Senior officials from North and South Korea, China and the United States reassemble in Geneva April 24 for the fifth round of four-party talks aimed at replacing the existing 1953 Korean War armistice with a permanent peace treaty. The odds of a breakthrough appear slim, however, given North Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Kim Gye Gwan's prediction after round four that the talks would remain "empty" until Pyongyang's demands regarding the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the South are met. The U.S. and South Korea have steadfastly (and correctly) insisted that the U.S. military presence is for Washington and Seoul alone to decide: U.S. forces are not a bargaining chip.
Despite North Korean intransigence, some limited progress has been made at the previous meetings. After much prodding, North Korea agreed at the third meeting to the establishment of two subcommittees, one to discuss replacing the armistice with a peace regime and the other to formulate possible confidence-building measures. At the fourth meeting, all agreed on subcommittee procedures and ideas for tension reduction on the Korean Peninsula -- including the establishment of a humanitarian corridor and a new communications channel -- were raised (but not agreed upon). The question is, where will they go from here?
It is time to put significant confidence-building measures on the table. For example, since the U.S. and South Korea have little to hide when it comes to their combined military capabilities -- indeed, a greater awareness of this combined strength serves the cause of deterrence -- and have no plans to invade the North, why not offer Pyongyang an "open skies" aerial observation agreement to permit mutual reconnaissance over each other's territories? Alternatively, third-party reconnaissance platforms operated by a neutral nation or organization could monitor troop disposition and movements, with the information then shared by both sides.