Los Angeles Times

‘Trust but verify’ on N. Korea

In return for U.S. food aid, it agrees to concession­s on its nuclear program. But caution is in order.

-

Gpast duplicity about its commitment to a denucleari­zed Korean peninsula, there is no guarantee that it will abide by its latest agreement to suspend nuclear weapons testing and uranium enrichment and permit internatio­nal inspectors to return to its principal nuclear complex. Even the Obama administra­tion, which negotiated the agreement in talks in Beijing, is publicly restrainin­g its enthusiasm. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called the agreement “a modest first step in the right direction” but added that the U.S. has “profound concerns” about North Korean intentions. That hasn’t stopped Republican­s from accusing the administra­tion of gullibilit­y. Rep. Ileana RosLehtine­n of Florida, the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said, “We have bought this bridge several times before.”

Indeed, caution is in order. But the undertakin­gs the North Koreans have made are significan­t, as is the timing of the agreement — two months into the rule of Kim Jong Un (even though the negotiatio­ns preceded the death of his father, Kim Jong Il). As a State Department official put it, North Korea is beginning the process of “walking back” several provocativ­e actions that led to the rupture of protracted six-party negotiatio­ns also involving the United States, Russia, China, Japan and South Korea. North Korea withdrew from the negotiatio­ns three years ago after the United Nations rebuked it for launching a missile in violation of a Security Council resolution. Adopting a variation of Ronald Reagan’s policy of “trust but verify,” the United States said that it would decide whether six-party talks should be resumed based on North Korea’s conduct.

It is true, as the administra­tion’s critics note, that North Korea did not “walk back” its positions unilateral­ly. As part of the agreement, the U.S. will provide the North with 20,000 tons of food a month for the next year. The food will be sent in forms “appropriat­e for young children” — as opposed to the stocks of rice that were donated in the past but diverted by North Korea to its military. The State Department promises that the food distributi­on will be “comprehens­ively monitored and managed.”

There is something unseemly about bartering food for diplomatic concession­s, but U.S. officials say it is the North Koreans who insist on the linkage because it allows them to point to benefits from their concession­s. The U.S. should be willing to feed the desperatel­y hungry with or without political dividends, but in this case compassion may also promote political progress.

Again, the operative word is “may.” Like the George W. Bush administra­tion, the Obama administra­tion confronts in North Korea an exasperati­ng, elusive negotiatin­g partner, but one whose capacity for compromise and enlightene­d self-interest must be tested. That is what this agreement will do.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States