The U.S. is describing the recent activities done by the DPRK for self-defence as "threats to international peace and security", stirring up a terrific furor.

Terming them "armed provocations" timed to a certain occasion and aiming at a specific target, it faulted those measures which belong to our right to self-defence. This arrogant and self-righteous response is a vivid revelation of the American-style double-dealing attitude.

The U.S. is still engrossed in the anachronistic concept that the world must obey its rule.

Today its high-handed practices have gone beyond the limit.

It actively shields some countries whether they violate international law or escalate regional situation. But it antagonizes those countries standing for independence against the U.S., faulting them over every matter.

Its double-dealing attitude can also be found in calling demonstrators at home who protested racism "insurgents", while eulogizing the "independent forces" and rioters in other countries as "heroes and fighters".

The Korean peninsula is where the U.S. double-dealing attitude finds its most vivid manifestation.

Over the coincidental launches made on the Korean peninsula on September 15, the U.S. called "north Korea's act a threat to the U.S. and the international community", while keeping mum about south Korea's act.

The U.S. double-dealing act based on its deep-seated repugnancy at the DPRK becomes a stumbling block in the way of solving the Korean peninsula issue and a catalyst straining the tension.

This is the exact reason behind the stalemate in the DPRK-U.S. talks.

We are aware of the fact that the new U.S. administration has for months been sending a signal wishing for our return to talks, and we also know well that it is misleading the public opinion to convince the world that the DPRK is to blame for the failed resumption of the DPRK-U.S. talks.

We have never opposed the dialogue itself.

Now that the U.S. is wielding the double-dealing yardstick, it is self-evident that it is hard to expect talks at which respect for the dialogue partner, impartiality and equality are guaranteed.

Even though contacts and dialogues are undertaken now, it is certain that the U.S. would raise the double-dealing yardstick by which it would call our acts for self-defence "threats" to the world peace and its allies.

Sitting for talks with the U.S. would not bring any progress but would only earn the U.S. more time as it always resorts to the double-dealing stand.

What can be talked and negotiated when the U.S. hostile policy remains unchanged and it can not be changed.

Dialogue is never compatible with pressure.

Unless the U.S. vouches for the withdrawal of its hostile policy toward the DPRK, the word denuclearization can never be put on the table.

The U.S. should have proper basic attitude in viewing and approaching the DPRK and withdraw its habitual attitude of doggedly faulting and antagonizing the latter.

The international community should see through the danger and absurdity of the U.S. double-dealing attitude behind the escalation of tension on the Korean peninsula.