WASHINGTON - Despite years of efforts to keep North Korea and Iran from developing nuclear weapons technology, the United States and its allies have made little headway, with few viable options on the horizon.
Negotiations coupled with economic, diplomatic and security incentives have barely slowed Pyongyang's nuclear arms program or Tehran's drive to process its own nuclear fuel, for possible military use.
Both the insular Asian state and the hardline Islamic Republic have become increasingly pugnacious. But while Washington insists that no option is off the table, US allies oppose the use of force.
So the administration of President George W. Bush, already at war in Iraq, has been focusing on diplomatic solutions and struggling to find new means of leverage.
Security affairs analyst Michele Flournoy said that while the administration has declared nuclear non-proliferation a top priority, it has failed to devise an effective strategy for either North Korea or Iran.
"In both cases, it remains divided internally and at odds with its closest allies on the best course of action," said Flournoy, senior adviser for the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Compounding the problem is a lack of hard information on what Pyongyang and Tehran might be up to. A presidential panel said in March that US intelligence agencies knew "disturbingly little" about the two countries' arms programs.
Analysts said the two cases were symptomatic of the weaknesses plaguing a 35-year-old effort by the international community to control the spread of nuclear weapons.
Joshua Williams and Jon Wolfsthal, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said the dual stalemates had contributed to a crisis of confidence in the cornerstone Non-Proliferation Treaty.
"From Washingtons perspective, treaty violations by Iran and North Korea and the unwillingness of other states to punish those cases of non-compliance (have) put the treaty at risk," the pair wrote in a policy brief.
The United States has been tracking Pyongyang's nuclear program for four decades but has been unable to head it off, either with direct talks under Bill Clinton or President George W. Bush's multilateral approach.
With the North Koreans reportedly holding enough nuclear material for at least half a dozen bombs, Bush can do little more than berate leader Kim Jong Il as an isolated "tyrant" and a "dangerous person."
Washington appears nearly resigned to the prospect of a nuclear-armed North Korea. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has started to stress US deterrence capability while Bush speaks more urgently about missile defense.
One State Department official, who asked not to be named, acknowledged the potential limits of diplomacy in dealing with would-be nuclear powers.
"Can you force people to do what is in their interest? Generally not," the official said. "You can raise the consequences of them not doing so."
Analysts agree that negotiations were a dicey and likely frustrating proposition with a hermit Communist regime that considers its military arsenal a matter of national pride and survival.
Asian expert Tomohiko Taniguchi predicted the stalled six-party talks, also involving China, Japan, South Korea and Russia, would collapse and be followed by an equally torturous debate over UN sanctions.
Among the options reportedly under consideration by the Americans is a virtual quarantine on nuclear shipments to and from North Korea, a move that would almost certainly be regarded as an act of war by Pyongyang.
Taniguchi, a fellow with the Brookings Institution, said the situation was likely to remain "uncomfortable" for months or even years. "We're all hoping that North Korea will gradually die," he sighed.
Iran is at a much earlier stage in its nuclear development and denies any intention to develop nuclear weaponry. But its insistence on producing enriched uranium that could go into a bomb has sent alarm bells ringing in Washington.
The United States has practically no economic leverage with Iran -- a major oil producer -- having shot its load of sanctions over the last 25 years. Nor has it won much support in the past for taking Tehran before the United Nations.
So the US administration has had little choice but to support efforts by France, Germany and Britain to entice the Iranians to abandon their nuclear program with offers of economic and security benefits.
While publicly backing the "EU-3" negotiations, US officials privately are already looking beyond them and hoping to nudge the Europeans into tougher UN action if no movement is recorded by the summer.
"If the EU-3 believes the Iranians are unwilling or unable to comply with their international obligations, we would all be in a much stronger and much more united place to consider what the next steps are," one official said.
05/05/2005 12:16 GMT