The objective of this paper is to determine a new strategy in the United States’ foreign policy approach to dealing with North Korea. Past administrations employed strategies that fell short of accomplishing the goal of de-nuclearization on the Korean peninsula. In order to design a new approach I researched the two previous U.S. administrations attempts at dealing with North Korea. First, I examined the Bill Clinton administrations Agreed Framework, which took an approach of engagement with North Korea. The agreement was based on a theory of positive sanctions and rewards for dealing with an “enemy” government. Next, I analyzed the transition from the Clinton administration into the Bush administration, and how U.S. foreign policy took a drastic turn into a neo-conservative strategy. I then analyze the Bush administrations attempts to deal with North Korea, and the overall lack of strategy that was used in doing so. Finally, I analyze the best way to move forward, and provide an outline of the proper method that should be used to conduct the 6-Party Talks. The method I selected was interest-based bargaining, and it relies on cooperation of all parties involved in the negotiations to reach an outcome based on equity. The goal is to satisfy all parties’ interests, not just your own. The results of my research have led me to rely on a strategy based on the Liberalism theories of International Relations, which focuses on cooperation with an enemy, and equal gains for all. I used this approach to design a negotiation scenario where all sides are able to contribute to supplying aid to North Korea, while in return receiving the security of knowing North Korea is disabling their nuclear capabilities. Lastly, I evaluate the plan that I researched, and assess the viability of the plan’s actual ability to be implemented.