Quotes of the Day

As the third round of talks on North Korea's nuclear program ended inconclusively in Beijing on Saturday, this diplomatic soap opera was beginning to look like a tired re-run. The latest episode was not without a dramatic plot twist: chief U.S. negotiator James Kelly proposed a plan under which North Korea would dismantle its nuclear weapons in phases in return for massive aid and a provisional guarantee that the U.S. would not attack. But the denouement seemed utterly predictable: the North was in no hurry to bite, vowing to study the proposal in due time, and both sides came away empty-handed. A senior U.S. official close to the talks said they were "not unfriendly," but added, "The results would have to be described as mixed."

Kelly's proposal did show some early promise: it marks a significant softening of the Bush Administration's demand that Pyongyang completely and irreversibly dismantle its nuclear programs before receiving benefits. But Pyongyang countered by demanding more aid for fewer concessions. As the U.S. official put it: "They want to offer as little as possible for the highest possible price."

One reason for the impasse is that both sides stand to gain by holding out until after November's U.S. presidential election. Pyongyang hopes to win a sweeter deal from John Kerry, the presumptive Democratic nominee who favors bilateral talks with the North. And the Bush Administration believes re-election would give it a freer hand to deal firmly with the North, possibly through tougher sanctions. Until then, though, Bush needs to appear open to negotiation so that allies and domestic voters alike will not carp that war is his primary tool of foreign policy. "It seems both sides don't want to compromise," says Lee Jung Hoon, a political scientist at Yonsei University in Seoul. "But neither wants to be seen as the culprit for the lack of progress."

• John Larkin
• In Beijing, the U.S. and North Korea once again agree to disagree