Talk:North Korean-American relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	WikiProject Korea invites you to join in improving Wikipedia articles related to Korea. Community:  Discussion - Notice board Guidelines:  Manual of Style - Naming conventions Navigation:  Key topics - Browse - Portal
	Korea-related tasks: purge Create North Korea South Korea Korea North Korean Cities South Korea-India relations Districts of Seoul National Institute of Korean Language Wanghusa Garakgukgi Korea YMCA Ji Cheongcheon Battle at Luozigou Battle at Dadianzi Battle of Bongohdong Battle of Samdunja Sampo Waeran Byeongin Yangyo Goguryeo-Wei War Lelang Conquest Xienpei Campaign Guda-guk Galsa-guk Gaema-guk Hangin-guk Chunchong King Taejong Jeamri Jinju fortress Improve North-South relations Sports Tourism Communications North Korean Missile Test (2006) Law Culture Politics Nat'l Assembly South Korea-U.S. relations Gangpeh Jirisan Joseonsa Pyeonsuhoe Korean architecture Gaya confederacy Samhan Goryeo Namsan (Gyeongju) Nangnang nation Korean royal court cuisine Bangjja Calligraphy Donghak Peasant Revolution Righteous army Korean Liberation Army Independence movement Culture of Korea Korean martial arts Korean swords Korean nationalism Korean knife Korean armour (see also Pages needing attention and Stubs) Images North Korean famine Kim Tschang Yeul Dong-A University Pohang Songguk-ri Japanese General Government Building, Seoul Jirisan Japanese invasions of Korea (1592-1598) History of Korea Dangun Korean pottery Three Kingdoms of Korea Mongol invasions of Korea Goryeo-Khitan Wars Goguryeo-Sui Wars Military history of Korea List of monarchs of Korea Prehistory of Korea Translate Korean Wikipedia articles: ko:이범석 (1900년) ko:유관순 ko:이봉창 ko:박헌영 ko:김원봉 Japanese Wikipedia articles: 第一次日韓協約 第三次日韓協約 Discuss Portal nominations Votes Complete List (edit)

---

This article should be part of a larger, US policy toward North Korea article. --Uncle Ed

Or better, United States-North Korea relations. DanKeshet

Contents 1 Revert 2 POV 3 U.S. Misled Allies About Nuclear Export 4 Bush administration on North Korea 5 Six-party talks information

[edit] Revert

I suggest we revert to this version (before addition of PD text). I don't think the new text (at the top of the article, notabene) is suitable for Wikipedia. Maybe we can take some information from there, but I consider this POV. Kokiri 22:08, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The original version was shallow, uninformative, and also slanted in its own way. If you think it is POV, state how. Attacking the source is not an option. Flag and explain and we'll try to make it un-POV. Similar text was copied at Sino-American relations at one time. --Jiang 11:18, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Fair point. I will try to state reasons.

The United States supports the peaceful reunification of Korea--divided following World War II--on terms acceptable to the Korean people and recognizes that the future of the Korean Peninsula is primarily a matter for them to decide. The U.S. believes that a constructive and serious dialogue between the authorities of North and South Korea (Republic of Korea, R.O.K.) is necessary to resolve the issues on the peninsula.

This, to me, sounds like a propaganda leaflet. The actual policies seem (IMHO) to contrast this.

On his inauguration in February 1998, R.O.K. President Kim Dae-jung enunciated a new policy of engagement with North Korea dubbed "the Sunshine Policy." The policy had three fundamental principles: no tolerance of provocations from the North, no intention to absorb the North, and the separation of political cooperation from economic cooperation. Private sector overtures would be based on commercial and humanitarian considerations. The use of government resources would entail reciprocity. This policy eventually set the stage for the first (and only) inter-Korean summit, held in Pyongyang June 13-15, 2000. The summit produced a Joint Declaration noting that the two governments "have agreed to resolve the question of reunification independently and through the joint efforts of the Korean people.

Now, firstly there's an article on the Sunshine Policy (I have linked it now), so there's quite some overlapping. Secondly, this is South Korean- North Korean relations, not exactly what the title of the article suggests. Thirdly, the statement given at the end was merely repeated in 2000.

The nuclear issue (should be) is covered at North Korea nuclear weapons program. This issue makes up much of the PD text...

North Korea policy under George W. Bush [...]

No mentioning of the Axis of Evil...

In 2002, the Administration also became aware that North Korea was developing a uranium enrichment program for nuclear weapons purposes.

They actually accused North Korea first (in public). And breached the 1994 agreements unilaterally. Note, I'm probably not NPOV here, but the text consistently tells it from one (biased) source.

During the August 2003 round of six-party talks, North Korea agreed to the eventual elimination of its nuclear programs if the United States were first willing to sign a bilateral "nonaggression treaty" and meet various other conditions, including the provision of substantial amounts of aid and normalization of relations. The North Korean proposal was unacceptable to the United States, which insisted on a multilateral resolution to the issue, and refused to provide benefits or incentives for North Korea to abide by its previous international obligations.

A non-agression treaty is unacceptable to the US... Maybe some historical background (such as the US couldn't sign an official end to the Korean War...) wouldn't go amiss?

The current text reads like a propaganda leaflet to me. Maybe not every text is suitable for copy/paste into Wikipedia..., but more crucially, I think most of what the text mentions is already covered in Wikipedia, just in other articles. --Kokiri 22:19, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I say go ahead and delete whatever is not relevant, but some stuff, such as "U.S.-D.P.R.K. talks beginning in June 1993 led, in October 1994, to the conclusion of the U.S.-D.P.R.K. Agreed Framework. The Agreed Framework called for the following steps..." is relevant and should be kept. Also keep in ming that it's good to leave some context. The axis of evil comment is mentioned by wikipedia, and that text should be incorporated into the relevant section. It's better to fix than to delete. Feel free to add a neutrality dispute header in the meantime. --Jiang 22:52, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I prefer not to do this edit. I don't consider myself in a neutral enough position here. Maybe somebody else? --Kokiri 23:32, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

The article needs to be updated to cover recent 6-party peace talks in China. --Jiang 11:19, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I merged the two articles that were here, but do not have enough information to do the 6-party peace talks in China information. --Wolf530 19:46, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] POV

"President Bush has made clear that the United States has no intention to invade North Korea. He also has stressed that the United States seeks a peaceful end to North Korea's nuclear program in cooperation with North Korea's neighbors, who are most concerned with the threat to regional stability and security it poses. The U.S. goal is the complete, verifiable, and irreversible elimination of North Korea's nuclear weapons program. North Korea's neighbors have joined the United States in supporting a nuclear weapons-free Korean Peninsula."

I think that is clearly POVed, at least the way of saying it, sounds like US propaganda.The DPRK may have a corrupt and closed regime, but that doesn't mean that Wikipedia should just repeat the USA's position; we all know they are all but peaceseekers.

I rewrote the paragraph somewhat. In it's original form, it basically seemed to be taking the position that the sincerity of the Bush Administration on this issue was accepted by all when in reality many critcs doubt the administrations sincerity on this issue. In order to be more NPOV, I made it clear that we are talking about claims of the Bush and his administration and not completely accepted facts as they are not. -Cab88 22:58, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. Misled Allies About Nuclear Export

This article give an insightful observation why Condoleezza Rice is travelling to East Asia. Apparently, US government played a trick on them by reporting to them that North Korea sold weopons directly to Libya. When US allies discovered the omission, they were apparently not impressed. Anyway, its a nice read. [1]

[edit] Bush administration on North Korea

The outline of events in 2002 is a bit misleading if the series of events are incorrect. Bush's state of the union address took place on january 29, 2002. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_of_evil when did the united states discover that North Korea was involved in a unranium enrichment program. Secretary of State pushed North Korea on a visit in October, 2002, (source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2604437.stm#2002), but when did these suspicions become apparent to the united states? a more specific outline of events with dates needs to be applied to this part of the article, specifically if the linear history of events are incorrectly listed.

[edit] Six-party talks information

To suggest the US were the original suggestors of 6-party talks in 2003 is clearly incorrect. Multiparty talks existed before (e.g. 4-party talks), and the idea of including the six relevant countries in such multiparty talks for denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula were discussed as long ago as the late 1980s. Overall, the article needs a lot of reworking which I can improve on at a later date, but it definitely needs a more 'professional' and informative makeover. Jsw663 23:03, 25 September 2006 (UTC)