NORTH KOREA: The first six-nation talks on North Korea ended yesterday with mixed signals about the future. North Korea warned that it might go nuclear and test a bomb, refused to sign a formal communique agreed by all parties, and gave only a vague commitment to meet again in two months.
It later issued a truculent statement saying the US had behaved in a "brigandish way" by insisting that North Korea disarm first before meeting its demands.
Deputy Foreign Minister, Mr Kim Yong-il, said the US had rejected its request to resume heavy oil supplies and expand humanitarian food aid, sign a non-aggression pact, complete building nuclear reactors and establish diplomatic ties in return for the North scrapping its nuclear programme, allowing inspections, dismantling nuclear sites and stopping missile exports.
The host country, China, however strove to present an upbeat account of the three-day talks in Beijing.
"The talks saw progress and also differences, but all parties thought the talks were beneficial," Chinese Vice Foreign Minister, Mr Wang Yi, told a closing ceremony at which he read out a six-point agreement to applause from all delegations.
South Korea also drew comfort from the fact that the talks will continue but the meeting is certain to sharpen the differences between hawks and doves in Washington.
The hawks will be pleased that the North Koreans repeated in front of the other delegates what they told US negotiator Assistant Secretary of State, Mr James Kelly, a year ago in Pyongyang.
The North admitted they have extracted enough plutonium from spent nuclear-reactor fuel rods to make five or six more bombs and had the means to deliver them.
However, Mr Kim retracted an earlier admission that it had a second nuclear weapons programme based on enriching uranium.
"In this regard we made it clear that we have no secret nuclear programme but we are entitled to have weapons more powerful than those based on enriched uranium," he said. Last year's admissions drove a final nail into the 1994 Agreed Framework which President Clinton had negotiated. Under this deal North Korea agreed to freeze its nuclear programme under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in return for ½ a million tonnes of oil a year and multi-billion dollar light water reactor plant.
Mr Clinton also provided a letter stating that the US would not undertake any aggressive actions. Since Mr Kelly's visit last autumn, North Korea has expelled the IAEA inspectors and withdrawn from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
The US has stopped the oil shipments The and the nuclear reactor project, which was being financed by South Korea and Japan, is close to being abandoned.
I don't think they can be trusted," said Mr Mohammed El-Baradei, head of the IAEA in Vienna.
"However, we would like to work with them and bring them back to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)."
"I don't think any settlement should be reached without a full, verified dismantlement of their nuclear capability," he said.
"I think North Korea has to understand that they cannot blackmail and they need to come back to [the NPT]."
He said the US should not reward the North by offering more carrots to persuade them to do what they had repeatedly committed themselves to doing.
"It sends a signal that if you want to protect yourself, if you want to get economic concessions, build a nuclear weapon.
"I think it sends a horrible message, that and the way we treat North Korea will be very important for the future wannabes," he said.
Like Iraq, if North Korea runs circles around the IAEA, it will marginalise the organisation's contribution to controlling nuclear weapons.
This is the view of hawks in Washington but the doves believe the Bush administration is making a mistake by being too tough as this can only end in a pre-emptive strike or another Iraq scenario.
There was speculation in Beijing that North Korea might carry out a nuclear test on September 9th, the anniversary of the formation of the state.