Editor's Note:

Glyn Davies, US special representative for North Korea policy, will meet with Kim Kye-gwan, Pyongyang's first vice foreign minister, in Beijing today, resuming a dialogue put on hold last year by the death of former North Korean leader Kim Jong-il. What signals will the dialogue send? Will it bear any fruit? Global Times (GT) reporter Wang Wenwen talked to Cui Zhiying (Cui), dean of the Center for Korean Peninsula Studies at Shanghai Tongji University, and Bradley Babson (Babson), chair of the DPRK Economic Forum at the US-Korea Institute at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a member of the Executive Committee of the National Committee on North Korea, on these issues.

GT: As the new North Korean leader Kim Jong-un hasn't been in office for long, why have talks resumed at this time?

Babson: I believe that the timing of the talks reflects readiness of the North Korean side to re-engage the US, following the unexpected political transition that occurred in December.

My understanding is that the earlier talks between the US and North Korea last year were considered positive, so there may be some desire on the North Korean side not to lose whatever momentum has been achieved. It will certainly give the US an opportunity to assess whether there is continuity or some adjustment in the North Korean aspirations in holding direct discussions with the US.

Whether this will lead to any early agreements on next steps remains to be seen.

Cui: Outsiders have estimated that it will take at least three to six months for North Korean's new leadership to go through the transition after the death of Kim Jong-il. The US wants to see what the situation in North Korea is in the post-Kim Jong-il era. The dialogue is earlier than expected though, which means that the conditions in North Korea are stable. This is the message North Korea wants to send to the US through this dialogue.

Meanwhile, as an isolated country, North Korea would like to bolster relationships with others and seek financial help from the US.

GT: Some experts predict that there won't be any substantial results coming from this dialogue, as it's unlikely that North Korea's new leadership will restrain the nuclear program. What do you think?

Babson: I don't think we know enough yet about the policy intentions or self-confidence of the new leadership in North Korea in taking concrete measures on issues of concern to the US to be able to predict the results of this dialogue. But I also believe that holding talks will provide more understanding of the current situation and thinking on both sides, and that is a good development, regardless of whatever specific commitments for further steps might come out of the meeting.

Cui: Generally, the new leadership will continue policies adopted in the Kim Jong-il era, such as the military-first policy. But it's hard to say if its stance on nuclear weapons will change in the long run. Therefore, the upcoming dialogue is key for whether North Korea will soften its attitude on nuclear issues.

The US hopes that North Korea will cease developing nuclear weapons and stop building uranium enrichment facilities. If North Korea does, the Six-Party Talks and even talks between the two Koreas are likely to resume.

However, North Korea started its nuclear tests in the 1990s. In the past two decades, the international community has strived for a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula, but has realized that this is not an easy task.

I agree that there won't be any substantial results coming from this dialogue. But it will be beneficial for both countries to have a dialogue so as to ease tension and enhance understanding, especially since Kim Jong-un has taken office. The US would like North Korea to maintain its current situation. Although the US has proclaimed its "return to Asia," it is still hampered by the Middle East. If anything happens in North Korea, the US won't have the strength to deal with it.