Talk:North Korea–United States relations

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tcevidanes.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Public Opinion on current handling of North Korea

I was wondering if anyone could look at what I want to add

Polling on North Korea

“Most Americans Trust U.S. Military Leaders, Not the President, to Handle North Korea.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 20 Oct. 2017,

Q: Do you think North Korea does or does not pose a threat to the United States? IF DOES POSE THREAT: Would you say it's a serious threat, or not serious?

Response	Percentage
Threat-serious	70%
Threat-not serious	13%
Does not pose threat	14%
No opinion	3%

Untitled

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

Or better, United States-North Korea relations. DanKeshet

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)

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]

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.wiki.x.io/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.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• DMZ Crossing 2015.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:44, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Public opinion section

The 'public opinion section' seems like a real mess! Lots of {{Citation Needed}} tags. Also, the section contains tables extracted from a single survey. I suggest rephrasing the most important data into readable prose, instead of copy-pasting them. --Mhhossein ^talk 07:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)