Abstract
The continued nuclear enrichment by North Korea despite several sanctions from the United Nations Security Council has continued to attract mixed reactions from scholars, security experts, policy makers and strategic thinkers. The issue has generated serious controversy which has become a critical subject of concern that dominates debates in many international and local discourses since the recent time. In most of these fora relevant stakeholders have proposed solutions for the denuclearization of North Korea in view of its implications for both regional stability and global security. This paper interrogates the import and feasibility of the freeze-for-freeze option proposed by Russia and China for the denuclearization of North Korea. Data for the study were sourced from secondary sources, specifically from published journal articles, official gazettes from relevant government agencies and institutions. The theoretical framework that anchors the study is the theory of Collective Security while content analytical technique is employed for data analysis. A critical analysis of data revealed among others, that; North Korea’s nuclear armament has thrown up tension in the Korea peninsula which poses a grave threat to South East Asian stability, global peace and security. This is further exacerbated by frequent joint military drills between the United States and South Korea close to North Korean border. The study also discovered that the use of sanctions has failed to disempower North Korea from becoming a nuclear power hence the argument for the adoption of Freeze-for-Freeze option. The study recommended amongst others that the United Nations Security Council members should cooperate and adopt a nonmilitary option towards North Korea’s denuclearization in order to save the world from a nuclear war. Furthermore, the US should reconsider a cessation of her joint military drills with South Korea in exchange for a full disarmament of all North Korean nuclear weapons and associated facilities. In all, the paper recommended for an internationally supervised peace treaty between North and South Korea that pledges mutual non-aggression and restoration of full diplomatic relations.
 Keywords: Nuclear Weapons, Proliferation, Sanctions, Freeze-for-Freeze, Denuclearization
Highlights
The level of destruction and collateral damages occasioned by the Second World War, the huge devastation effects of the first atomic bomb dropped by American B-29 bombers in two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 quickly changed the perception of states on the use of nuclear weapons in the event of war
Needless to state that the continued tests of nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles by North Korea have resulted to security dilemma in North East Asia
The United States expresses grave concern on North Korea’s nuclear weapon development and maintains that allowing the country to acquire nuclear weapon could result to terrorists’ access to the weapons of mass destruction as Pyongyang maintains close links with states associated with sponsorship of terrorism like Iran and Syria
Summary
The level of destruction and collateral damages occasioned by the Second World War, the huge devastation effects of the first atomic bomb dropped by American B-29 bombers in two Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 quickly changed the perception of states on the use of nuclear weapons in the event of war. ANALYTICAL DISCOURSE United Nations Security Council’s Efforts towards Denuclearization of North Korea in 1985 following diplomatic engagement, North Korea eventually accepted to formally sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as a non- nuclear weapon state though in exchange for a technical assistance from the Soviet Union for the construction of four light water reactors (LWRs) This was considered a breakthrough as North Korea proceeded to sign both the joint declaration on denuclearization of the Korea Peninsula and an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards agreement in 1992. Resolution 2375 primarily targeted North Korea oil imports, textile exports and overseas labourers (Davenport, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
