North Korea: The Case for Strategic Entanglement

North Korea is a state shrouded in secrecy, yet it receives an enormous amount of media attention. Its reclusive nature makes analysis difficult and speculative. What is certain is that a dangerous stalemate regarding nuclear weapons has persisted for far too long and is an obstacle to any real change in the political system. History, culture, and ideology all rule the state's actions; it is therefore a mistake to assume North Korean negotiators can act with autonomy. A new and dynamic means to deal with this dilemma should be developed, for the past has demonstrated that threats and demands will not coerce Pyongyang into submitting, in fact, that approach will only exacerbate the problem. An effective means to move beyond the stalemate is needed.     

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.     

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.     

Why Not Invade North Korea? Threats, Language Games, and U.S. Foreign Policy

International relations theory has difficulty explaining how similar policies produce different outcomes. Iraq and North Korea have been identified as members of the "axis of evil" with weapons of mass destruction programs that threaten the United States. Yet in late 2002, the United States prepared to attack Iraq whereas it chose to negotiate with North Korea, even after North Korea admitted to a secret nuclear program in direct violation of its 1994 agreement with the United States. Moreover, a direct comparison with Iraq shows North Korea to possess the greater material capability to threaten the United States. I argue that a language-based constructivist approach can explain these differences in U.S. foreign policy where other theoretical approaches cannot. By examining the U.S. entanglement in intersected language games—the implementation of the 1994 Agreed Framework with North Korea and the enforcement of United Nations Resolutions in Iraq—it becomes possible to show how the United States could construct North Korea's nuclear program as a manageable threat that could be dealt with diplomatically.     

中国视角：朝核问题现状及解决途径

本文通过对朝鲜拥核的内外部因素分析,重新评估了朝鲜的核政策,反驳了目前西方学者在朝核问题上的6种观点,对朝鲜拥核的动机、强制弃核的效果、朝核问题解决的程序悖论、中国在朝核问题上的作用、朝鲜经济变革的可能性以及六方会谈的未来等进行了论证。本文认为朝鲜弃核进程必须与安全关切紧密联在一起,弃核的实现又与朝鲜的经济改革存在相关性。必须强化六方会谈其他五方与朝鲜的立场和政策更为有效的协调,以多边模式整合碎片化的地区安全局面。     

当前朝鲜对外政策的特点及走向分析

朝鲜外交政策的基本目标是通过外交手段为确保国家生存权利、巩固和扩大国家生存空间创造条件。朝鲜总体外交战略是两轴战略,基本外交战略是先军战略,安保外交战略是均衡战略加搭便车战略,对南外交战略是民族共助加追求经济实利战略,对外经济合作战略是有限制的开放战略。朝美核危机最终通过和平解决的可能性还是大于通过其他方式解决的可能性。美伊战争的进程和结果将对朝美关系产生重大影响。     

The Twin Peaks of Pyongyang

The United States has been negotiating with North Korea in an effort to have it renounce its nuclear program for over a decade, since Washington negotiated an Agreed Framework in 1994. In this time, North Korea has only amassed more plutonium. The negotiations are hindered by mutual distrust and hostility, but it is doubtful whether any change in Washington's attitude toward the dprk would help solve the nuclear issue. It is the Kim regime that is the core problem. Until the regime is removed, there can be no durable peace in the region. This article suggests that with the prospect for a negotiated resolution of the nuclear issue remote, and since any attempt to remove the Kim regime militarily would entail huge costs, Washington might consider a third option: directly engaging the North Korean people.     

去冬今春朝鲜形势管窥

去冬今春朝鲜形势沸沸扬扬,有两点尤为引人关注:其一,美朝核风波所以再起绝非偶然,系由美朝双方各自立场相左而引起。风波事态发展严峻,但还不致引发美国对朝实施类似对伊拉克的“外科手术式”打击。在中国卓有成效的斡旋之下,在北京召开的中、美、朝3方会谈,展现了和平解决朝核问题的曙光;其二,朝鲜推出的经济秩序调整和增设特区的举措,不否认对其活化濒临崩溃的经济具有重大意义,却因受一系列的制约因素影响,导致通货膨胀发生,个别特区建设搁浅。朝鲜距全面复苏经济、实现良性循环尚任重道远。     

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.     

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。     

美朝核风波的实质与六方会谈的出路

美朝核风波再起的实质是美国霸权与朝鲜生存权的又一次政治博弈,美朝核风波的实质看成是生存权与霸权的政治博弈。进而为此展开的六方会谈框架又成为一组多方政治博弈平台。在美朝核风波愈演愈烈、几近战争临界值之际,中国从维护地区安全出发,积极出面斡旋,经三方会谈而达成了六方会谈框架。六方会谈的达成意义重大,舒解了“战争临界”;彰显了“中国作用”;取得了可视化成果。不应否认,六方会谈框架存在某种不足,却仍是解决朝核问题的最现实、最可行的方式。     

六方会谈与美朝博弈分析

朝核问题的核心是美朝关系问题，美朝之间的博弈影响并左右着六方会谈的进程。美国在既定的对朝战略目标下，在国内强硬派和务实派的政策转换中采取不断变化着的对朝策略；热衷朝美直接对话的朝鲜由于其弱势地位，不得不为应对美国变幻不定的政策措施而变换手法。六方会谈的多边性地位及其维护谈判的公正性正在受到美朝双方博弈的挑战。     

Sino-U.S. Cooperation in North Korean Nuclear Issue

China and the United States have cooperated closely in resolving the second North Korean nuclear crisis.China and the United States have worked together with South Korea, Russia and Japan to prevent the North Korean nuclear issue from spiraling out of control, and they have also tried to make progress in the six-party talks. Despite differences over the issue, both sides are maintaining the momentum of cooperation with increasing mutual understanding and trust. The current U.S.-North Korea rapprochement has progressed quickly, adding a new factor in Sino-U.S. cooperation. Apart from bilateral contact with North Korea, the United States is insisting on a multilateral approach, continuing to persuade China to share responsibility for a nuclear-free Peninsula, and jointly advancing the process in the second phase set forth in the February 13 Agreement on Initial Actions. China's role,therefore, remains indispensable.     

The Dilemma of Nuclear Disarmament: The Case of North Korea

ABSTRACT

The Hanoi summit between the US and North Korea failed not because of North Korea’s brinkmanship strategy or its miscalculation of the US position on the denuclearisation talks, but because of a fundamental issue: a dilemma of how much to yield in giving up its military capabilities to expedite the lifting of sanctions. The leadership in Pyongyang has concerns about the ‘deliverability’ of its promises to its domestic audience to ensure deterrence capabilities and economic recovery. The two-level game model explains why both sides keep minimising the range of options for the negotiations, increasing the risk that the talks will break down.     

The U. S. Policy toward DPRK: Opportunities and Constraints

布什政府上台以来,始终未能阻止朝鲜拥核步伐.朝核试后,美对朝政策有了新的调整,六方会谈得以复会.但美朝双方受各自国家利益和政策目标的限制,在朝鲜半岛无核化问题上的尖锐分歧难以解决,朝核危机仍存在再度升级的可能.     

Overcoming US-North Korean Enmity: Lessons from an Eclectic IR Approach

ABSTRACT

Periods of mutual enmity in US-North Korean relations are typically interrupted by more conciliatory gestures. How can the many twists and turns in this relationship be explained and hopefully overcome so that more long-lasting détente is accomplished? Drawing eclectically on realism and constructivism, we conclude that a nuclear deal should address not only North Korea’s interests in security and regime survival, but also its status concerns. Applying the same theories to the other part of the dyad – the US – we conclude that it may now have material interests in ameliorating the relationship, but that such a development requires US foreign policy discourse to cease depicting North Korea as “irrational” and “evil”.     

Atomic Leverage: Compellence with Nuclear Latency

Nuclear proliferation is not a binary outcome with uniform consequences, but instead spans a continuum of latent capacity to produce nuclear weapons. At various thresholds of technical development, some countries leverage nuclear latency to practice coercive diplomacy. How and when does nuclear technology provide a challenger with the most effective means to extract concessions in world politics? This article claims that compellence with nuclear latency puts a challenger on the horns of a credibility dilemma between demonstrating resolve and signaling restraint, and identifies a sweet spot for reaching an optimal bargain where the proliferation threat is credible while the assurance costs of revealing intent are low. Historical studies of South Korea, Japan, and North Korea validate this Goldilocks principle and find that it consistently reflects the ability to produce fissile material. Contrary to conventional wisdom about proliferation, nuclear technology generates political effects long before a country acquires nuclear weapons.     

The EU,regional cooperation,and the North Korean nuclear crisis

North Korea poses a security threat by developing nuclear weapons. To address this source of regional insecurity, institutionalized frameworks of regional cooperation have been employed. Despite its usefulness as an alternative route to deal with the North Korean case, controversies still remain in terms of its relevance and effectiveness. Even so, the regional integration, consistently promoted by the EU as an integral part of its Asian policy, still requires systematic evaluation. This paper thus examines how and under which conditions regional integration can make a contribution to the transformation of the current crisis. In answering this question, it concludes that a long-term model-setting effect is hard to disregard, in spite of the mixed view of substantial compulsory and social learning effects. The underlying reasons are the ontological-seeking activities of North Korea, along with regional and global actors’ reservations about the contributions of the EU as a key security provider in Asian affairs and in its promotion of the regional integration scheme.     

中朝经贸关系的发展及其努力方向

朝鲜的地理位置决定着中朝经贸关系在朝对外经贸中一向占有重要地位。 2 0 0 2年是朝鲜经济的重大举措之年 ,所推出的“秩序调整”和“设置新义州特别行政区”举措 ,在某种意义上意味着朝鲜在以自己的方式向国际社会回归。这有利于提高中国对朝鲜经济的影响作用 ,推动东北亚区域经济合作向纵深发展。朝鲜致力于经济建设 ,希望有一个和平的周边环境。包括中国在内的周边国家应从区域共同体意识出发 ,运用“双赢”或“多赢”战略 ,帮助朝鲜一把。     

"Nukes for Sale Cheap?" Purchasing Peace with North Korea

What impact can economic incentives have on difficult international security problems, such as nuclear proliferation? This article first discusses theories of the effectiveness of incentives. It then examines the case of the 1994 Agreed Framework accord between the United States and North Korea. It argues that, despite cheating by Pyongyang, the American effort to use incentives in this case was on balance more successful than many now believe, especially in view of the bleak alternatives. If incentives can have an impact in such a "least likely" case, there is reason to believe they could be helpful in resolving other cases of proliferation.