Breakdown of North Korea, U.S. nuclear talks in Stockholm: Analysis with John Delury
- 5 years ago
The first North Korea, U.S. denuclearization talks in more than seven months broke down in Stockholm this past weekend.
Immediately after the eight and a half hour long meeting, North Korea said the talks broke down entirely because the U.S. had not discarded its old and came to the table empty-handed.
The U.S., on the other hand, said the two sides had good discussions that it intends to build on in two weeks - which Pyeongyang denied a few hours later.
Are we in for another hiatus or is this a game tactic? Live in the studio with me is John Delury, Professor at the Graduate School of International Studies at Yonsei University.
My first question to you, John, is - was this more or less than you expected from this Stockholm meeting? I mean, is this an utter failure - there is only so much you can expect from a one Saturday working-level meeting.
Based on the conflicting remarks about their eight-hour meeting by the North Korean and U.S. negotiators, what do think happened behind closed doors? There had been various speculations as to what Stephen Biegun and his team were bringing to the table, but what cards do you believe were being played in Stockholm this time?
The breakdown raises the possibility North Korea will intensify its provocations, days after testing a new medium-range ballistic missile.
But the North’s decision could also amount to a negotiating tactic meant to raise pressure on Washington. Will North Korea and the U.S. meet again in two weeks?
Based on the pace of the talks, how do you think the two sides will be able to make the North Korean leader's end of the year deadline?
With the impeachment drama unfolding in Washington, do you believe it will be a factor in North Korea, U.S. nuclear talks?
Last but not least, South Korea's role in this process from here on forth
Immediately after the eight and a half hour long meeting, North Korea said the talks broke down entirely because the U.S. had not discarded its old and came to the table empty-handed.
The U.S., on the other hand, said the two sides had good discussions that it intends to build on in two weeks - which Pyeongyang denied a few hours later.
Are we in for another hiatus or is this a game tactic? Live in the studio with me is John Delury, Professor at the Graduate School of International Studies at Yonsei University.
My first question to you, John, is - was this more or less than you expected from this Stockholm meeting? I mean, is this an utter failure - there is only so much you can expect from a one Saturday working-level meeting.
Based on the conflicting remarks about their eight-hour meeting by the North Korean and U.S. negotiators, what do think happened behind closed doors? There had been various speculations as to what Stephen Biegun and his team were bringing to the table, but what cards do you believe were being played in Stockholm this time?
The breakdown raises the possibility North Korea will intensify its provocations, days after testing a new medium-range ballistic missile.
But the North’s decision could also amount to a negotiating tactic meant to raise pressure on Washington. Will North Korea and the U.S. meet again in two weeks?
Based on the pace of the talks, how do you think the two sides will be able to make the North Korean leader's end of the year deadline?
With the impeachment drama unfolding in Washington, do you believe it will be a factor in North Korea, U.S. nuclear talks?
Last but not least, South Korea's role in this process from here on forth