Nuclear Negotiations with North Korea: In Brief

Summary

Some analysts have suggested that, in response to the accelerated pace of North Korea’s nuclear and missile testing programs and its continued threats against the United States and U.S. allies, the United States might engage in an aggressive negotiation strategy. Since the early 1990s, successive U.S. Presidents have faced the question of whether to negotiate with the North Korean government to halt Pyongyang’s nuclear program and ambitions. Questions for policymakers include the utility, timing, scope, and goals of diplomatic talks with Pyongyang.

The United States has engaged in four major sets of formal nuclear and missile negotiations with North Korea: the bilateral Agreed Framework (1994-2002), the bilateral missile negotiations (1996-2000), the multilateral Six-Party Talks (2003-2009), and the bilateral Leap Day Deal (2012). In general, the formula for these negotiations has been for North Korea to halt, and in some cases disable, its nuclear or missile programs in return for economic and diplomatic incentives. While some of the negotiations have shown progress, North Korea has continued to advance its nuclear and missile programs.

Congress possesses a number of tools to influence whether and how intensely the Administration pursues negotiations with North Korea. The tools include oversight hearings, resolutions expressing congressional sentiment, restrictions on the use of funds for negotiations and the required diplomatic team through the appropriations process, and legislation that attaches or relaxes conditions and requirements for implementation of agreements.

Past Congresses have influenced U.S.-DPRK talks and in several cases affected the implementation of the negotiated agreements. Congress’s role has been particularly significant in negotiations over the provision of U.S. energy and humanitarian assistance to North Korea through the appropriations process.

This report summarizes past nuclear and missile negotiations between the United States and North Korea, also known by its formal name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), and highlights some of the lessons and implications that can be drawn from these efforts. Other CRS products address various aspects of U.S. policy toward North Korea, including those listed below.

CRS Report R41259, North Korea: U.S. Relations, Nuclear Diplomacy, and Internal Situation, coordinated by Emma Chanlett-Avery

CRS In Focus IF10467, Possible U.S. Policy Approaches to North Korea, by Emma Chanlett-Avery and Mark E. Manyin

CRS Report R41438, North Korea: Legislative Basis for U.S. Economic Sanctions, by Dianne E. Rennack

CRS Report R40095, Foreign Assistance to North Korea, by Mark E. Manyin and Mary Beth D. Nikitin

CRS Report R44994, The North Korean Nuclear Challenge: Military Options and Issues for Congress, coordinated by Kathleen J. McInnis

CRS Report R44912, North Korean Cyber Capabilities: In Brief, by Emma Chanlett-Avery et al.

CRS In Focus IF10472, North Korea’s Nuclear and Ballistic Missile Programs, by Steven A. Hildreth and Mary Beth D. Nikitin