North Korea
By presenting the threat of an international menace, the nuclear problem certainly complicates situation. Obviously, North Korean nukes create an international conflict for nations, especially for the United States.
The two sides are still struggling over how the United Sates would guarantee the security of the North Korean regime. Pyongyang wants a legally binding non-aggression pact, but Washington is sticking to a less formal written assurance.
Kim Hwan-suk, a researcher of the Institute of National Unification Policy, stated, "There are two opposite views for the N.K. nukes; first, the nuclear weapons are the final protection measures for N.K. to survive from U.S. power. Second, North made nukes for their sakes in order to demand materials from other countries that exchange the pact of abandonment of the nuclear program. In any sides, however, Pyongyang regime must give up nukes for equilibrium of the Northeast regions." For evaluation about this meeting, he insisted that the U.S. should have provided a formal written assurance on the paper at the table. He said that U.S. should have also presented security assurances and economic assistance that North Korea demands.
"To resolve the problem through the talks, 5 countries should share the crisis as well as support to North Korea; for example, U.S. may offer the security guarantee, financial support from South Korea and Japan, energy resource and trailer from Russia, and lastly, China may provide foods and resources as well. If it progresses properly, North Korea would change its attitude about hard line policy towards the nuclear arms program," Kim mentioned.

China
Now the real negotiation begins. Frankly, proposals around for placing the international meeting approach with actual rules. What is a diplomatic policy? A conference has held for tuning an each countries' own benefit. This saying is also worked at the six-way talks.
Leading by China, the meeting had finished with an agreement that opposed the North Korean nuclear arms program and shown a willingness to continue dialogue in the near future. It is clear that China meditated notable efforts leading to these talks so that gave nations a chance to cooperate closely to resolve the nuclear tension.
China aims to put pressure on North Korea to abandonment of its nuclear weapons development. Seeing more deeply, however, the main purpose of China's remarkable mediation is not just for peace but for their need.
"The reasons that China tries to resolve the nuke conflict is nuclear program can give bad and dangerous effects to their country's development. N.K. nukes would provoke the swells of competitions of military force in East-Asia, especially, the possibility of possession on nuclear weapons in Thailand and also, behave direct the U.S. military power action," said Kang Jun-young, a professor at Center for International Area Studies and Chinese Department. He pointed out that China knows multilateral talk is the only way to solve the nuclear crisis. Therefore, being a position of mediator, they contacts between the two nations and than they eager to set up a road map through a multilateral system.
China seeks to give impact on the policy to the countries: "abandonment of nuclear" to North Korea, "guarantee the security of N.K. regime" to United States and "peaceful solution" to South Korea. The China's current action is very contradictory to the claim.
China hopes to hold a next meeting at least end of this year. Two countries, U.S. and China, their main goals to achieve through this talks are obviously different. In short, it is time to read a real purpose of China.

Russia
In fact, the Pyongyang government had to insist on Russia's participation in the Beijing talks. The reason why N.K. demanded Russia's presence is because the North tried to keep a balance from U.S. and Japan's biased power.
Historically, Russia and North Korea have a close relationship, and Russia has supported North continuously. Russia also would be one of mediator countries for N.K and U.S. to reach an agreement.
A professor at Russian and Eastern Europe Studies at Graduate School of International Area Studies, Lyubov Podgornaya, said, "The six-party talks are the only way to solve the nuclear problem." From her opinion, the conflict should be resolved through conversations with all six countries. At the same time, North regime must change themselves as world has changed.
Asked about her perception and perspective of the North Korean nukes, she responded, "This is kind of very difficult and complicated problem into the global situation. On my thought, however, North Korea does not have the operative nuclear weapons, and the reason is that North has not enough resources to make nukes. But, in any sense, North Korea must stop to develop the nuclear arms program."
Prof. Podgornaya also mentioned, "Russia as North Korea's friendly side, could play a certain role in solving the nuclear problem to reach an agreement. Moreover, Russian and North Korean borders are side by side. In that sense, Russia could provide help to break the nuclear tension." She also stated about the partition of Korean peninsula; "I really hope the two Koreas are unified in the future."

United States
Basically, the United States has maintained their hard-line to the nuclear weapons program of North Korea since in 1990s. The United States stated that North Korea's dismantlement of its nuclear facilities should precede any incentives from Washington that may include security assurances, economic assistance and establishing diplomatic ties.
Sean Michael Witty, a professor of the English Division said, "The current U.S. policy on North Korea is nothing new. In fact, it is a return to the prevailing policy that has been in place since the end of the Korean War. Very briefly, that policy was to isolate and contain North Korea until it either learned to be a responsible member of the international community, or it reconciled with the South. In the case of the former, it is the position of the U.S. that the two Koreas resolve their issues themselves." This is not possible, however, because North Korea refuses to deal with South Korea.
He continued, "During the Clinton years, U.S. foreign policy was less engaged and a bit more naive, especially when it came to North Korea. One might even say that the current nuclear crisis is the direct result of the failure of Clinton administration's foreign policy in 1994. Almost ten years later, North Korea claims to have nuclear weapons, and we have re-learned something that we already knew - you can't trust North Korea."
North Korea must choose between building nukes and feeding its people. If they choose to build nukes, weapons that they will likely never use, there is a greater probability that they implode. The Beijing talks, actually, afford North Korea the opportunity to save themselves, because security guarantees would allow the North to divert its resources from the military to the civilian sectors.
"I believe that the North Korean nuclear problem is a bigger issue for countries like China, Russia, and Japan. The U.S. doesn't much of a physical presence in the region, and there is no logical purpose to using nuclear weapons against the South. Even if the North survived the retaliation for such an attack, they would win a nuclear wasteland. The more weapons it produces, the more likely the country will collapse." he pointed out.

South Korea
Apparently, the 6-way talks have been progressed by two main countries, North Korea and the United States who has been vocal on the issue. Accordingly, success of this meeting depends on efforts from those two, and the others, working as assistants. And, of course, these countries have supported them to make consensus for their own needs as significant as for the world peace.
As a matter of fact, South Korea's participation of 6-party dialogue was realized only by the help of the United States. Realistically, if North Korea would continue to develop nuclear weapons program, South Korea is the one who faces the danger most. Unavoidably, South Korea must have to join the efforts to resolve the nuclear conflict not only for relationship between N.K. and the U.S., but for its survival.
Despite the importance of our role, actually, S.K.'s position of the talks was limited. Namkoong Young, a professor of the Political Science Department said, "In this situation, there is no influential action that S.K. could do in order to progress this matter. Theoretically, there could be a lot of suggestions and solutions. In the real world, however, the power of S.K. is very limited, compared to other powerful countries."
Questioned about the South Korea's leading role as a mediator, Prof. Namkoong pointed out that without cooperation of, North Korea and the United States, no result would be expected. South Korea cannot take any stand between two sides; both have had friendly relations with South Korea. South is now falling into a dilemma. On the positive side, however, now could be a chance to harmonize these countries and to melt the crisis through prudent actions.
Though South Korea staged in a narrow setting, it has to try to make an agreement next coming talks.


Japan
In reality, Japan is standing on the U.S. side. It will take a hard-line stance to stop the North Korean nuclear policy if necessary. Japan has agreed to support a huge amount of money if North Korea give up the nuclear arms program. However, if the North does not, it says that it will put into action that the economic blockades or carry out partly or large scale bombing to nuclear suspected areas.
The situation is, in the Beijing meeting, North Korea and Japan had discussed the issue of Japanese citizens abducted by the North in the 1970s and 1980s. In addition, anti-North Korea sentiment has arose from abducted case in Japan. Due to the two issues; the nuclear conflict and abduction of Japanese citizens, negotiations on both nations were broken off. Japan, however, despite downplaying the significance of the one-on-one contact, indicated its willingness to continue dialogue with North Korea.
According to Seiichi Matsumoto, a researcher of the Japanese Studies Institute of HUFS and a professor of the Toyo University of Asia Cultural Research Institute, Japanese policy toward the North regime is not only to end the nuclear threat but also, to prevent the export of missiles to the Middle East. He said "In Japan, the anti-North Korea sentiment has spread widely now. It is such a serious problem. The North have to make sure that the kidnapped Japanese are set free. There are still over 100 citizens abducted in North Korea. If the North Korea wants to develop the relation, it should show faiths."
Responding to Japan's hard line policy which is similar to the United States policy, he said "Also, Japanese opposed of militarism in our nation. Therefore, Japan should follow the current world peace movement. And of course, North Korea have to change."
Mr. Seiichi added that the relationship between the two Koreas should solve their problems of the past; such as separated families, then after that, North Korea's and Japan's problems might be solved.