The success of the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal has reared optimism for world powers to resolve the North Korean crisis in a similar fashion. But differences between the rogue nations may make that tough.

That global authorities would want an end to the impasse in North Korea is understandable. The isolated country’s belligerence has been a key source of unease: Pyongyang conducted its fourth nuclear test in January and then launched a long-range rocket earlier this month, both in defiance of United Nations resolutions. Not only do such incidents reveal the aggressive, military-first policy of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, they trigger worries that Kim may finally act on his multiple warnings and launch a strike against the U.S. and other foes.

Multilateral negotiations aimed at denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, known as the Six-Party Talks, between the U.S., China, Japan, Russia, North and South Korea have been stalled since 2009 and little progress has made since then, with Pyongyang proclaiming itself a nuclear state in 2012 despite strict international sanctions.

… The resumption of Six-Party Talks is highly unlikely because of the diametrically opposed preconditions attached by the stakeholders, explained Tan Ming Hui, associate research fellow at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.

“The U.S. wants North Korea to return to the talks and commit to denuclearization before the removal of sanctions and a peace treaty could be on the table; Pyongyang wants the sanctions to be first removed and a peace treaty negotiated before it is willing to return to the talks.”