Talk to, not at, North Korea's Kim Jong Un

EVERY missile that North Korea hurls towards neighbouring countries - the latest of which flew over Japan's Hokkaido island this week - gets just impotent verbal retorts from the likes of US President Donald Trump, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and South Korean President Moon Jae-in.

Intolerable, outrageous and unacceptable are among the most favoured adjectives used against the supposedly "mad" behaviour of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. And yet, the world has little alternative but to tolerate and accept what he is doing. The situation appears to be one of impasse or stalemate.

Yet, there may be a way out. It involves replacing diatribe (such as Mr Trump's threat to rain down "fire and fury" upon Pyongyang) with dialogue - real face-to-face dialogue and not skulking, quasi diplomatic or "back channel" encounters.

Yet, the Trump and Abe administrations continue to insist now that "this is not the time for dialogue but for action" even as the danger of an accident involving a North Korean missile (nuclear weapon-tipped or not) grows from day to day.

Why will no world leader step up and openly invite Kim to a dialogue? Are they worried that he may actually have a case to state, which they are not anxious for the world to hear?

Mr Kim has become almost universally despised by people who, it seems, have never tried seriously to find out what his case is, so that they can judge for themselves.

Back in the year 2000, Russian President Vladimir Putin had an interesting tale to tell when he arrived in Okinawa for a Japan-hosted G-8 summit meeting there. He had come from Pyongyang where he had a one-on-one meeting with then North Korean leader Kim Jong Il.

Why had Mr Putin gone into "the enemy camp", so to speak, a rather scandalised sounding Japanese reporter demanded of the Russian leader. Because, replied Mr Putin with cool rationality, it seemed to him that everyone else was "talking at" Mr Kim while no one was "talking to" him. After that, the supposedly reclusive North Korean leader began to loosen up somewhat. Several countries which until then had dutifully toed the shortsighted line of ostracising North Korea decided to grant it diplomatic recognition.

Today, we are back to deadlock or deja vu, with major powers talking at or about, rather than to, the latest head of North Korea. The US is intent on denying a North Korea which it failed to defeat in the Korean war the recognition it seeks and which could lead to a formal peace treaty.

Japan toes the US line on North Korea - and arguably denies itself thereby the chance to settle finally the issues of Japanese citizens abducted decades ago. China, meanwhile, seeks to preserve a fragile peace on the Korean peninsula, while Russia stays more or less neutral. Pyongyang's latest missile launch will probably not force the US to the negotiating table despite the credible threat of an attack on its territories such as Guam. Instead, it could give Washington an excuse for a "preemptive strike" on North Korea. Meanwhile, Japan will use events as a cover to re-arm itself.

Markets gave vague signs this week of their disapproval of the goings-on, but it will take much stronger and more widespread howls of popular outrage before leaders sit up and take notice.