The potential costs and risks for all three governments are too large to expect any one of them to alter course greatly.

The bottom line is, they are many years away from food self-sufficiency. If they push the public distribution too far, they could easily be looking at another famine.

It sounds cliched but we live in a tough world at the moment and to jump away for two hours and look at some lovely costumes, hear a great band play with some great singers, to watch two people connect on the floor is a nice way to forget about all this other stuff.

This has reinforced everything we feared about North Korea's promises, but no one expected them to shove it in everyone's faces within 24 hours. It doesn't mean they're ripping up the piece of paper, they just like to keep everyone guessing.

We look at interesting-looking people, quirky characters. We need to have a mix of a young hot things and mature, middle-aged; serious, not so serious stars; some big names, a couple of Bs (B-list stars) and some Cs, with personalities that complement the rest of the cast.

Given the limited policy options they have, they don't have much of an alternative to talking.

The risk of this agreement is exactly what many hawks in Washington had warned about. You reduce the sense of urgency and let people grow comfortable with the status quo.

I think it's a nonstarter. It's not even a deal-breaker.

There's a new assertiveness in terms of dealing with the foreign aid community, ... That reflects a confidence that they can better manage their food situation.