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。     

朝鲜半岛区域公共产品:超越朝核与“萨德”的综合考量

朝鲜第四次和第五次核试验搅动了东北亚局势,美韩借此蓄谋部署"萨德",严重增加了区域紧张,导致了区域失衡。朝核与"萨德"根源在于朝鲜半岛区域公共产品的缺失,这一缺失主要源于朝鲜半岛政治经济结构的两大矛盾:"安美经中"的二元结构分裂与竞争;"南融北斥"的南北结构失衡。构建朝鲜半岛区域公共产品,概有三个努力方向:力推美朝与南北关系正常化,构建中美朝韩四国外长会晤机制、中美朝韩四国首脑峰会;力推朝鲜半岛无核化,签署和平协议,构建中美朝韩共同治理和平委员会;力推半岛南北平衡发展,在"一带一路"战略框架下促成中朝自贸区。进而在此基础上,搭建一个强有力的制约性整合平台,即中美朝韩四国共管的朝鲜半岛区域合作组织——"跨半岛联合体"。"跨半岛联合体"不仅面临区域公共产品构建的共有困境,同时面临东北亚秩序的特有困局,若要破解这些困境,中美需将"新型大国关系"机制化、推动双边同盟体系转型和构筑"共同外部威胁"意识,同时借鉴东盟与上海合作组织等模式,组建一套完备的"跨半岛联合体"体系,以共建、共享朝鲜半岛安全、和平与发展。     

朝韩关系与六方会谈

朝鲜半岛陷入对抗僵局,美国对朝采取了遏制待变的策略。对抗局面对朝韩的安全都不利。韩国推进的“朝鲜半岛信任进程”由于双方的“话不投机”而受阻。朝韩关系再陷困局,并且处于无协定、无对话、无谈判的状况。这种对抗局面的持续,致使六方会谈难以重启,核问题的解决遥遥无期。半岛正在积累安全风险。要打破这种局面,韩国需要认清自己所处的结构性局限,推动朝韩关系重返以往双边协定所确定的和解轨道,并推动六方会谈的重启。     

朝鲜半岛问题四方会谈及其影响

朝鲜半岛问题四方会谈及其影响李福兴秦世森１９９７年１２月９日至１０日，来自朝鲜、韩国、美国、中国的高级官员在日内瓦举行了有关朝鲜半岛问题四方首次正式会谈，通过四方会谈拟建立朝鲜半岛新的和平机制以取代停战协定，进而实现半岛和平。由于朝与美、韩会谈意图相...     

朝鲜半岛问题“四方会谈”

1997年12月9—10日,中、美、朝、韩在日内瓦召开了朝鲜半岛问题“四方会谈”首次正式会议,这标志着建立朝鲜半岛和平机制进程的启动,意义重大。 一、会议提出的背景 1996年4月16日,美国总统克林顿和韩国总统金泳三建议举行有中、美、朝、韩参加的四方会谈,其背景有: (一)有必要缓和朝鲜半岛局势。冷战结束后,朝鲜与美日关系和韩国与中俄关系各有不同程度的改善,但朝鲜南北方的关系却几度剑拔驽张。1993年3月朝鲜爆发的核危机使刚刚起步的南北关系缓和陷于停顿。1994年10月,美朝签署核协议后,核危机引起的紧张局势渐趋     

特朗普政府对朝"极限施压"政策的特点、效能与前景探析

"极限施压"政策是否是朝鲜在2018年回到无核化谈判轨道的决定性因素,是学界的一大研究热点。特朗普政府上台后,随即对朝改行"极限施压"政策,利用美国的超强实力与国际影响力,对朝鲜实施全方位的高压威吓、惩罚和孤立,以迫使朝鲜弃核求和。2018年朝鲜半岛局势发生新变化,从金正恩的新年讲话、平昌冬奥会、朝韩板门店宣言到美朝签署联合声明,美朝关系发生新变化,朝鲜半岛显露和平曙光。特朗普政府对朝"极限施压"政策的战略意图是先"极限施压"迫使朝鲜屈服再与其接触,其与金正恩政府先确立可信拥核事实再逼美和谈的战略意图发生共振,使得朝鲜半岛紧张局势大为缓和。美朝第二次首脑会晤无果而终,表明半岛无核化进程不会一蹴而就。鉴于美朝之间根深蒂固的敌意与不信任,"极限施压"将长期作为美国対朝政策的基本面。探讨特朗普政府对朝"极限施压"政策及其特点、效能,对于认知朝鲜半岛局势变化及其走向,具有重要意义。     

朝鲜半岛的和平统一进程与东北亚安全机制

朝鲜与韩国的和平统一政策经历了一个演变和发展的过程.近年来,双方和平统一方案的趋同化有很大发展.北南方一致同意依靠本民族自己联合的力量实现国家统一.北方的初级阶段联邦制方案和南方的旨在实现统一的联合制方案互有共同性.如果美、俄、中、日四大国关系能够实现稳定和合作,将有利于朝鲜半岛的和平与统一进程.朝鲜半岛的和平与统一成为东北亚安全机制所要解决的主要问题之一.同时,这一进程又促进东北亚安全机制的形成.未来东北亚将形成多层次、多渠道、多类型的安全机制.这种机制应建立在"共同安全"和"合作安全"的基础之上.而且,随着新的安全合作机制的建立,应逐步弱化军事联盟的作用,并最终取代军事联盟.     

2019年朝鲜半岛形势回顾

2019年,朝鲜半岛处于美朝无核化博弈和东北亚地区大国战略博弈之中。美国主动出击,在朝鲜半岛地区推行其"印太战略",中国和俄罗斯正面迎击,韩国谋求与美国"印太战略"对接,朝鲜半岛的战略博弈呈现新态势,缓和下的博弈成为一种新常态。朝鲜半岛紧张局势缓解,军事对抗强度降低,安全形势无巨变亦无升温。美国的对朝制裁施压、对韩约束限制政策为韩朝关系投下了阴影。韩朝关系有缓和,但也有波折:军事和解取得进展,但军事合作协议尚未完全履行;保持了对话合作的渠道,但合作交流止步不前。有关国家为促进朝鲜半岛无核化和建立朝鲜半岛永久和平机制付出了努力,无核化进程仍然处于"双暂停"阶段。半岛问题出现钝化迹象。     

朝鲜核危机的症结及走向

当前 ,朝鲜半岛核危机陷于僵局状态。朝鲜核问题长期未能解决 ,再度演变为核危机 ,症结在于朝鲜半岛安全结构转型进程中朝美战略相互冲突。冷战后朝鲜外交战略的核心是缔结朝美“和平协定” ,突破残存的冷战结构 ;而美国的对朝政策取决于其东亚战略的整体设计 ,旨在维持冷战安全结构 ,美日、美韩同盟和美在日韩驻军是其中关键。战略冲突决定朝美之间是零和关系 ,核危机是战略冲突的集中体现。双方力量的非对称性增加了发生战争的可能性。但战争的残酷性起着关键的制约作用 ,使双方不会轻易放弃达成妥协的微小机会。     

东北亚局势的发展变化

东北亚正处于向新格局转换过程中。和平与稳定局面继续发展,表现在朝鲜核问题走向解决,朝韩关系有所缓和,各国关系保持平稳,经济合作更加密切,安全对话与合作提上日程。但朝鲜半岛双方内部局势,冷战思维及其影响,仍是不稳定和不确定因素。美日在朝鲜半岛的活动,日本的走向,俄罗斯影响的增大,跨国界问题的出现,值得人们密切关注。     

Failed agreements and their impact on subsequent mediation onset and success in intrastate conflicts

ABSTRACT

What impact do failed mediated agreements have on subsequent mediation onset and success? The question of mediation onset and success is undoubtedly important, given that mediation is one of the international community’s preferred conflict management tools, but its voluntary nature leaves room for the conflict parties to (dis)agree to talks and possible settlements. Existing research suggests that previous mediation outcomes can affect subsequent mediation efforts positively or negatively – depending on the outcome in focus. This article argues that failed agreements – an outcome of mediation that has not been accounted for in existing literature – underscore the persistence of the commitment problem, and therefore the hazards of sharing private information. Consequently, the conflict parties question the utility of mediation, and the likelihood of subsequent mediation onset decreases. If subsequent talks take place despite the failed agreement, the conflict parties refrain from sharing private information, and reaching an agreement becomes thus less likely. Drawing on the Uppsala Conflict Data Program’s (UCDP) Managing Intrastate Conflict in Africa data set and the UCDP Peace Agreement data set, the results strongly underline the negative impact failed agreements have on subsequent mediation onset, and thereby show that agreement longevity is crucial not only for peace duration but also for leaving the door open to subsequent talks.     

Inter-Korean relations and the roles of the US and of the EU

The North Korean nuclear standoff has escalated since North Korea let slip that it was developing nuclear weapons while James Kelly, U.S. Assistant Secretary of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, was visiting Pyongyang in October 2002. The Bush administration has acknowledged that the United States will not discount a preemptive military strike on the suspected nuclear development facilities, and North Korea has stood firm against any pressure to halt its nuclear development from the international community. Dialogue and meetings for international cooperation among the major countries concerned, including Korea, the U.S., Japan and China, have been activated to resolve the nuclear crisis in the Korean Peninsula, especially after the U.S. pronounced an end to its war against Iraq in early May of this year. In the middle of the rapidly changing situation on the Korean peninsula, the inter-Korean reconciliation and cooperation initiated by the Sunshine Policy of the Kim Dae Jung administration and followed by the Roh Moo-hyun administrations Policy of Peace and Prosperity are not separable from the nuclear situation. This paper follows recent developments of inter-Korean relations, illustrates South Koreas stance on the issue and suggests the EUs role on the nuclear issue. This is a revised version of the paper presented at the Asia-EU Journalists Seminar organized by the Asia Europe Foundation and the Korea Press Foundation (KPF), held in Brussels, Belgium, May 22 2003. Financial support from the KPF is gratefully acknowledged.     

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.     

韩国—东盟FTA建立的背景与内容解析

韩国与东盟的自由贸易协议(FTA)起步较晚,直到2005年12月才达成《全面经济合作框架协议》,排在中国、日本与印度之后。但韩国积极推进FTA战略,在中、日、印3国之前与东盟完成了FTA所需协议文本的签署,使得韩国—东盟FTA与中国—东盟FTA同时于2010年1月1日建成。本文对韩国与东盟签订FTA的背景及内容进行了较为详细的解析。     

卢武铉的和平繁荣政策及其对中韩关系的影响

韩国总统卢武铉在继承金大中“阳光政策”的基础上,为了促进朝鲜半岛的和平,谋求南北双方和东北亚的共同繁荣,实行了“和平繁荣政策”。卢武铉的“和平繁荣政策”的实施,为中韩政治、经济关系的合作提供了广阔的前景。     

Major world cooperation events, 1945 to 1975

Using event‐interaction data from Azar's Conflict and Peace Data Bank, the authors examine the distributions of major world cooperations and major international interventions by regions of cooperation, types of cooperation, and times of cooperation. Also examined are the distributions of major intervening parties by regions of intervening parties and intervening by intervened regions. In terms of location, it was found that the developed regions of North America and Europe experienced more cooperations than conflicts, while the Third World regions experienced as many conflicts as cooperations or more so. In terms of involvement, the pattern was similar, but not of the same degree. With regard to interventions, 41% of the 122 cooperative interventions occurred in Black Africa; 75% of them were civil; 57% occurred in the decade 1958–1968; and about half of these three percentages were due to the achievement of national independence. With regard to intervening parties it was found that: the first world originated 76% of all interventions; the second world originated 4%; the third world originated 19%; and the U.N. originated 2%.     

Pathways Out of Terrorism in Northern Ireland and the Basque Country: The Misrepresentation of the Irish Model

This article focuses on the reasons why the attempt to achieve the end of ETA's violence in the Basque Country during the mid- to late-1990s was unsuccessful when compared to the IRA's case in Northern Ireland. It argues that the different roles played by Basque and Irish nationalism in that decade and the distortion of the Irish model by Basque nationalist parties and the terrorist organization ETA were decisive in this outcome. The radicalisation of constitutional nationalism in the Basque region, as opposed to the constitutionalisation of radical nationalism that was a key factor in the achievement of the consensus enshrined in the 1998 Belfast Agreement, contributed to the continuation of terrorism. Contrary to the spirit of this Agreement, Basque nationalists moved away from an existing consensus with non nationalist parties around the principle of full development of the Basque autonomy strengthening ETA's will to carry on with their campaign.     

Assessing the Dayton Accord: The structural weaknesses of the general framework agreement for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina

The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina ‐ the Dayton Accord — brought a formal end to the war in Bosnia, but the prospects for an enduring peace remain uncertain. One of the obstacles to peace is the accord itself. This article outlines the main provisions of the agreement and then examines its structural weaknesses. These weaknesses, it is argued, though significant, may not be insuperable. There is broad scope for interpretation of the treaty's terms and for innovation within its framework. Its effectiveness in the long term will depend in part on whether the implementing powers succeed in exploiting this potential.