With regards to North Korea, the US now come out and say "the time of talk is over", but what talking has occurred between North Korea and the US?

I do not recall reading anything about talks, rather it seems that US have threatened NK all the way from the beginning, imposed sanctions, encouraged Russia and China to do something about NK, etc, etc.

What "talks" are being referred to here?

Surely a "talk" would be a two-way communication in which North Korea's wishes are taken into account. Making demands and handing out punishments if those demands aren't met certainly does not seem like a "talk" to me.

  • 1
    In American rhetorics talk is often the opposite of taking action. Thus talk in this contest can be just the threats you listed or even internal US conversations to do something about NK.
    – Communisty
    Jul 31 '17 at 6:46
  • 1
    Note that the article actually says "The time for talk is over", not "the time _of_talk". "The time for talk is over" is a set phrase meaning we're going to stop talking about taking action and actually take action. I don't think this is saying anything about bilateral "talks".
    – Deolater
    Jul 31 '17 at 12:51

The "talks" were the six party talks involving NK, SK, China, Rusia, Japan and USA. They were held between 2003 and 2009, and ended with NK withdrawing from the talks and declaring itself not bound by any agreements made.

There have been occasional attempts to get the talks started again, but there is very little goodwill from either the American or NK side.

  • So, in other words, when the US says "time for talk is over", it's referring to somethin that happened almost a decade ago? makes sense.
    – Imean H
    Jul 31 '17 at 15:53
  • It's rhetoric. The OP wanted to know what talks there had been. There have been talks before, but now both the US and NK are showing no interest in restarting them.
    – James K
    Jul 31 '17 at 20:08

From the article:

Washington will not seek UN Security Council action following North Korea's latest missile test, according to US ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley, who says that the "the time for talk is over."

There's nothing specifying that the talking is occurring with the North Koreans. It's talking in general, between the US, the UN, China, etc.

One thing to note is that "talking" is a term used in diplomacy to refer to the stage where you're trying to negotiate or trying to find a minimum energy solution. Talking is what we pay ambassadors to do. If an ambassador is saying that the time for talking is over, that's a message in and of itself. It is an insinuation that the next message delivered may not be verbal or written.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .