People watch a TV live broadcast about DPRK leader Kim Jong Un meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump in Hanoi, Vietnam, February 27, 2019. /Xinhua
Editor's note: Gabriela Bernal is a Korean analyst and a Ph.D. student at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul, South Korea. The article reflects the author's opinions, and not necessarily the views of CGTN.
Recent comments made by top U.S. officials, including the president himself, suggest that America is interested in resuming dialogue with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). Bilateral talks between both countries have been stalled since the end of the 2019 Hanoi Summit and little progress has been made in achieving the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. So, how would this time be any different?
Heads first began to turn on Tuesday when U.S. President Donald Trump said he would be interested in holding a third summit with DPRK leader Kim Jong Un. "I understand they want to meet and we would certainly do that," Trump said in an interview that day. It's unclear, however, what exactly Trump means with "they want to meet" as the DPRK has made it abundantly clear recently that their intentions are leaning in the opposite direction.
On Saturday, DPRK Vice Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui said her country does "not feel any need to sit face to face with the U.S." Nevertheless, Trump says he is open to talks: "I would do [a summit] if I thought it was going to be helpful. Yeah."
Trump's Tuesday interview quickly made its way to the Republic of Korea's (ROK) top headlines, where the government has been trying to improve inter-Korean relations. Besides Trump's comments, ROK media was also covering U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun's visit to the country.
Similar to Trump, Biegun also adopted a rather positive tone regarding the DPRK. On Wednesday, he reiterated the U.S. commitment of being "fully engaged" in efforts to promote peace on the peninsula and its "ironclad" security commitment to the ROK. In a notably different approach than previous envoys, Biegun said the U.S. is "flexible" and wants to reach a "balanced agreement" with the DPRK when dialogue resumes.
A man paints a pole next to pictures of the Vietnamese, the U.S. and the DPRK national flags in Hanoi, February 25, 2019. /VCG
Unlike his boss, Biegun did address the recent comments coming from the DPRK concerning their disinterest in bilateral talks. He criticized Choe for being "locked in an old way of thinking, focused on only the negatives and what is impossible, rather than thinking creatively about what is possible."
He then went a step further by suggesting the DPRK replace her with someone else: "When Chairman Kim appoints a counterpart to me who is prepared and empowered to negotiate on these issues, they will find us ready at that very moment." Given Choe's high rank as one of the DPRK's top officials for foreign affairs, it is unclear who exactly the U.S. would be more open to negotiating with.
This is where America's words don't match up with its actions. Simply paying lip service to being "open for talks" and "interested in peace" does not actually translate into physical progress on the Korean Peninsula. If the ultimate goal of the U.S. is to denuclearize the DPRK, they must treat the issue as a priority and truly adopt the more "flexible" approach Biegun was talking about.
Instead of taking jabs at DPRK officials, the American side should build a team of negotiators who will be able to draft up a series of agreements that could get both sides back to the negotiating table. These agreements don't have to be overly complicated, but must be able to provide Pyongyang proof that Washington is negotiating with good will.
Instead of holding more presidential-level summits, negotiators must start resuming dialogue at the lower, working levels first. The U.S. side must offer the DPRK at least some concessions, mainly in the form of sanctions relief, in order for Pyongyang to even consider resuming high-level dialogue with its American counterparts. So far, the U.S. has failed to treat the DPRK as an equal negotiating partner by only making demands and not being "flexible" enough to give anything of value in return.
If Trump and Biegun are serious about wanting peace on the peninsula, they must stop talking about it and instead take action to prove it to the DPRK and the ROK. Gradual sanctions relief is the only way that: 1) the DPRK will be interested in serious negotiations with the U.S., 2) inter-Korean relations can begin improving through the implementation of joint economic projects, and 3) a viable path towards the signing of a peace treaty to end the Korean War can become attainable.
Actions speak louder than words and it's time the U.S. starts putting its money where its mouth is.
(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)