Biegun, special representative of the U.S. Department of State for North Korea policy, sent us through a third country a message hoping that the DPRK and the U.S. would meet again within December for negotiations.
I can not understand why he spreads the so-called idea of DPRK-U.S. relations through the third party, not thinking of candidly making direct contact with me, his dialogue partner, if he has any suggestions or any idea over the DPRK-U.S. dialogue.
His behavior only amplifies doubts about the U.S.
If the negotiated solution of issues is possible, we are ready to meet with the U.S. at any place and any time.
If the U.S. still seeks a sinister aim of appeasing us in a bid to pass the time limit - the end of this year - with ease as it did during the DPRK-U.S. working-level negotiations in Sweden early in October, we have no willingness to have such negotiations.
Now that we have already informed the U.S. side of our requirements and priority matters, the ball is in the U.S. court.
If the U.S., failing to put forth a basic solution for lifting the anti-DPRK hostile policy harmful to our rights to existence and development, thinks that it can lead us to negotiations with war-end declaration, which may reduce to a dead document any moment with change of situation, and with other matters of secondary importance like the establishment of a liaison office, there is no possibility of the settlement of the issues.
If the U.S. side has found a solution to be presented to us, it can just explain it to us directly.
But I intuitively feel that the U.S. is not ready to give a satisfactory answer to us and its proposal for dialogue with us is a trick to earn time through the orchestration of DPRK-U.S. meeting.
Explicitly speaking once again, I am not interested in such a meeting.
