Once more, international cooperation to settle the North Korean nuclear problem is faced with the dilemma of power politics. Tensions are growing among major powers over the response to Pyongyang's third nuclear test in mid-February, with Washington and Tokyo calling for stern sanctions and Beijing and Moscow advocating moderation and dialogue.

Not unexpectedly, US President Barack Obama and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on February 22 agreed on firm sanctions against North Korea. Obama said that the two agreed to pursue "strong measures" to respond to North Korea's nuclear provocation. Abe even mentioned the possibility of the two countries jointly invoking Chapter VII of the UN Charter at the UN Security Council, which was enacted after Pyongyang's first nuclear test in 2006.

Articles 41 and 42 of this chapter discuss measures to be taken against member states for threats to or breaches of the peace or for acts of aggression. The pressure on Pyongyang will go up substantially if Article 42, which mentions armed intervention, is invoked.

However, the Chinese and Russian foreign ministers expressed a different perspective during their own talks on February 21.

While they both condemned the nuclear test, they emphasized that although North Korea deserves to be punished by the UN Security Council, the present situation on the Korean Peninsula must not be used as an excuse for an arms race or to justify foreign military intervention in the region.

Beijing and Moscow have begun to talk about the revival of long-suspended Six-Party talks, rather than discuss stronger measures and tougher sanctions against the North.

The contrasting results of the two meetings are likely to rehash old scripts of power politics in Northeast Asia.

Presumably, Japan is trying to use Pyongyang's nuclear threat as an excuse to amend its Peace Constitution, and allow the country to have a national guard, while the US aims to keep "rising" China in check and bolster its alliance with Japan. On the other hand, China and Russia are becoming ever more sensitive to the prospect of a shift in the balance of power in Northeast Asia.

We have seen this sort of scenario concerning the North's provocations all too often. It also shows that the North Korean nuclear crisis is again being dealt with in the context of Cold War fashion power politics.

However, measures based on power politics alone will not contribute to a fundamental solution, but could lead to things getting worse.

If nations fail to close their differences in dealing with the North's nuclear crisis, the Six-Party talks will, if revived, simply buy the North more time to bolster its nuclear arsenal.

Apparently, Pyongyang is seeking to exploit discrepancies among the big powers, while continuing with its brinkmanship.

While we have yet to hear the entire story, Pyongyang's successful test of a smaller, lighter nuclear weapon means that they have become a de facto nuclear state.

Amid the vicious cycle of agreements and violations, or provocations and punishments, over the past two decades, the world has seen this reclusive regime grow from a fledgling to a full-fledged nuclear state.

This development also partly resulted from power politics among the nations involved.

In a state of despair, now some voices claim we should recognize North Korea as a de facto nuclear power. In addition, some argue that the US and China will focus on preventing Pyongyang from spreading its nuclear materials to other countries instead of denuclearizing the North.

However, this is like cutting one's own throat.

If the concerned countries are plunged into power politics rather than cooperation, Pyongyang's nuclear problem will ignite a string of reactions leading to the destruction of the global nuclear order.

It is time to overcome the concept of power politics, and refocus more fundamentally on this issue.

In retrospect, policies of engagement and isolation have both failed at reducing North Korea's threat to the region. The two Koreas, China and the US should consider more seriously a comprehensive approach that does not focus solely on the nuclear issue, but includes negotiations on the signing of a peace agreement and providing economic aid to North Korea.

The author is a professor with the Asiatic Research Institute of Korea University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn