Northeast Asian Regional Security Research Articles

To Double Down or Decouple? North Korea and China as Challenges to the U.S.‐South Korea Alliance

This article argues that both North Korea's nuclear weapons and Chinese attempts at wedge‐driving between South Korea and the United States represent threats to degrade and perhaps decouple the U.S.‐South Korea alliance. These will intensify regardless of the outcome of current diplomacy on the Korean Peninsula. This puts at risk a component of the San Francisco System that has served as a pillar for Northeast Asian regional security for almost seven decades. We assess what the potential problems will be for the U.S.‐South Korea alliance as they emanate from these two policy challenges, and what actions policymakers in both Washington and Seoul can prioritize in order to modify or neutralize them.

Untying the “Gordian Knot”?

Former South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun initiated a major desecuritizing approach to the Northern Limit Line (NLL), a de facto maritime border between North and South Korea. What brought President Roh to choose the initiative that might weaken South Korea’s national security and embolden its “main enemy” North Korea? What implications does Roh’s new approach have for the Northeast Asian regional security? In this study I answer these questions by using the Copenhagen School’s Regional Security Complex (RSC) theory. This study emphasizes the importance of domestic political factors in desecuritizing traditional threats, which ultimately can contribute to the evolution of RSC. President Roh’s approach to the NLL issue was just a starting point; the efforts for desecuritizing Cold War-type threats will be revived, expediting the evolution of the Northeast Asian RSC.

North Korean Contingency and Resolving Conflicts Among Regional States

IntroductionNorth Korea is at a crossroads. Its ailing leader, seemingly rapid political transition, and unstable domestic political and economic situation all lead to a greater possibility of regime collapse. Although the leadership of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) still has a strong grip on its political power and maintains tight control of every layer of the society, a possible DPRK collapse or contingency continues to be one of the main issues for North Korea watchers, including pundits, scholars, policymakers, and even laymen who are interested in the changing North Korean affairs and their implications in the domestic and/or international arenas.1If North Korea collapses, then it would be a failed state in the sense that its government could not sustain its citizenry. Some commentators even say that the collapse of the DPRK has already begun. Thus, it is critical that regional powers discuss the possible outcomes of the North Korean stalemate and its impact on Northeast Asian regional security. The Republic of Korea (ROK) government, especially, should prepare for the possible outcomes of a North Korean catastrophe based on discussions, dialogues, and consultations with influential regional actors, such as the United States and the People's Republic of China (PRC). Of the various possible future scenarios concerning the future of the DPRK regime, this article will focus on its deteriorating situations, analyze surrounding states' policy positions, and provide some meaningful policy considerations that the ROK government might consider in terms of the political, security, and legal aspects of the North Korean contingency. Regional powers surrounding the peninsula would play a critical role in a North Korean catastrophe for the following reasons: first, China has vital interests in North Korea; second, the U.S., the strategic ally of South Korea, is supposed to protect South Korea from any effect of the turbulence in North Korea; third, Russia and Japan also have strategic interests on the Korean Peninsula, so they may try to step in any contingency situation; and fourth, the U.S. and China would be highly concerned about the situation especially in the context of Sino-U.S. competition over East Asia and the Korean Peninsula. Nonetheless, the South Korean government will be a key player in dealing with this matter, given that changes in North Korea could have a direct influence on the government in terms of security, economics, geography, and even national status. It is, therefore, timely and of the utmost importance to think about the possibility of the North Korean contingency from the perspective of the ROK.This article attempts to explain the general issue of North Korean contingency and then explores the various political and security considerations among concerned states, especially China. Next, it focuses on the legal perspectives that the South Korean government can and should employ in case of a catastrophic situation in North Korea and ends with conclusions and a summary of the main argument.The North Korean Contingency: Legal Aspects, Security Problems, and Regional ImplicationsAlthough regional stakeholders surrounding the Korean Peninsula have an acute interest in preventing any kind of catastrophic outcomes within North Korea, given the current stalemate in the North Korean situation, it is time to take more seriously any possibility of North Korean contingency in relation to its regime failure and collapse.2 North Korean contingency, if it happens, could be characterized as complex, uncertain, and unstable.First, legally speaking, the North Korean contingency has both domestic and international characteristics. In principle, resolution of the state of anarchy or the state of civil war in North Korea is a matter within North Korean domestic jurisdiction; it is a domestic matter. The principle of nonintervention in domestic matters is expressly stipulated in Article 2. …

North Korea and Northeast Asian Regional Security

1. Introduction to this Special Issue: North Korea and Northeast Asian Regional Security 2. Have Nuclear Weapons Made the DPRK a Rogue State? Studying the Korean Peninsula Crisis from the Waltzian Theory 3. North Korea's Nuclear Policy: Domestic Determinants, Strategy and Future 4. Peace Movements in South Korea and their Impacts on the Politics of the Korean Peninsula 5. The North Korea Crisis in Sino-US Relations 6. Japan Eyes the North Korean Nuclear Crisis (2006-09) 7. The Evolution of Russia's Foreign Policy, Ideologies and Strategies in Northeast Asia: A Study of Russo-Korean Relations

Introduction to the Special Issue, North Korea and Regional Security

ASIANPERSPECTIVE, Vol. 32, No. 4, 2008, pp. 5-7. INTRODUCTION TO THE SPECIAL ISSUE, NORTH KOREA AND REGIONAL SECURITY MarkJ. Valencia This edited series of essays draws in part from discussions and papers presented at a Workshop on North Korea and Regional Security held April 15-16, 2008 in Seoul. Other papers were solicit­ ed to fill substantive gaps in coverage. The content begins with a brief overview of our discussions. This is followed by an explana­ tion of why America's North Korea nuclear policy failed and a suggested new approach. Next is a sampling of perspectives on the Six Party Talks (6PT) by scholars in some of the countries involved. The focus then turns to the critical questions regarding a multilateral security cooperation mechanism in Northeast Asia— its design, its institutional precedents and lessons learned, and a potential application in the maritime sphere. The editor wishes to thank Mel Gurtov and Peter Van Ness for the invitation to edit this issue and their encouragement while undertaking this task, as well as the individual authors for their contributions. The following is a brief summary of the contents. Gregory Moore explains why America's North Korea nuclear policy has been a failure. Instead of achieving its goal of preventing North Korea from possessing and proliferating nuclear weapons, it has had the opposite effect. This failure was a result of the Bush administration's blanket rejection of the previous administra­ tion's approach to North Korea, the tendency to ignore the advice of "experts," neoconservative influence on foreign policy, and divisions within the administration resulting in an inconsis­ tent approach. Moore suggests a bold initiative in which the 6 MarkJ. Valencia United States guarantees North Korea's security, proposes a peace agreement, and establishes full diplomatic recognition if North Korea guarantees not to attack South Korea, not to proliferate weapons of mass destruction or the means to produce them, and not develop more nuclear weapons. According to Chu Shulong and Lin Xinzhu, China views the 6PT as a major part of its foreign policy and thus for China the success of the talks is paramount. However, China believes the outcome is uncertain because North Korea will most likely want to keep its nuclear weapons to maintain its regime security. China hopes that North Korea will follow the Chinese example of regime security through economic strength. China supports a multilateral security arrangement for Northeast Asia. Georgy Toloraya argues that Russia has had a consistent policy of promoting a nuclear-free Korean peninsula, opposing resolution of the nuclear issue through pressure or sanctions, supporting a multilateral process and solution, promoting adherence to the rules of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, and expanding mutually beneficial economic cooperation. North Korea has been generally positive about Russia's suggestions. However, the United States has not welcomed Russia's partic­ ipation in the process and has only belatedly and reluctantly rec­ ognized its positive role. Russia hopes the 6PT will gradually evolve into a multiparty security and cooperation system that will include a peaceful North Korea. This would be facilitated by international economic assistance to the North and institutio­ nalization of the 6PT. Successful Russia-U.S. cooperation here may have much wider positive implications. Chung-in Moon provides special insight into the role of the South Korean government under Roh Moo Hyun in the 6PT. It suggested innovative ideas by often defying the American posi­ tion to break impasses, and it facilitated the overall process of negotiation through proactive diplomacy. Moon describes the Roh government's initial perception of, and reactions to, U.S. policy evolution, explains its position on contentious issues such as the terms of engagement (sequential vs. simultaneous) and exchange (e.g., scope and method of denuclearization and recip­ rocal measures), and analyzes its role in facilitating the imple­ mentation of the joint statements that link the 6PT to a peace regime for Korea and a Northeast Asian regional security and Introduction to the Special Issue, North Korea and Regional Security 7 peace mechanism. The three concluding chapters are based on the premise that the current 6PT provide an opportunity to build new and unprecedented multilateral arrangements to enhance strategic stability and security...

Diplomacy of Defiance and Facilitation: The Six Party Talks and the Roh Moo Hyun Government

The second North Korean nuclear crisis, which was triggered by controversy over its alleged highly enriched uranium (HEU) program in October 2002, continues. Despite its roller-coaster trajectory, the Six Party Talks (6PT) process has paved the way for a peaceful diplomatic settlement of the nuclear standoff. Since the 6PT process has been primarily a negotiating arena for North Korea and the United States, through the mediation of China, room for South Korea's effective participation has been structurally limited. Nevertheless, the Roh Moo Hyun government played a significant role in suggesting innovative ideas, often defying the American stance to break impasses, and facilitating the overall process of negotiation through proactive diplomacy. This article unravels the Roh government's diplomatic role in the 6PT process by describing its initial perception of and reactions to U.S. positions on contentious issues such as the terms of engagement and exchange, and analyzing its role in linking the 6PT to a peace regime for Korea and a Northeast Asian regional security and peace mechanism. Key words: South Korea, multilateral security - East Asia, North Korea, nuclear weapons Introduction: The Second Nuclear Crisis Controversy over the highly enriched uranium (HEU) program in North Korea, which surfaced during U.S. special envoy James Kelly's visit to Pyongyang in October 2002, triggered the second nuclear crisis between North Korea and the United States. It was through the Six Party Talks (6PT) process that the nuclear stand-off began to show prospects for a peaceful settlement through diplomatic negotiations. But as with most negotiations with North Korea, the 6PT process, which has been underway since 2003, has been protracted, frustrating, and unpredictable. The first three rounds (2003-2004) of the 6PT did not produce any tangible outcome. The uncompromising attitudes of North Korea and the United States almost derailed the talks, particularly when the North declared its possession of nuclear weapons in February 2005 and refused to attend the talks indefinitely. A major breakthrough came during the fourth round with the adoption of the September 19, 2005 joint statement. However, the freeze of North Korean bank accounts at the Banco Delta Asia on September 20, 2005 and the North's subsequent provocative reactions- such as its missile tests on July 5 and underground nuclear test on October 9, 2006-eroded the very foundation of the 6PT. After a series of direct contacts between the United States and North Korea in early 2007, the 6PT were resumed and began to make concrete progress. The 6PT adopted the February 13 and the October 3 agreements for shutting down and sealing the nuclear facilities in Yongbyon, disabling those facilities, identifying nuclear materials and programs, and ultimately, verifiably dismantling all nuclear programs and materials, including nuclear weapons. The first phase of shutting down and sealing has been completed at this writing, and the second phase of disabling and declaration is also coming to an end as the United States removed North Korea from its list of terrorist-sponsoring states. The last phase of verifiable dismantling, however, is encountering formidable challenges. The 6PT process has been a negotiating arena for North Korea and the United States, through the mediation of China. Room for South Korea's participation has been structurally limited. But the South Korean government has played a significant role in suggesting innovative ideas, breaking occasional impasses, and facilitating the overall process of negotiation through proactive diplomacy. A growing body of literature on the second North Korean nuclear crisis and the 6PT process has failed to pay attention to the South Korean role, being preoccupied instead with analyzing negotiations between Pyongyang and Washington.1 This article fills the gap by delineating and explaining South Korea's diplomatic efforts in the 6PT process. …

Sino-Japan Strategic Rivalry and the Security of the Korean Peninsula

Abstract The Northeast Asian regional security complex has both consistent and inconsistent factors within the global security structure. While non-traditional security issues dominate academic discussions in the European region, traditional security concerns are still preponderant, both among policymakers and the general public in the Northeast Asian region. Sino-Japan rivalry centers on the discussions on Northeast Asian regional security. The expectation on the rivalry between China and Japan is one of the representative security concerns in the region, and to a certain degree it also stabilizes the Northeast Asian security order, even though this was not intended. It is highly likely that an escalation will be avoided of military confrontation leading to a war-scale conflict between the two countries. Instead Japan will pass the buck for its military responsibility against the China threat to the hegemonic state, the United States, and China's military capability cannot catch up with that of the Unite...

China and Northeast Asian regional security cooperation

Northeast Asia is a particularly complex area in the world, especially in terms of security. China advocates a new concept of security based on equality, mutual benefits, consultation and cooperation. China is making great efforts to reduce regional hot issues and lower regional tensions under the conditions that a regional security framework has not been completely established. In recent years, China has actively participated in regional security cooperation and promoted the construction of a security institution. The Six-Party Talks are of great significance not only for resolving the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula, but also for forming a relatively formal framework of security organization. Among the various East Asian security cooperative relationships, that of China–Japan–Korea is critical with regard to East Asian stability. At the same time, however, China should face and deal with some problems concerning the promotion of Northeast Asian security cooperation such as how to regard the presence of US–Japan and US–Korean military alliance, let Korea play the dominating role in Northeast Asian security cooperation and eliminate the Cold War mentality.

Unraveling the Northeast Asian Regional Security Complex: Old Patterns and New Insights

Abstract The concept of the regional security complex has recently been introduced in order to elucidate a region's security dynamics, independent of the international system. We apply the security complex concept to the Northeast Asian region, and draw several interesting observations. First, the Northeast Asian security complex is still governed by the logic of the traditional Westphalian sovereignty. Old actors such as nation-states are still dominant, whereas new non-state transnational actors are limited in power and influence. Second, profound structural reconfiguration among units has not yet taken place in the region. Uni-polycentrism, in which the United States still enjoys the hegemonic position, while other actors, China, Japan, and Russia, compete in the second-tier. Third, despite the advent of the post-Cold War era and the globalization drive, military issues still top the hierarchy of national security concerns. Countries in the region appear to be preoccupied with traditional military security issues. Fourth, realist, liberal, and constructivist visions can cohabit in the ideational terrain of security discourse. The continuing co-existence of blind power-seekers, optimistic liberal pacifists, and fervent identity protectors deepens the security dilemma of the region. Finally, the best way to manage the security dilemma and to ensure a stable peace in the region is to cultivate a community of security by going beyond the logic of deterrence, fostering liberal transition, and healing past scars and resisting the temptation of parochial nationalism.

Policies toward North Korea: A time for new thinking

It is a commonplace among students of Northeast Asian security issues to regard North Korea as a rogue state, one which operates outside the norms of global society and which presents an ever-present threat to regional security. In this article, however, the authors present an unorthodox line of analysis which attempts to see North Korea as it sees itself: a state whose external support system rapidly and traumatically disappeared a decade ago; a state confronted by hostile neighbors who wish to undermine its regime and who are heavily armed for possible military actions against it; and a state whose limited ability to participate in the global economy is confined to selling abroad for hard currency the few things that it does well: military equipment, including missile technology. Thus viewed, the authors find wanting the policies pursued towards North Korea by the United States, Japan, South Korea, and China. They stipulate a series of precise policy shifts that these four states must undertake to encourage North Korea to play a more active and positive role in building a durable framework for Northeast Asian regional security.

A Northeast Asia nuclear weapon free zone

A subtle balance in public sentiment emerged in Japan about Northeast Asian regional security after a series of recent incidents related to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK or North Korea). These incidents included the alleged construction of underground nuclear facilities, a surprise launch of a three‐staged Taepodong missile or satellite over Japanese territory in August 1998, and the intrusion of two allegedly North Korean spy boats into Japanese territorial waters in March 1999. On the one hand, more Japanese citizens are uncomfortable with the DPRK's unpredictable behavior and thus are increasingly susceptible to hardliner arguments in favor of strengthening Japan's military capabilities. On the other hand, many citizens have realized anew that Japan has virtually no diplomatic channels with the DPRK, one of its closest neighbors. That fact clearly indicates the diplomatic failure of successive Japanese administrations, a failure that must be redressed before all else.

North-East Asian Regional Security: The Role of International Institutions.

Part 1 Institution building: North-East Asian regional security and the role of international institutions - an Australasian perspective ASEAN Regional Forum as a model for North-East Asian security? China and North-East Asia's regional security a Japanese perspective with special reference to the international nuclear management regime. Part 2 Pressure points - threats to peace and stability in North-East Asia: China incorporates Hong Kong: implications for international security in the Asia-Pacific region the Taiwan factor in Asia-Pacific regional security the NPT regime and denuclearization of the Korean peninsula defiance versus compliance - North Korea's calculation faced with multilateral sanctions Russian strategic nuclear policy after the collapse of the USSR (1992-1994). Conclusion: a peace and security taxonomy.