In April 1996, President Bill Clinton and South Korean President Kim Young-sam met on Jeju Island and proposed four-way peace talks with North Korea and China. This offer—coming only a year and a half after the signing of the bilateral Agreed Framework deal between Washington and Pyongyang—marked the first and only time since 1954 that the United States actively and publicly proposed peace discussions with North Korea.

Despite having sought peace talks with the United States for decades, North Korea took over a year to respond. When it finally engaged, it demanded U.S. troop withdrawal from the Korean Peninsula be put on the agenda. The U.S. side rejected this demand, and the talks sputtered. Several months later, North Korea launched a Taepodong rocket over Japan, causing the focus of the talks to shift toward its missile program and discussions of peace to fall by the wayside.

On March 17, USIP hosted a discussion of the Four Party Talks, including why the United States decided to propose these talks after 40 years of disengaging from North Korea, why the talks failed, and what lessons these talks may have for future attempts at peace discussions. The event included a panel of three leading Korea experts who served as part of the U.S. delegation during the Four Party Talks.

Continue the conversation on Twitter with #4PartyTalksUSIP

Panelists

Frank Aum, moderator
Senior Expert, North Korea, U.S. Institute of Peace

Robert Carlin 
Nonresident Fellow, Stimson Center; former Chief of the Northeast Asia Division, Bureau of Intelligence and Research, Department of State

Philip Yun 
President and Chief Executive Officer, World Affairs Council of Northern California; former Senior Policy Advisor for the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia, Department of State

Chip Gregson 
Senior Advisor, Avascent International; former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Affairs, Department of Defense

Related Publications

North Korean Troops in Russia Show Putin Is Doubling Down on Ukraine War

North Korean Troops in Russia Show Putin Is Doubling Down on Ukraine War

Tuesday, October 29, 2024

After signing a mutual defense pledge in June, North Korea and Russia relations appear to be deepening. U.S. officials confirmed last week that North Korean troops, including elite special forces, were in Russia for training and potentially combat operations against Ukraine. This represents a “dangerous expansion of the war,” according to U.S. and NATO officials. It could also have serious ramifications for peace and security on the Korean Peninsula. South Korea is concerned that the deployment of North Korean troops could provide them valuable combat and technical experience. Meanwhile, China is watching closely to see what this means for its influence over North Korea and the implications for broader geopolitical tensions with the West.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

How Enhancing Civil Nuclear Energy Safety Can Benefit the Korean Peninsula

How Enhancing Civil Nuclear Energy Safety Can Benefit the Korean Peninsula

Wednesday, October 16, 2024

At the 28th Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2023, the United States and South Korea, alongside 18 like-minded countries, endorsed the “Declaration to Triple Nuclear Energy.” By joining the initiative, the countries agreed to augment domestic nuclear energy production to fight climate change and to promote the safe application of civil nuclear energy at home and abroad. As tensions on the Korean Peninsula rise and U.S.-North Korea and inter-Korean relations remain at a stalemate, however, this commitment could also inspire potential engagement with North Korea beyond traditional security dynamics.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

How Northeast Asian Geopolitics Impact Peace on the Korean Peninsula

How Northeast Asian Geopolitics Impact Peace on the Korean Peninsula

Tuesday, September 17, 2024

Amid today’s renewed great power competition, the Korean Peninsula has entered a new Cold War winter without having enjoyed the spring of the previous post-Cold War era. During the post-Cold War period, the South Korean and U.S. governments anticipated that the seismic changes occurring in Europe would be replicated on the Korean Peninsula. However, over the past 30 years, none of their main policy goals regarding North Korea — such as reform and opening, denuclearization, peace settlement and unification — were fulfilled due to several factors in Northeast Asian geopolitics that favored the status quo. The enduring nature of these factors means the United States and South Korea should adjust their North Korea strategy and goals to enhance peace and security on the Korean Peninsula more effectively.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

Russia’s War and China’s Rise Set a New Path for South Korea-NATO Relations

Russia’s War and China’s Rise Set a New Path for South Korea-NATO Relations

Tuesday, August 20, 2024

July 2024 marked the third time South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol joined a NATO summit along with the leaders of the alliance’s other Indo-Pacific partner countries (Australia, Japan and New Zealand), informally known as the IP4. This represents a new phase in South Korea’s relations with the Atlantic alliance, but building a lasting friendship will take time and requires navigating a series of challenges. Amid an emerging global division of democratic and authoritarian camps and the challenges posed by China and Russia for both the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic regions, it is incumbent on both Brussels and Seoul to build a more cooperative relationship. That journey, however, has just begun.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

View All Publications