Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Six Party Talks
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Six Party Talks

1,853
views

Published on


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,853
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
23
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • 1994: in return for US help building 2 power-producing nuclear reactors2000: If the US doesn’t compensate for loss of electricity due to delays in building the promised nuclear power plantsJune 2001: If the US doesn’t resume contacts aimed at normalizing relations between the two countries
  • Sept. 2004: Accused US of “hostile policies”Sept. 2005: US also pledges not to invade and to respect North Korea’s sovereignty
  • Oct 2006: Drawing unanimous condemnation from the UN Security Council
  • March 2010: Killed 46 sailors
  • South – they conducted military exercises, but they were aimed away from the North.
  • Sept. 2005: in return, NK would receive food and energy assistance from other membersDocuments – 18,000 page document detailing production records of nuclear program (from NK to US)
  • To signal that the Obama administration hasn’t abandoned the goal of NK’s denuclearization
  • This would entail an unwillingness to negotiate with North Korea at allPros: They clearly wouldn’t be reaching those goals; hopefully this would prompt them to change some of their actions if the US is unwilling to budge.
  • Almost a continuation of the current policy
  • Almost a continuation of the current policy
  • Transcript

    • 1. Should the U.S. press for a return to the Six Party Talks?
      Meredith Lamberti
    • 2. What are the Six Party Talks?
      • Members:
      • 3. United States
      • 4. Russia
      • 5. Japan
      • 6. China
      • 7. North Korea
      • 8. South Korea
      • 9. Goal: to end the North Korean nuclear program through a negotiation process.
    • Timeline
      • 1994: North Korea/U.S. agreement
      • 10. North Korea pledges to freeze and eventually dismantle nuclear weapons in return for 2 power-producing nuclear reactors
      • 11. 1998: North Korea fires a missile over Japan, into the Pacific Ocean
      • 12. 1999: North Korea pledges to freeze long-range missile tests
      • 13. 2000: North Korea threatens to restart nuclear program
      • 14. June 2001: North Korea warns it will reconsider lifting the freeze on missile testing
      • 15. July 2001: US State Department reports that North Korea is developing long-range missiles.
      • 16. Jan. 2002: President Bush labels North Korea, Iran, & Iraq an “Axis of Evil”
    • Timeline
      • Sept. 2002: North Korea pledges with Japan to extend the freeze on missile testing
      • 17. Oct. 2002: North Korea tells US delegation it has a second covert nuclear program
      • 18. Jan. 2003: North Korea says it will withdraw from Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty
      • 19. April 2003: US, China, and North Korea announce talks in Beijing
      • 20. April 2003: North Korea announces it has nuclear weapons and may test, export, or use them depending upon US actions
      • 21. Aug. 2003: North Korea joins the first round of Six Party Talks
      • 22. Feb. 2004: Second round of Six Party Talks
      • 23. May 2004: North Korea reaffirms it’s missile testing freeze in talks with Japan
    • Timeline
      • June 2004: Third round of Six Party Talks
      • 24. Sept. 2004: North Korea threatens not to attend the fourth round of talks
      • 25. Feb. 2005: North Korea announces it has nuclear weapons
      • 26. May 2005: North Korea fires short-range missile into Sea of Japan
      • 27. July – Aug. 2005: Fourth round of Six Party Talks. North Korea was in attendance
      • 28. Sept. 2005: North Korea pledges to dismantle nuclear programs in return for pledges of energy assistance.
      • 29. Nov. 2005: Fifth round of Six Party Talks
    • Timeline
      • July 2006: North Korea fires 7 missiles into Sea of Japan
      • 30. Oct. 2006: North Korea declares that it conducted first nuclear test
      • 31. Feb. 2007: Sixth round of Six Party Talks
      • 32. July 2007: North Korea closes down a nuclear reactor after the US returns the transfer of previously frozen funds
      • 33. July 2007: Seventh round of Six Party Talks
      • 34. Sept. 2007: North Korea pledges to disclose all nuclear activities and disable nuclear programs by end of 2007
      • 35. Jan 2008: North Korea fails to fulfill its promise to disclose all nuclear programs
    • Timeline
      • June 2008: North Korea destroys the cooling tower at Yongbyon nuclear facility
      • 36. July 2008: Eighth round of Six Party Talks
      • 37. Sept 2008: North Korea announces plans to restart nuclear programs and bans international inspectors from Yongbyon
      • 38. Oct 2008: President Bush removes North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism
      • 39. Oct. 2008: North Korea resumes tearing down Yongbyon and removes ban on international inspectors
      • 40. April 2009: North Korea launches a long-range missile over Japan. The UN Security Council condemns the launch and broadens sanctions against the country
    • Timeline
      • April 2009: North Korea expels inspectors from the country and vows to never return to Six Party Talks
      • 41. May 2009: North Korea explodes nuclear device underground
      • 42. Jan. 2010: North Korea calls for end to hostile relations with the US and vows to strive for a nuclear-free peninsula
      • 43. Feb. 2010: North Korea declares 4 areas near disputed sea border with South Korea to be naval firing zones
      • 44. March 2010: Sinking of South Korean warship
      • 45. July 2010: US announces new sanctions on North Korea in response to warship sinking
    • Timeline
      • Aug. 2010: Kim Jong-il visits China; both countries push to resume Six Party Talks
      • 46. Sept. 2010: President Obama signs new sanctions against North Korea into law.
      • 47. Nov. 2010: North Korea shows visiting American nuclear scientist a new, secretly-built uranium enriching facility
      • 48. Nov. 2010: Cross-border clash between North and South Korea
      • 49. South: North fired on border island; resulted in death of 2 marines
      • 50. North: South began firing first
      • 51. One of the worst clashes between the two countries since the Korean War
    • Six Party Talks
      Accomplishments
      Pitfalls
      • Sept. 2005 Agreement
      • 52. North Korea pledges to eventually abandon quest to become nuclear power
      • 53. Denuclearization Plan
      • 54. Feb. 2007
      • 55. Yongbyon plant
      • 56. 2008: release of documents
      • 57. North Korea has continued to fire missiles over/near Japan
      • 58. Stop-and-go negotiations; unpredictability of North Korea
      • 59. Multiple missile tests
      • 60. Document left out details
      • 61. Warship sinking
      • 62. November clashes with South Korea
    • US Stance
      • Since North Korea walked out of 2009 talks, President Obama has pursued negotiations with the other parties
      • 63. Doubts that multi-lateral talks will produce results; bilateral talks between the US and North Korea may produce the best/quickest results
      • 64. Dec. 1: “We are not interested in talks, and talks are no substitute for having North Korea fulfills its international obligations, meet its commitments and cease provocations…As North Korea demonstrates a willingness to do that, then we will act accordingly” (State Department spokesman Philip Crowley)
      • 65. Until North Korea shows a responsible attitude toward recent provocation, the stalled talks will not be resumed
    • Option One
      The U.S. should push to NOT return to Six Party Talks
      Pros:
      • North Korea needs to be held responsible for its actions
      • 66. Country has a past of aggressive action prompting negotiations; this isn’t a trend we should continue
      • 67. North Korea’s end goals in the talks are a pledge of nonaggression from the US and aid from other parties
      Cons:
      • Doesn’t help anyone achieve their goals, not just North Korea
      • 68. Kim Jong-il is already unpredictable; no guarantee that not negotiating with him make the country take responsibility or change their actions
      • 69. Results in a standstill where nothing will change
    • Option Two
      The U.S. shouldn’t push for a return to the talks, but also shouldn’t rule out the option of talks in the future
      Pros:
      • Places pressure on North Korea to take responsibility for their actions and change their behavior, but offers an incentive if they do
      • 70. Leave open the option for bi-lateral as well as multi-lateral talks
      • 71. South Korea isn’t interested in resuming the talks; China is
      Cons:
      • Under what circumstances would the U.S. be willing to return to the talks?
      • 72. Not pushing for a return to the Six Party Talks but holding bi-lateral talks with North Korea could undermine the other countries in the group
    • Option Three
      The U.S. should push for an immediate return to the talks
      Pros:
      • Could show that the U.S. is serious about reaching a solution
      • 73. There is no guarantee that North Korea will change their behavior without a negotiation process
      • 74. Multi-lateral talks will decrease North Korea’s feeling that the U.S. and South Korea are teaming up against them
      Cons:
      • Continuation of past trends where North Korea acts aggressively and the other parties make concessions
      • 75. South Korea has no interest in returning to Six Party Talks this early
      • 76. The success of the previous meetings of the Six Party Talks is questionable
    • My Decision – Option Two
      • Gives the United States the most options
      • 77. North Korea can be unpredictable; gives us the option to pursue multi or bi-lateral talks depending on how the climate changes
      • 78. Puts some pressure on North Korea to change their behavior without either seeming like we are bending to their will or refusing to negotiate