Putin's foreign policy toward North Korea

Since coming to office in 2000, President of the Russian Federation,Vladimir Putin, has taken a pragmatic and calculating approachto the conduct of foreign policy in order to promote Russia'sgeopolitical and economic interests. For him, a higher profileon Korean issues has been an opportunity to show that Moscowcan influence Pyongyang and play a meaningful role in greatpower diplomacy on the Korean peninsula. As a result of activediplomacy toward North Korea, the two former communist alliesput a period to the deteriorating relations in the 1990s; afterthe September 11 terrorists attack and the launch of the waron terrorism Moscow's influence over Pyongyang reached its peak.The beginning of the North Korean nuclear crisis in October2002, however, relegated Moscow to a marginalized position inthe Korean issue. This paper examines how Putin's pragmaticdiplomacy was put into effect in Russia's foreign policy towardNorth Korea and how circumstances on the Korean peninsula haveaffected Russia–DPRK bilateral relations. An analysisof these factors shows why Russia's role in the ongoing Six-Partyprocess has become insignificant. At the present time, it iscertainly plausible that Russia will not activate diplomaticefforts to solve the North Korean nuclear crisis and will besatisfied with merely securing a seat at the multilateral talksin Northeast Asia.     

Taking the 'taken-for-grantedness' seriously: problematizing Japan's perception of Japan-South Korea relations

The existence of acrimonious relations between Japan and itsimmediate neighbour, South Korea, is a familiar theme in theliterature on the international relations of the Asia-Pacific.Public discourse in Japan treats this acrimony as the startingpoint for the formulation of diplomatic policy towards Seoul.While not suggesting that such an outlook is wrong, characterizingthe bilateral relations as ‘tough’ has become ‘taken-for-granted’.By focusing on the representation of Japanese collective identitywithin the public discourse, and treating it as a foreign policyspeech act, this article argues that taking the ‘taken-for-grantedness’seriously allows us to unpack the intersubjective structureof Japan–South Korea relations, enabling us to appreciatefully the recurring invective across the Tsushima Straits.     

东北振兴战略与中、朝、韩合作前景

中国启动的东北振兴战略,不仅对“东北现象”的解决是一次重大转机,而且也被朝鲜、韩国视为搭乘中国经济发展快车的天赐良机。东北地区与朝鲜半岛毗邻的地缘优势决定了中国对朝、对韩经贸关系发展有着重要作用。如今,借助东北振兴战略启动之东风,与朝鲜的“强盛大国”建设、韩国的东北亚经济中心国家建设目标的提出,共同营造了有利于中、朝、韩三方加强经济合作的氛围和环境。     

朝鲜半岛和平协定与和平机制

2007年以来东北亚局势的重大变化,使签定取代1953年朝鲜半岛《停战协定》的《和平协定》时机日渐成熟。签定新协定的主体应是朝、韩、美、中四方。达成新协定的主要障碍在于实现持久和平的途径,尤其是美国的立场与政策。只有从"停战机制"转向签订《和平协定》,建立和平机制,东北亚地区的和平与稳定才能得到保障。     

朝鲜半岛形势变化与丹东的战略抉择

自 2 0 0 0年 6月朝韩首脑会晤以来 ,朝鲜半岛形势发生了令世人瞩目的变化。尽管还存在着种种变数和外部制约因素 ,但朝韩之间通过政治对话和经济交流 ,逐步由对立走向合作的趋势已不可逆转。丹东是连接朝鲜半岛与欧亚大陆的主要通商口岸 ,是中朝经贸合作的前沿窗口。面对变化 ,应积极调整思路 ,抓住机遇 ,准确定位 ,充分发挥区位优势 ,推动地区产业升级和城市功能完善 ,向东北亚国际性城市迈进。     

东北经济区地缘战略研究

分析预测21世纪初期俄罗斯、日本在东北亚的地缘战略、朝鲜半岛的政治走向和美国的亚太战略及其对东北经济区的政治经济影响，可以认为，对东北经济区未来的发展是机遇大于挑战，至少会赢得1/4世纪的宝贵和平时期。因此，应抓住机遇，积极发展。其地缘战略是：在地缘政治方面与俄罗斯合作，防御日美联合及其构建地区性防御体系；在地缘经济方面与日韩合作，促进东北亚经济的共同发展；充分利用已有的基础和有利的地理环境，争取国家的重点支持，加强区内联合，采取超常规发展举措，加快发展；全面对外开放，以开放促开发，促进国际合作，用地缘经济促进地缘政治的良性发展，为东北经济区快速发展营造良好的外部条件。     

韩国的东北亚经济合作及东北亚中心战略

最近,韩国政府提出了东北亚中心战略,即充分利用韩国连接东北亚地区大陆和海洋的地理优势、经济优势,以韩国为中介、枢扭,促进东北亚地区经济、贸易、金融等方面的发展及合作。为此,韩国首先要从自身出发,不断完善经济结构,确保其经济快速发展,同时,也要积极推进东北亚经济合作和建立东北亚经济共同体,促使东北亚地区建立起开放而活跃的市场。     

东北亚和解与合作:韩国的作用与角色冲突

冷战后韩国在东北亚地区的地位与作用均有明显的上升趋势。而卢武铉提出的东北亚平衡者外交战略,要在地区事务中发挥更大的独特作用,更使东北亚地区的国际关系有了新变化的可能。在国际事务中,韩国自主外交的"独立意识"及其作用的发挥,有利于地区安全的战略平衡。同时,在朝核问题、区域合作等问题上,韩国作用的发挥还是具有一定的局限性。中国应进一步加强与韩国在各领域的合作。这对呼应韩国自主防卫诉求、培植中韩互信、牵制美日、防止东北亚"新冷战"的发生都具有重要的战略意义。     

中朝经贸关系发展的现状及未来走势分析

进入新千年后,中朝经贸关系出现了历史性的新发展,特别是2003和2004年连续取得突破10亿美元的最好业绩,使中国在朝鲜对外经贸关系中的重要地位再次得以凸现,使东亚各国对其今后的发展前景表现出极大的关注。随着朝鲜经济市场化改革的进展,中朝双边贸易未来几年还有进一步发展的余地。     

A Fragile Relationship: The United States and the Republic Of Korea

As South Korea became economically and militarily stronger and developed democratic institutions, the country was in a position to assume more responsibilities in its partnership with the United States. The necessary changes could be achieved only with difficulties. The efforts of the US administration to stop the nuclear proliferation by North Korea and South Korea's attempts to develop a policy of engagement towards the DPRK resulted in friction between the allies. The dissonance was amplified by efforts of the Rho Moo Hyun government to pursue a foreign policy that was less dependent upon the United States. The change of atmosphere was underlined by anti-American outbursts in South Korea. A new effort to strengthen the partnership is, however, reasonable. For South Korea the United States is still the indispensable ally as long as an attack by North Korea that probably has nuclear weapons cannot be ruled out. For the United States this alliance contributes to maintain America's paramount influence in East Asia. If both countries agree with this rationale they should take steps to accept basic assumptions and policies of the other side. To find a common position towards the nuclear efforts of North Korea is crucial. Even if both sides try to harmonize their policies, success is not guaranteed. Korean nationalism and American dynamics combined with occasional high-handedness are difficult obstacles.     

俄罗斯与东北亚天然气合作

俄罗斯是世界天然气资源最为丰富的国家,其远东和西伯利亚占全俄土地面积的3/5,地处东北亚。东北亚是21世纪天然气消费增长的主要地区,同时又是能源相对短缺的地区;东北亚国家俄罗斯、中国、日本、韩国、朝鲜在天然气资源、资金、技术、劳务方面有很强的互补性,具备合作条件。但因为还存在一些问题,所以长期以来东北亚天然气合作的进展并不顺利。     

中国在朝鲜半岛的地缘安全战略分析

朝鲜半岛地处东北亚核心地带,是我国重要的战略侧翼。作为与中国山水相连、唇齿相依的邻邦,朝鲜半岛在中国的地缘安全战略中一直具有极其重要的意义。冷战结束以来,朝鲜半岛的地缘政治环境发生了重大变化,原来由美苏主导的两极格局趋向多极化,在某种程度上形成了大国相互竞争的局面,处于较弱地位的朝韩两国也不由自主地被纳入了周边大国的战略轨道,半岛形势空前复杂化。而两次朝核危机的爆发更使朝鲜半岛局势的发展跌宕起伏,波折不断。面对错综复杂的半岛形势,中国从"维护朝鲜半岛的和平与稳定"这一战略目标出发,确立了以"对话和合作"为基本特征的安全战略,并积极推动朝核问题的和平解决,为缓和半岛紧张局势,维护东北亚地区和平与稳定发挥了不可替代的作用。     

新一轮朝鲜核危机与日、韩、美3国协调体制

新一轮朝鲜半岛核危机正在挑战美国的反恐新战略。同时 ,朝鲜南北和谈、日朝平壤宣言 ,东北亚两大历史事件也冲击了美日、美韩同盟。在这历史性的转换中 ,日、韩、美 3国协调体制将从同盟向外交转换。构筑TCOG和KEDO的新协调体制 ,是这一转换的重要形式。     

A Fragile Relationship: The United States and the Republic Of Korea

As South Korea became economically and militarily stronger and developed democratic institutions, the country was in a position to assume more responsibilities in its partnership with the United States. The necessary changes could be achieved only with difficulties. The efforts of the US administration to stop the nuclear proliferation by North Korea and South Korea's attempts to develop a policy of engagement towards the DPRK resulted in friction between the allies. The dissonance was amplified by efforts of the Rho Moo Hyun government to pursue a foreign policy that was less dependent upon the United States. The change of atmosphere was underlined by anti-American outbursts in South Korea. A new effort to strengthen the partnership is, however, reasonable. For South Korea the United States is still the indispensable ally as long as an attack by North Korea that probably has nuclear weapons cannot be ruled out. For the United States this alliance contributes to maintain America's paramount influence in East Asia. If both countries agree with this rationale they should take steps to accept basic assumptions and policies of the other side. To find a common position towards the nuclear efforts of North Korea is crucial. Even if both sides try to harmonize their policies, success is not guaranteed. Korean nationalism and American dynamics combined with occasional high-handedness are difficult obstacles.     

从东北振兴迈向东北亚大同:试论东北振兴计划与“中韩港”合作

全球化时代的东北振兴不仅具有重要的中国国内经济发展意义,还有重大的国际和地区战略意义,"中韩港"三边合作,对于从东北振兴迈向东北亚大同,具有举足轻重的作用。自上个世纪90年代以来,朝核问题成为影响东北亚和平稳定的主要因素,在六方会谈框架下,中韩双方在维护朝鲜半岛以及东北亚局势的稳定方面积累了合作的经验,两国的经济联系也日益密切。在2008年金融危机背景下,中韩经济均受到不同程度的冲击,中国需要通过拉动内需防止经济发展势头中断,韩国和中国香港特区也需要寻找新的增长空间,而东北振兴计划能够为解决上述矛盾找到出路。中国东部跨越、中部崛起、西部开发都离不开东西和谐、南北合作。"中韩港"在振兴东北问题上的合作如果奏效,有利于吸引更多的国际资本流向该地区,从而为该地区的稳定繁荣打下进一步的基础,为通向东北亚大同创造必要的条件。     

Regional energy cooperation in North East Asia: Lessons from the European Experience

The three major oil importing countries of Northeast Asia—China, Japan and South Korea—are concerned about future security of energy supplies to fuel their dynamic economic activity. Currently all three countries are highly dependent on imports of oil from the Middle East, a region with inherent political instability. Russia’s rich reserves of oil and gas in Eastern Siberia and the Russian Far East offer an obvious alternative. Given the geographical proximity of Russia and its desire to increase its energy exports to Northeast Asia, there is huge potential for cooperation. So far there has been no real intra-regional cooperation and no common external policy towards Russia. Despite obvious differences between Europe and North East Asia, the European model of energy cooperation, developed over the past 50 years, offers some useful lessons.

---

South Korea's Faustian Attitude: The Republic of Korea's Decision to Send Troops to Iraq Revisited

South Korea sent troops to Iraq not because of any perceived threat from an Iraqi nuclear programme, but to seek influence over American foreign policy towards North Korea. At no point did the general public support the American invasion and war in Iraq; most South Koreans also opposed sending troops to Iraq. However, the government chose to send first non-combat and later combat troops to Iraq, and the public approved of the former choice and support was growing for the latter. The liberal President Roh Moo-Hyun had to persuade the public on this issue, even in opposition to his core supporters, risking political isolation. What the public and the President aimed at was a peaceful resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue and business opportunities. The national interest that South Korea pursued in sending troops to Iraq was policy influence over the US guarantee not to use military power against North Korea.     

EU perceptions through the FTA lens: main results of interviews among the Korean “elites”

The Korea–EU relations have undergone a substantive change during the last two decades. The bilateral Framework Agreement, which was first signed in 1996 and updated in 2009, has upgraded the bilateral relationship to a considerable extent. The common membership of Korea and the EU to the Asia–Europe Meeting (ASEM) has also expanded and deepened the channels of official contacts between the two parties. Among these factors, the Korea–EU FTA Agreement, which was initialed in October 2009, appears to have the potential to affect the relationship most strongly. The results of elites’ interviews conducted during September 2009–April 2010 largely verifies this in a number of interesting aspects. Especially, most of the Korean elites perceive the Korea–EU FTA as an opportunity to maximize the effects arising from “the expanded markets”, “reduced market risks” and “harmonized European business practices leading to reduced transactions costs”. This also has had substantially positive impact on their perception of the EU’s importance to Korea.     

俄罗斯总统普京的朝鲜半岛政策与朝核立场

20 0 0年普京担任总统后 ,俄罗斯对外政策开始转向以国家利益为目标的实用主义外交。在朝鲜半岛政策上 ,改变了过去“重南轻北”的方针 ,积极发展俄罗斯与朝鲜的关系 ,实行南北朝鲜等距离的平衡政策。普京通过加强与南北朝鲜的关系 ,提高俄罗斯对朝鲜半岛的影响力。俄罗斯坚持朝鲜半岛无核化原则 ,主张以和平方式解决朝鲜核危机 ,反对使用武力和各种制裁措施。建议通过对朝鲜提供安全保证的方式使朝鲜放弃核计划。俄罗斯的原则立场对于解决朝鲜核危机无疑具有建设性作用。     

论东北亚经济联合的新制约因素和发展趋势

世纪之交 ,以日韩自由贸易区和中、日、韩自由贸易区的提出为契机 ,东北亚经济联合再次成为人们关注的焦点。在第 4次 10 + 3领导人会议已就东亚自由贸易区达成共识的情况下 ,东北亚经济联合由APEC框架之下过渡到了 10 + 3框架之下。从发展趋势看 ,中、日、韩自由贸易区很有可能纳入到东亚自由贸易区之中 ,双边自由贸易将成为东北亚经济联合的主要内容和基本形式。