The San Francisco Chronicle has a roundup of expert opinions from various think tanks; North Korea’s return boosts China, observers say; Some see U.S. as having the most to lose, or gain, in talks. Below are a few excerpts that I either agree with, or poke holes in:

“(North Korea) feels slighted and disrespected. They are weak and insecure. They want … to be respected and treated as an equal. They feel the U.S. has not done that,” said Daniel Pinkston, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies in Monterey.

“Now they feel they can go back as a nuclear power, and they expect to be treated with respect as an equal. And if not, then they will withdraw from the talks again and go back to strengthening their ‘nuclear deterrent,’” he said.

While the first paragraph is true, but the first sentence of the second one is probably not correct. Becoming nuclear powers didn’t enhance the prestige of Pakistan or India among Western nations or other nuclear powers, and every agreement North Korea has signed on the issue has stated the explicit intent to remove nuclear weapons from the entire peninsula. I’m sure the last sentence will come true, no matter what.

The North “loses nothing from more time and more talk,” said Peter Hayes, executive director of the San Francisco-based Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development. “Meanwhile, it makes more plutonium and can prepare for a second test, which I believe is more likely than not in the winter period.”

[and from further down in the article]

“The United States is in diplomatic free fall over the North Korean test,” Hayes said. “The onus will be on Washington to show its genuine intention to resolve this issue on terms acceptable to (North Korea). My judgment is that the United States has no intention of doing anything of the kind. Thus, I view the talks as part of the diplomatic dance, whereby China sustains pressure on the United States, but has little to do with securing the North Korean bomb.” (emphasis added)

Again, I agree with the first paragraph, but judge the second to be akin to DPRK propaganda. The U.S. has been consistent, and as the 19 September joint statement (DOC) demonstrates , willing to re-establish the 1994 Agreed Framework. North Korea, however, killed that deal the next day (DOC). Blaming the U.S. for North Korea’s actions is disappointing, but not unexpected.

I went a round with Mr. Hayes back in April/May, when I pointed out some of the unrealistic aspects of a report. He also declared that China has not used oil as a lever with North Korea, but did not provide any evidence for the claim.

Some analysts contend China benefited from North Korea’s nuclear test, despite Beijing’s widely reported annoyance over its client state’s defiance.

“It is not unbelievable that the Chinese sort of gave the North Koreans the nod [for the nuclear test] … because the United States was no longer needing or listening to the Chinese,” said Rodger Baker, director of geopolitical analysis at the private analysis group Stratfor. (emphasis added)

The suggestion that China gave North Korea the nod to test a nuclear weapon is absurd. China preferred the status quo where a non-nuclear North Korea remained hostile but didn’t cross do anything to dramatically lower the threshold for more drastic U.S. action or possibly upset regional financial markets. That’s aside from the fact in that over the past several months the U.S. has been relying more on China in dealing with North Korea, not less.

North Korea had its own reasons for testing and knew that China could, or would, not do much about it.

The North Korean leader may have felt he had little to lose by returning to talks at this stage, said Ken Gause, director of the Foreign Leadership Studies Program at the CNA Corp., a policy group in Alexandria, Va., that consults on national-security issues.

“From Kim’s point of view, it doesn’t make sense to drive China completely out of its corner,” he said. “In the end, (North Korea) will find a way to walk away from the talks, saying it tried, but things fell through because of the obstinateness on the part of the U.S.”

From that perspective, Gause said, North Korea is “essentially kicking the can down the road, while finding some breathing space and possibly driving a wedge between the allies, who seem to be unusually unified at the moment.” (emphasis added)

I believe that Mr. Gause nails this; North Korea will leave the talks and blame it on the U.S., as it has every time in the past. North Korea knows that as long as they don’t actually start a war or get caught selling nuclear materials or technology, the U.S. won’t attack and China won’t use its leverage fully.