Read the passage.

denuclearization and the two koreas, 1993–2001

the end of the cold war altered the korean peninsula’s diplomatic landscape. the republic of korea (south korea) established diplomatic relations with the longstanding allies of the democratic people’s republic of korea (north korea): the soviet union, in 1990, and china, in 1992. in 1991 both koreas were simultaneously admitted into the u. n. these developments… opened up the possibility of …normalization of u. s.-north korean relations. denuclearization, a key aim of u. s. diplomacy, was at the heart of a series of crises on the korean peninsula throughout the clinton administration.

there were signs of hope in early steps toward denuclearization. in january 1992, north korea publicly committed to signing the nuclear safeguards agreement with the u. n.’s international atomic energy agency (iaea) and to permitting inspections of its primary nuclear facility at yongbyon. in april of the same year, the north and south signed the joint declaration of the denuclearization of the korean peninsula, which barred the parties from developing or acquiring nuclear weapons and limited them to using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes only.

however, north korea’s refusal throughout 1992 and 1993 to cease and disclose its nuclear activities at yongbyon, in defiance of iaea agreements and directives … initiated a series of crises.

the parties returned to negotiations, but these, too, faltered as north korea resisted iaea inspections. by march 1994, north korean diplomats threatened war if the united states and south korea went to the u. n. in may north korea withdrew from the iaea. a last minute trip to north korea by president jimmy carter in june 1994 averted war and led to u. s.-north korean bilateral negotiations and the october 1994 agreed framework for the denuclearization of north korea.

in 1998, suspected nuclear weapons activities at kumchang-ri brought the agreed framework to the brink of collapse. once inspectors were finally allowed in, they found no evidence of nuclear activity, but mistrust remained high.

north korea broke out of the 1994 agreement in the winter of 2002, resulting in the opening of the six-party talks the following year, hosted by china.

how does the reference to "suspected nuclear weapons activities" and the statements that the agreement came "to the brink of collapse" and that "mistrust remained high" impact paragraph 5 of this passage?

the language capture the pointlessness of continuing a process after the trust between the two sides has been broken.

this language convey the sensitive nature of this process and the dangers faced by all sides if it falls apart or fails.

the language show that the north korean government was only bluffing in order to position themselves to get a better deal.

the language express the writer's personal respect for inspectors doing a difficult job.