On the face of it, North Korea's demand that the US sign a peace treaty makes sense. It would bring to an end the official state of war that has existed on the Korean Peninsula since the cessation of open conflict there in 1953, and, in theory, reduce the need for so many. American troops to be stationed in the South. That presence, the North Koreans say, is one of its motivations for developing a nuclear program. North Korea is now maneuvering to restart six-nation talks on its nuclear program, a format that the country believes offers more dependable guarantees and aid. South Koreans, however, want to see broader movement on other issues from the North Koreans before becoming involved in nuclear talks, profiling the possibility of talks as an incentive for other reform. Seoul certainly has good reason to approach a peace treaty with caution, given the incidents of unprovoked bellicosity practiced by North Korea. Two unprovoked North Korean attacks on the South have left 50 people dead over the past year, and there is a string of other incidents stretching back decades. That, however, must have been put aside when nuclear negotiators from the North and South held unscheduled meetings at a regional security forum in Malaysia last week. The outcome was a call to restart formal nuclear negotiations. And if the North Koreans get their way, there will be different talks regarding a peace treaty and resumption of six-party talks. There can be little argument that a peace treaty would profit the economies of both nations, particularly in the North. But if North Korea wants a peace treaty, it must behave as a partner in peace. Nearly 60 years after the declared end of hostilities, North Korea continues to show itself capable of unprovoked attacks on civilians and military in the South, hardly a reassuring factor when considering making peace. __
