Reaching a stage when a joint statement could be released by participants in the six-party talks has not been easy. This achievement marks a new era for the Korean nuclear talks and we are cautiously encouraged by this progress.

The talks have lasted for more than two years, from the first round to the fourth round before this accord. The objective of "verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in a peaceful manner" has been universally accepted.

This rules out the possibility of the US resorting to a non-peaceful solution. At the same time, North Korea must accept international inspections to make sure it gives up "all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs."

The joint statement is a reminder of the major compromises made by both the US and North Korea, and it also reflects flexibility. The promise from Pyongyang is based on the security guarantee from Washington. North Korea has announced it will abandon its nuclear weapons and the US has promised no aggression.

The joint statement emphasizes North Korea's goal of normalizing relations with the US and Japan, a related matter. Normalization of ties is a prerequisite to overcoming the impasse.

North Korea is reforming its economy and opening up. It needs an international environment that is peaceful and stable. Normalization of its links with the US and Japan will help achieve this. Conflict with the US and Japan and the country's lack of a sense of security have hampered development.

Gradual normalization will help North Korea join the Asia-Pacific economic system and the world economy, ending its isolation.

Nuclear weapons and programs do not help normalize relations.

The US had not been showing enough respect or recognizing North Korea's sovereignty. There is a big gap between the political systems and ideologies of the two countries. The US has been placing emphasis on human rights in the North.

Problems also exist between Pyongyang and Tokyo. In the joint statement, the US promises to respect North Korea's sovereignty and coexist peacefully with it, while Japan agrees to solve unfortunate historical as well as current matters of concern.

In this joint statement, North Korea's insistence on its rights to civilian use of nuclear energy is respected, which is a diplomatic coup. The US has to yield on this point. But this does not mean the US believes North Korea will peacefully use nuclear energy.

As for North Korea's request that the US provides it with a light-water reactor, the US only agrees to "discuss at an appropriate time."

The joint statement also mentions peace and stability in Northeast Asia, touching on the six parties' joint commitment to peace and stability in the region and building a mechanism for prolonged peace on the Korean Peninsula.

Peace would end half a century of Cold War on the peninsula and accelerate reconciliation, cooperation and even reunification.

The armistice agreement signed on July 27, 1953, was to end military action, not to solve political problems. Given the Cold War, all sides, especially the US and former Soviet Union, did not have much political interest in building a mechanism for eternal peace on the peninsula, which is closely linked to the North's unification with South Korea.

The joint statement not only highlights the importance of offering energy aid to North Korea, but also promises "economic cooperation in the fields of energy, trade and investment" through bilateral and multilateral channels. This turns the document into an opportunity for economic cooperation throughout the region.

The role China has been playing is quite obvious. The passing of the joint statement bolsters Beijing's international reputation. China has created an opportunity for the US and North Korea to talk directly and within a multilateral framework, under which the two countries conducted direct exchanges.

China has acted as a conduit, unequivocally relaying concerns of one side to the other and adding its own analysis.

The statement was drafted by China, submitted to discussions by all, incorporating different opinions and coordinating everyone; finally reaching the universally accepted version.

From a diplomatic perspective, the first four rounds of talks were arduous but never veered away from the principles, the core points and the objectives.

The talks paved the way for genuine diplomatic negotiations. The joint statement is a sign that the talks have entered a new phase -- a time for reaching objectives and solving problems.

This document is the result of compromises. It is not long, but condenses the fundamentals.

Despite repeated attempts, it still contains some abstract, generic and inexact terms. Each paragraph is subject to interpretation by each party, which may be the seed of future disputes.

The goal is specific, but the road is uneven. Promises are easy, but keeping them is hard. The talks ahead are fraught with difficulties, confrontations, complications and unforeseen factors.

The past tells us that, when it comes to Korean nuclear negotiations, one must possess sufficient political and diplomatic patience and tolerance.

(China Daily September 21, 2005)