Down through history, the call for dialogue on the part of the U.S. was a ploy to mislead the international community.

When the Bush administration appeared in the U.S., the DPRK government proposed direct talks for peace on the peninsula several times, strongly urging the settlement of the nuclear issue through conclusion of a nonaggression treaty.

However, the U.S. insisted on "nuclear program renouncement first, dialogue later", raising preconditions that the DPRK should refrain from nuclear proliferation, dismantle its long-range missiles, slacken the intimidatory posture of conventional armed forces and fully comply with the safeguards accord under the Non-proliferation Treaty.

It went the lengths of asserting that any progress in the DPRK-U.S. talks entirely depends on the former's attitude towards the key problems and that the talks would focus only on the performance of its obligation. Their assertion was little different from the U.S. refusal to have talks with the DPRK.

The U.S. rhetoric about dialogue in 2006 was no more than a smokescreen to cover up its intention to stifle the DPRK. Just after an agreement on the resumption of the six-party talks, the U.S. launched "reception, staging, onward movement and integration" (RSOI) exercises, driving the talks into total collapse.

At present the U.S. cries out for starting dialogue in an appropriate environment, in an appropriate time and under appropriate condition, urging the DPRK to stop the "provocative" remarks and show its will to realize denuclearization and suspend missile launch.

Such gangster-like logic can never work on anyone as the DPRK and the U.S. are in hostile relationship and the latter is the very one that pushed the Korean Peninsula to such a touch-and-go situation as now.