The End of History: ‘Neojuche Revivalism’ and Korean Unification

This article argues that prospects for change in North Korea and, thus, reduction in threats to regional security, lay more in rising prospects for Korean unification than in scant hopes for reform inside North Korea. It identifies several factors that have made unification a more salient idea than at any time in the last decade. First, Kim Jong Il's failing health and his youngest son's and designated heir's uncertain grip on succession mean greater risk of political instability in North Korea that could bring discontinuous change, including reunification. Second, it has become clear that the Six Party Talks and other diplomatic efforts will not produce denuclearization and reduction of the regional security threat posed by Pyongyang's weapons program. Third, the current and likely future leadership in Pyongyang is incapable of reform, making regime collapse a more likely scenario and unification a more likely route to meaningful change. Fourth, the North Korean regime has become heavily dependent on Chinese support, material and political-diplomatic. Finally, thinking about how unification might occur has shifted to scenarios that are more feasible to key parties, including South Korea, the United States and Japan.     

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.     

The EU’s Korea relationship: enlargement effects

As the EU was expanding in 2004, a phase of new development between the EU and North Korea could have been expected. However, it was argued that the EU’s position towards North Korea is likely to remain unchanged. Most of the existing studies ascribed the reactive attitude of the EU to the distinctiveness of the recent enlargement. The accession of a large number of new members, which are considered to have diverse foreign policy interests and perception, is likely to add up to the already overwhelming number of problems in the governance of the EU. Thus, the EU’s policy towards North Korea would rather concentrate on a soft security approach. However, this paper contends that the existing explanation is not exhaustive, but that the implications relating to the conception of smallness, which is relevant to most of the new member states, should be included in the parameters of analysis in order to generate a more comprehensive and balanced view where the future relationship between the EU and North Korea is concerned. The preliminary draft of this paper was presented at the International Conference of the Korean Society of Contemporary European Studies, November, 25, 2005, at Seoul, South Korea. I appreciate all the comments and helpful advice made at the presentation.

---

Going nuclear in Northeast Asia: a global view

Northeast Asia (NEA) is on the international security agenda for a lot of reasons. The historical legacy, territorial disputes, the region’s growing importance as an economic actor and a trading partner accompanied by increasing defence expenditures and acquisition of high tech weaponry and the political isolation of a “rogue” North Korea have all contributed to fear that NEA could open a Pandora’s box of a nuclear arms race. In this paper, I analyse recent strategic trends in Asia and try to evaluate the main motivations and objectives of a country like North Korea behind Weapons of Mass Destruction proliferation and the impact of this “nuclear diplomacy” on the evolution of defence policy of major military power like Japan.

---

The Bush Administration and the Nuclear Challenges by North Korea

When in October 2002 the US administration confronted the North Koreans with intelligence that the latter had a program to enrich uranium, another nuclear crisis on the Korean peninsula was triggered. It quickly developed into a plutonium crisis because the DPRK then started to “defrost” the nuclear facilities that had been frozen by the Agreed Framework and to revive its nuclear weapons program. North Korea told the world that it was building up a nuclear deterrent force. Though the US administration toyed with the idea of working towards a collapse of the DPRK, it ultimately decided to pursue diplomacy. The two Koreas and the four great Pacific powers got involved in the negotiations. The administration insisted on a complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantling of the North Korean nuclear programs. The DPRK was reluctant to proceed with the talks, since it felt that its basic security interests were being disregarded. Three rounds of six-party talks held in Beijing did not surpass the stage of prenegotiations. At the end of 2004, the prospects for the talks were gloomy. ¹ 1. If no particular sources are mentioned, the facts of the case are based on reports of the printed editions of the International Herald Tribune, The New York Times and The Wall-Street Journal and the on-line editions of the Los Angeles Times The Washington Post The Korea Herald The Korea Times, The People’s Korea and the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA)      

1999——依然难以平静的朝鲜半岛

朝鲜半岛形势在不断地走向缓和 ,但并不平静 ,迭起波澜。朝、韩经济在走向好转。朝、韩都在积极发展对外关系 ,韩国金大中政府已完成了四大国首脑外交 ,朝鲜在积极改善同四大国的关系。韩、韩之间也在稳步改善政治关系 ,发展经济关系。但朝、韩之间的对峙、敌视情绪仍然存在 ,不时出现各种争执、摩擦。朝鲜形势仍处于扑朔迷离、难以把握的状态 ,值得我们密切关注和深入研究。     

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。     

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。     

1948年以来韩国政府的北方政策研究

韩国的“北方政策”是韩国处理与社会主义国家及朝鲜关系等国际关系的具有影响力的重要政策 ,并为世人所瞩目。韩国的“北方政策”的对象、范围与目标在不同的历史时期各有不同。韩国的北方政策大致经历了 3个时期。     

The US role in Korean democracy and security since cold war era

This paper traces the role that US played in the developmentof Korean democracy and maintaining peace and security in theKorean peninsula. First, it looks back into the US role in theKorean political transformation from 1950s through 1980s. Itexamines why the US introduced American style democracy in thedivided country and what was the role of the US in the criticaljunctures of regime changes and transformations. The UnitedStates had two contradictory objectives in South Korea: to buildup South Korea as ‘a showcase for democracy’ andas an anti-communist buffer state. The two objectives set ‘theAmerican boundary’ to South Korean democracy. The firstobjective acted upon as an enabling condition for incipientdemocracy, while the second acted upon as a confining conditionto development of democracy in South Korea. Second, it investigatesthe role that the US played in the outbreak of financial crisisin 1987 and in the ensuing comprehensive neoliberal restructuringof the economy by the Kim Dae Jung government after the crisis.Third, it analyzes three events that put US–Korean relationsunder stress since the inauguration of Bush administration:Anti-Americanism, perception gap on North Korea, and the newmilitary transformation initiative of US. Finally, it drawspolicy rationales for stronger Korea–US alliance in thefuture from the Korean perspective: Korea–US allianceas leverages against China and Japan, means of pursuing an effectiveengagement policy toward North Korea, a cornerstone to liftSouth Korea to a hub state in Northeast Asia, and geopoliticalbalancer and stabilizer in Northeast Asia after the unificationof Korea.     

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.     

朝鲜改革开放经济发展战略研究

从近年来朝鲜借鉴中国的经验 ,走朝鲜式改革开放之路的动向看 ,对内主要体现在“7·1措施”等一系列的改革 ,对外开放主要体现在建设四足鼎立的经济特区等重大举措上。“7·1措施”是朝鲜改革进入实质性进展划时代标志 ,4大特区建设是对外开放战略的主要载体 ,这两方面的战略措施支持着朝鲜的全方位改革开放 ,但其战略能在多大程度上改善经济困境 ,除本国因素外 ,关键取决于能否获得一个和平安定的国际环境。     

日朝关系与朝核问题

二战结束至今,日朝之间仍未建立外交关系,因此,两国又被称作“近而远的国家”。目前,战争赔偿问题、日本人绑架问题、导弹发射及出售问题已成为日朝恢复邦交关系的一些障碍因素。尤其是朝核问题成为今后相当长一段时期影响日朝关系的一个主要因素。     

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。     

东北振兴过程中的对外开放:中朝合作

中国实施的东北振兴战略和朝鲜的"经济管理改善措施"为中朝两国进一步巩固和发展传统的友好关系提供了良好的机遇和必要的条件。在东北振兴的历史背景下,应充分利用中朝经济互补优势,积极推动中朝"路港区一体化"项目的实施,组建中朝跨国边境经济合作区,扩大对朝边境贸易和直接投资,加强基础设施合作,拓展旅游合作,继续加强高层往来及各层次的交流,加强文化、教育、科技、体育等其他领域的交流与合作,不断丰富和充实中朝友好合作关系的内涵,进一步提升中朝合作的水平和层次。     

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。     

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.     

朝鲜IT产业管窥

在全球信息化大潮的冲击下 ,没有一个国家能够置身于信息化的发展之外。为挽救经济和建设“强盛大国” ,朝鲜政府给予IT产业很多政策扶持。朝鲜IT产业的发展总体上处于较低的水平 ,但在某些方面如软件开发上具有较强的竞争能力。中国IT企业应该通过软件合作开发等形式早日进军朝鲜市场。     

透视日本小泉首相的第2次访朝

日本首相小泉闪电般地进行第 2次访朝 ,虽然有“内病外治”的作秀成分 ,未必会有助于其国内困境的解决 ,但是在打破朝日关系僵局、解决长期困扰双方的“绑架问题”方面 ,还是取得了积极的成果。同时 ,在重新确认《朝日平壤宣言》精神、重开朝日邦交正常化谈判方面 ,也并非乏善可陈。     

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。