Kim Jong-un tries diplomacy

There are things wrong with the U.S./North Korea nuclear deal announced in parallel by both sides (but not published) today:

• The North Koreans are unreliable and unlikely to implement the agreement fully.
• Badly needed food was withheld from the North Korean population to get Pyongyang to agree.

The United States does not generally use humanitarian assistance as leverage, and I suppose we’ll deny that is what we did in this instance. But we did.

Still, the agreement is a lot better than no agreement at all, which was the alternative.  The agreement allegedly gets North Korea (DPRK) to suspend uranium enrichment and begin a moratorium on nuclear and long-range missile tests.  The Americans say it includes International Atomic Energy Agency verification of the enrichment moratorium and disablement of a worrisome plutonium-production reactor at Yongbyon (Pyongyang failed to mention that).

What did the U.S. give to get?  The DPRK statement includes this:

The U.S. reaffirmed that it no longer has hostile intent toward the DPRK and that it is prepared to take steps to improve the bilateral relations in the spirit of mutual respect for sovereignty and equality….

Once the six-party talks are resumed, priority will be given to the discussion of issues concerning the lifting of sanctions on the DPRK and provision of light water reactors.

Both the DPRK and the U.S. affirmed that it is in mutual interest to ensure peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, improve the relations between the DPRK and the U.S., and push ahead with the denuclearization through dialogue and negotiations.

What this sounds like to me is the beginnings of a broader quid pro quo: Washington accepts (maybe even recognizes?) the DPRK and they agree to give up nuclear weapons but keep their enrichment technology. I’ll believe the light water reactors when I see them.  Odious though the DPRK regime unquestionably is, if anything like this results we can count ourselves ahead of where we would have gotten without an agreement.

Do I think this will help us with Iran?  Unlikely, and only if we are willing to do the same kind of deal:  they keep enrichment technology, allow IAEA verification, but give up on nuclear weapons.  We give up on regime change.  Are we willing to do that?