Seoul/Brussels, 30 April 2007: Once North Korea shuts down its nuclear reactor, the U.S. and others must follow up with a detailed development assistance plan if the recent breakthrough in the North Korea nuclear talks is to achieve denuclearisation.

After the North Korea Nuclear Breakthrough: Compliance or Confrontation?,* the latest briefing from the International Crisis Group, examines the 13 February deal, in which Pyongyang agreed to dismantle its Yongbyon nuclear facility and admit IAEA inspectors in exchange for energy aid and security assurances. While the agreement is a vital first step, further negotiation is required to clarify many significant details. As Crisis Group outlined in November 2004, a multi-step strategy remains necessary to convince the North ultimately to give up its nuclear weapons. “Both Washington and Pyongyang needed this deal”, says Peter Beck, Crisis Group North East Asia Project Director. “North Korea was feeling a financial pinch, and the Bush administration required a diplomatic success in the wake of setbacks in the Middle East and the Iraq bloodbath. The deal is the right first step but its terms are still too vague”.

The U.S. and its partners in the Six Party Talks (at least South Korea, China and Russia – Japan may not be able to go along because of bilateral problems with the North) now need to make a detailed, comprehensive offer for the subsequent phases. In view of the North’s history of breaking agreements, they must back it with a credible threat of coercive measures if Pyongyang reneges at any stage. There are bound to be some hitches but other issues, including human rights concerns, should not be allowed to interfere with denuclearisation.

We will soon know if the North will shut down Yongbyon as agreed in exchange for the U.S. unblocking $25 million of Pyongyang’s money from a Macao bank and 50,000 tons of fuel oil from the partners. If so, sequential steps should include energy planning in exchange for declaration of the nuclear programs; energy provision in exchange for access to all facilities; infrastructure rehabilitation in exchange for agreed dismantlement of the program; aid and lifting of UN sanctions in exchange for actual dismantlement; security assurances in exchange for weapons removal and declarations on the suspected highly-enriched-uranium (HEU) program; international financial institution aid in exchange for HEU commitments; and diplomatic normalisation in exchange for verification.

“It remains unclear how serious the North is about giving up its nuclear weapons”, says Robert Templer, Asia Program Director. “To move forward, Pyongyang will need more incentives but also knowledge that the alternative is strong sanctions. A phased negotiation process that delineates specific rewards for actions is vital”.