destruction. Those sanctions attempted to sever Pyongyang from the international financial system.

North Korea has boycotted the six-party talks since the sanctions were imposed.

Bush credited China, which has more leverage than any other country with North Korea, with bringing the North back to negotiations.

"I am pleased and I want to thank the Chinese," the president told reporters in the Oval Office, after meeting with Andrew Natsios, his special envoy on Sudan.

"It's clear the North Koreans got the message from the Chinese and everybody else," said State Department spokesman Tom Casey.

The surprise announcement came three weeks after the communist regime in Pyongyang conducted its first-known test detonation of a nuclear bomb. The agreement was struck after three-way discussions hosted by the Chinese in Beijing between the senior envoys from the United States, China and North Korea.

The U.S. negotiator, Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, said the talks, which also include Japan, South Korea and Russia, could resume as early as November or December.

Bush said the agreement does not halt the United States' effort to enforce a U.N. Security Council resolution passed in response to the North's atomic test.

That resolution calls for a ban on the sale of major arms to Pyongyang and inspection of cargo entering and leaving the country. It also calls for the freezing of assets of businesses supplying North Korea's nuclear and ballistic weapons programs, as well as restrictions on sales of luxury goods and travel bans on North Korean officials.

"We'll be sending teams to the region to work with our partners to make sure that the current United Nations Security Council resolution is enforced, but also to make sure the talks are effective, that we achieve the results we want — which is a North Korea that abandons her nuclear weapons programs and her nuclear weapons in a verifiable fashion in return for a better way forward for her people," the president said. "I'm very pleased with the progress being made in the Far East. Still got a lot of work to do."

The top Democrat on the House International Relations Committee, Rep. Tom Lantos (news, bio, voting record) of California, hailed the announcement but said the Bush administration should enter renewed talks ready to bargain.

"It is now incumbent upon all involved, including the administration, to return to these talks with maximum flexibility and creativity," Hill said in a written statement.

Casey said the U.S. would enter the new round of talks insisting they start with a September 2005 agreement forged between the six nations, in which Pyongyang pledged to scrap its nuclear programs in return for aid and security assurances.

That accord ultimately produced no progress because of a dispute over timing, with the North insisting on the aid before it halted its nuclear work and the U.S. refusing to do so.

"The United States' intention is to start with the Sept. 19 agreement and not allow the North Koreans to walk it back any further," Casey said. "It isn't 'we throw out the Sept. 19 agreement and start over.'"

___


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061031/ap_ ... s_nkorea_5

And what makes you think that President Bush, of all people, was successful here? Seems much more likely that President Hu in China was the successful one.

Aren't you going to tickle his throbbing cock with a feather?

Does this mean that the Chinese are serious about trying to resolve the North Korea nuke thing?

China is in a difficult position here.

As North Korea's only friend (and they're not even really friends. It's more like that kid you used to play with when you were six and your parents set up playdates for you, but as you grew up you realized he was a complete dork and you didn't want to be seen with him, but you still kinda feel bad and are nice to him when no one is looking), China has influence that no other country has. So everyone is looking to China to bring some reason to the North Koreans. China does not want to see a united Korea, nor does it want to see a collapse in North Korea, which would undoubtedly lead to amjor refugee crisis in China. But that does not mean that they don't want to see the current regime in North Korea gone. Kim Jong-Il is a nutcase, the Chinese know this, and he's basically fucking things up for everyone especially China, which has been working very hard to become a full-fledged member of the international community, and a good neighbor in the region.

So absolutely China does not want North Korea to have nukes. It is in everyone's interests for North Korea to not have nukes. The difference that China has with the US, South Korea, and Japan is that we would prefer to see the regime in the North gone and united with the South (under the South's current government), and the Chinese prefer a divided Korea.

Who cares if anybody is successful at bringing North Korea back to the negotiating table. That's stupid.

The important part is that George W. Bush, and the entire global community was absolutely 100% inept at keeping North Korea from developing and testing a nuclear bomb in the first place.

This entire situation with NK now is 100% retarded.

So,

=

haha

you should be getting paid for coming up with this stuff

O SHit!

Thats all good and well, but even though China has as big a stake in this as anyone, they have been extremely reluctant to use harsh words or significant leverage in dealing with the North Koreans. Perhaps they are concerned with alienating the North Koreans further, I don't know. But from a U.S. perspective, they seem to have come rather slowly around to having a willingness to act more firmly in regards to North Korea.

Yup, it's so stupid to try to get North Korea to disarm. What's the big deal about a nuclear arms race in that region of the planet? I mean, every country should have one!

I guess it all depends on what you consider "acting firmly". If acting firmly is being intractible, beligerent, and incommunicado like the Bush Administration has been for the last 6 years, then I don't think we need another major power acting that way towards North Korea.

Like I said, it's not about China's stake in the matter (well, of course it is to some extent), it's about their POSITION as the only party that can get North Korea's ear and get them to actually listen, even a little bit.

It's like this. Imagine a standoff at a house. There's a guy inside with a gun and he's threatening to kill hostages. There's a dozen cops outside with guns trained on teh windows. If they can take the gunman out, they will, he's that dangerous. But there's one cop who knows the gunman, they used to be friends years ago, and he is going to try to talk the crazy guy with the gun down so that nobody has to get shot. The cop has to walk a fine line to keep himself, his fellow officers, and the hostages safe, as well as the gunman who he doesn't want to see killed either. There are some cops outside who would LIKE to shoot and kill this gunman, they'd actually prefer it. But everyone is going to give the one cop a chance to talk sense into the crazy man long enough to get his gun away from him.

That's acting firmly, in my opinion. And it's a fuckload braver than nuking the joint and killing the gunman, hostages and a few cops in the process while you sit in the safety of the command truck two blocks away.

Yes, but its also rather like the negotiation cop saying, "Joe, it'd be really swell if you'd drop the gun. I'll buy lunch regardless of what you do to the hostages, but I'd rather you put the gun down." Unless I'm mistaken, China hasn't really made aid dependent on North Korea's actions untill very recently. This is what I'm getting at. They haven't used their leverage as North Korea's buddy as much as they could have, or at least that's the impression that I have.

To further this metaphor, China has not said, "If you don't drop the gun, throw it out the door, come out with your hands behind your head and let that big cop over there have his way with you then we're going to cut off the food and water TO THE HOSTAGES," then yeah, I guess they haven't been doing their part.

All I'm saying is that there needs to be a good cop in the "good cop-bad cop" game, or it doesn't work. If China cuts off North Korea's food, then North Korea collapses, and that is very bad for China, South Korea, and Japan. They all know that.

Are they concerned that even the threat of decreased aid will push North Korea over the top?

Well, with an unstable person like Kim Jong-Il, it might get him to stop returning phone calls, and having NO channels of communication with a lunatic is bad news.

I say we send in Borat.

I'm convinced you either can't read or simply hate responding to what people are actually saying.

If I said West Virginia was inept while trying to beat Louisville last night, would you respond by mocking the statement with something like "yeah, it was really stupid of them to try?"

if West Virginia was inept in the first half of the game, would it be valid to say it's stupid for them to even come out for the second half?

nah, but if it was down, say, 45-0 with 5 minutes left, it'd be stupid for them to leave in their starters in hopes of a come back.