I'd be interested to know who the "observers" quoted in the story are. Their observations as to Sino-Korean relations and what China can expect to gain or lose from the outcome of talks on North Korea's nuclear arsenal are not obviously consistent with Chinese behavior. This seems aimed more at kicking the can down the road than at any strategic objective.

Perhaps it's a relatively simple form of compromise; stage both multilateral AND bilateral talks. Everybody wins.

Tom, that is assuming everyone is acting in good faith, which is manifestly not the case. China doesnt want the American headache to go away (although they dont want it spinning out of control either), South Korea doesnt want to do anything that could in any way incite NK and will do anything to appease KIJ, and of course NK itself only shows up to keep up the pretense and buy time.
With those being constants, pretending that there is some magical configuration of the deckchairs that can meet our goals is a dangerous diversion at best. It plays too easily into the diplomat's dillusion that negotiation is a good thing in and of itself. Never mistake the appearance of motion for progress.

I remember Kerry saying something like this back in the debates and people wondering what he was talking about. Funny, that.

Neil it is funny. I only support the Bush Presidency over the issue of the GWOT. I am totally alarmed at how the public has refused to critically examine many of the policy issues of the Bush Presidency. I have never met a man whom has not made a mistake.

Can't wait to see what Iran does in reaction to all this--"Oh, we thought bilateral negotiations were not an option--guess we were wrong..."

I'm not sure I understand the repeated claim that a nuclear armed Japan would be a "disaster" for China. As it stands now:

a) Japan is already effectively defended by the US nuclear arsenal, thus China is already deterred from trying anything against Japan.

b) Japan already has the knowledge, equipment, and materials needed to build nuclear weapons in a rather short time if it chose to, so actually building them vs. being able to build them pretty quickly strikes me as a fairly small difference.

c) China already has nuclear weapons of its own, thereby giving it in turn a deterrent against a potentially nuclear Japan.

All in all, what's the big deal to China on this, really?