Quote Originally Posted by cellmatrix View Post
We talked to Mao, we talked to Breshnev, Kruschev, trying to see if any agreements could be made, and with those same goals, Albright talked to Kim. Talking is not appeasement, it is the smart thing to try.
Albright talked to Kim, and Kim lied. The Agreed Framework was a failure. They cheated. What's the point of negotiating another deal when you know they're not going to keep their side of the deal? North Korea has no problem with lying to us and breaking their promises to us. Any agreement we reach with them will be worthless.

This is the main reason for the six-party talks. China has much more leverage over them than we do, and North Korea is going to be more reluctant to **** off China (along with Russia, South Korea, and Japan) by cheating on a future agreement.

A second reason for the six-party talks is that when left alone, China and South Korea tend to pursue appeasement, which counteracts our negotiating leverage. In one-on-one talks, we try to tie incentives to results. Meanwhile, China and South Korea freely send money and food to North Korea.

We are trying to talk to North Korea. We're ready to sit down for the six-party talks, and we are willing to have one-on-one talks with North Korea during the six-party talks. The last I heard, North Korea was refusing to join until we stop interfering with their program of distributing counterfeit US currency.