North Korean Nuclear Issue Research Articles

朝鲜“并进”外交政策及中朝关系 -金正日执政后期为中心-

The 17-year-leadership of Kim Jong Il, started from his election as Chairman of the North Korean National Defense Committee, could be divided into four periods, namely, the leadership under the guide of the will period; the pre-administration period; the mid-administration period; and the late-administration period. This paper aims to analyze the “Byungjin” foreign policy and China-DPRK relations pursued by North Korea in the late Kim Jong-il’s administration from the perspective of the assumptions of North Korea’s implementation of the nuclear-holding strategy and effectuation of the nuclear issue as the main theme of great power game. The late Kim Jong Il administration was in the transition period of the regime of successor system. Although DPRK achieved the staged goal of the nuclear ownership strategy with the success of two nuclear tests, the national security situation was still grim. In order to successfully complete the transition of the regime and implement the “powerful and prosperous” national strategy, North Korea adopted “Byungjin approach” in both interior and foreign affairs. Concerning the interior affairs, on the basis of adhering to “military-first politics”, more attention was paid to economic development and the improvement of people’s livelihood. As to the foreign affairs, focuses were on both the “nuclear diplomacy” and “economy diplomacy”, that is, the “Byungjin approach”. On the one hand, the nuclear diplomacy strategy was continuously advanced, and the “Brinkmanship” strategy and the off “Six-Party Talks” mechanism were carried on to defend the results of nuclear tests against such countries as the United States, South Korea, Japan and others with regard to the North Korean nuclear issue. On the other hand, the economic factors in foreign activities were paid due attention to. The economy-promoting-governance policy was taken to promote the economic-diplomatic relations between the friendly countries such as China and Russia; and to improve the relations with the United States, Japan, and South Korea, aiming at the economic benefits. In the process of implementing the “Byungjin” foreign policy, Kim Jong Il personally promoted the development of DPRK-China relations, actively sought a foreign policy with the political support and economic cooperation as the core with China, so as to elevate Sino-DPRK relations to a strategic height and a long-term prospect. To strengthen the political support and economic cooperation and assistance from China, Kim Jong Il administration maintained close communication by way of high-level exchanges on the matters of DPRK nuclear issue and others, and promoted mutual trust and reciprocal cooperation continuously. Taking the event of “PRC-DPRK Friendship Year” as an opportunity, the economic and trade cooperation were enhanced, and the cultural exchanges were enlivened. After the trial of North Korean nuclear tests, the new type of neighborly, friendly and cooperative state-to-state relations have been further developed.

Китайско-российские отношения по северокорейской ядерной проблеме

As the second summit between United States and North Korea in Hanoi ended without any significant results on February 2019, the negotiating process to resolve the nuclear issue has come to a deadlock. In this situation, Russia and China continue to cooper-ate with each other regarding the policy toward North Korea and at the same time maintain bilateral relations with the DPRK. Russia and China have consolidated their strategic partnership in solving North Korean nuclear issue, opposing not only harsh sanctions, imposed by the UN Security Coun-cil on DPRK, but also against the denuclearization decision proposed by the United States, putting forward an alternative method. It is widely believed, not only in the Republic of Korea, but also in the international community, that Russia and China have the same, or at least a similar position on the North Korean nuclear issue. The article discusses the shared views of both states in the aspect of co-inciding interests and political orientation. The au-thor has made an attempt to analyze and summarize the policies and strategies, which the two countries adhere to.

Not a blood alliance anymore: China’s evolving policy toward UN sanctions on North Korea

ABSTRACT What has driven China’s policy toward United Nations (UN) sanctions on North Korea? While insisting on a peaceful settlement of North Korean nuclear issues via diplomatic dialogues, China has gradually loosened its protective stance regarding UN sanctions on North Korea. This article examines the factors that have pushed China to take a tougher position toward North Korea: North Korea’s increasingly aggressive nuclear policy, the influence of the United States on Chinese foreign policy, and the changing perception of North Korea in China. Through close examination of China’s domestic discussions on North Korea, this article concludes that, besides the external factors, a growing negative perception of North Korea has played an increasingly important role in changing China’s official stance. The findings suggest that closer attention should be paid to the changes in the domestic political environment of China to understand its current and future approach toward North Korea.

Asia in 2019

Among the major events that occurred in Asia in 2019 were four that received global attention: the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the US-China trade war, the North Korean nuclear issue, and protests in Hong Kong. These events have significant policy implications for the world as well as for Asia.

The “New Northern Policy” strategy and its constraints

The article evaluates the “New Northern Policy” of Moon Jae-in’s administration. Based on the evaluations, geopolitical risk management strategies of the Northern Policy, essential and feasible tasks and projects, and a guideline to establish cooperative governance are proposed. The characteristics of the New Northern Policy under Moon Jae-in’s leadership are as follows: 1) the idea of connecting the Republic of Korea with the continent through North Korea is more important task of the New Northern Policy than that of participation in the Eurasian integration process; 2) at the moment, the New Northern Policy cannot overcome geopolitical restrictions and it can be compared to a car equipped with a powerful noisy engine, which however cannot be moved; 3) due to many difficulties, it seems that the current administration may have fewer motivating factors to implement the New Northern Policy than to promote the New Southern Policy. To succeed in the New Northern Policy, the following tasks must be completed: finding a reasonable answer to Western sanctions against Russia and North Korea; actively promoting mini-lateral cooperation; establishing the Northeast Asian Development Bank with the participation of the United States, Japan, Russia and China; connecting the regulation of the North Korean nuclear issue to the creation of the “Northeast Railway Community”; strengthen the platform for successful implementation of the New Northern Policy.

Retooling great power nonproliferation theory: Explaining China's North Korea nuclear weapons policy

China’s policy toward North Korea’s nuclear weapons programme represents an empirical and theoretical puzzle. Contrary to political relationship theory, Beijing has opposed its ally North Korea acquiring nuclear weapons. And contrary to power projection theory, a favourable asymmetry in material power has not resulted in Beijing being able to persuade, or otherwise coerce Pyongyang into terminating its nuclear weapons programme. To understand China’s policy on the North Korean nuclear proliferation issue, the concepts of power and power projection need to be understood differently, in relational power terms. The relational view of power calls for the specification of scope, domain, the means, and the opportunity cost of alternative policy options. Once this is done, the limits and complexities of Chinese policy come into clearer focus.

US Deterrence Strategy and North Korean Nuclear Issue

US Deterrence Strategy and North Korean Nuclear Issue

The Enhance Strategy on Global Firm Value of Korea Manufacturing in Multilateral Trade Structure

국제무역은 다자간 무역체제로 구성된 아(我)와 비아(非我)의 게임(Game)이다. 국제사회에서 유일하게 합의된 게임의 원칙은 국가의 주권론을 인정하는 것이고, 다자간 무역체제에서의 국제무역은 국력(power), 제도(system), 국익 우선주의, 국가적 특성 등에 의해 운영된다. 본 연구에서 한국 제조업의 글로벌 기업가치 제고를 위한 게임전략을 연구하기 위해 내용분석 한 결과, 다자간 무역체제에서 한국 제조업과 상관성이 높게 분석된 중국, 일본, 독일 및 미국, 중국, 러시아 등 열강들의 상황을 분석하여 아와 비아 게임(Me versus Others Game)에서 효율적인 국가적 맞춤 게임전략을 강구해야 하는 것으로 분석되었다. 한국은 제조업 중심의 수출주도형 국가로 국제 산업에서 상호 보완관계에 있는 미국과 러시아 등과는 아(我)의 협력관계에 있고, 산업적 특성이 동일한 중국, 일본, 독일 등은 기술개발, 국제무역, 산업정책 등의 전 분야에서 비아(非我)의 경쟁관계에 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 그리고 경제 및 외교 등의 분야에서 동맹국인 미국과는 외교의 실질적 협력과 산업 협력 등 적극적인 협력전략을 수행하고, 외교 분야에서는 북한 문제 등에서 중국과 우호적 관계의 증진을 모색하는 중장기적 전략을 실행해야 할 것으로 연구되었다. 본 연구는 게임이론을 적용하여 한국 제조업의 글로벌화에 따른 제조업의 글로벌 기업가치 강화전략을 국가적 관점에서 다자게임의 원리로 내용분석 한 것으로 향후 산업적 측면에서 국가경쟁력 강화 정책의 기획 등에 유용한 자료로 활용될 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.International trade based on multi-lateral trading structure prioritizes individual state’s sovereignty. However, it is a pseudo-anarchic system in which it lacks ability to fulfill its fundamental function of governance which is balancing the global order. International trade is ‘me versus others game’ and the only rule that is agreed upon the members is to respect individual state’s sovereignty. In such multi-lateral trading structure, international trade is carried between state-level actors according to the power, system, self-interest and organized characters formed within the structure among member states. As a result of the content analysis which was proceeded to investigate the strategy to raise global firm value of Korean manufacturers in the aspects of competitiveness and politics, it is essential for Korean firms to devise mid and long term game strategy in order to adapt to the status quo which is especially influenced by highly developed countries such as the US, China, Russia, Japan and Germany. Since Korea is industrialized exporting country based on manufacturing business, it is forming cooperative relationship with the complementary states as the US and Russia. On the other hand, Korea is currently in a competing relationship with China, Japan and Germany as because they share similar industrial characters in various fields such as technology development, international trade and industrial development policies. Under such circumstances, Korea needs to maintain cooperative industrial development strategy with the US and should seek mid and long term strategy to form friendly relationship with China in regards to numerous diplomatic affairs like North Korean nuclear issue. In such complex global structure, this research analyzed state-level strategies that can advance firm values of Korean manufacturers based on the multi-lateral game theory. This study is expected to be used as a core reference when making decisions on planning and executing industrial policies of Korea.

국내산 드라이 레드 와인의 품질 특성 및 항산화 활성

The North Korean nuclear issue serves as a failure of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons in the sense that Pyongyang has, at present, nearly...

"북중 동맹’과 ‘북핵 문제’ 전망에 관한 델파이 조사

"북중 동맹’과 ‘북핵 문제’ 전망에 관한 델파이 조사

한반도 평화 프로세스 구현에서 러시아 변수 고찰

The purpose of this study is to clarify that Russia is an important geopolitical variable for the stable implementation of the peace process on the Korean peninsula pursued by Moon Jae In government, to analyze that 1) Kremlin`s recognition of the unstable security situation on the Korean Peninsula, 2) Russia`s various roles that have contributed to peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, 3) the peace process and policy goals of the Korean Peninsula that Russia is envisioning, and 4) the opportunity factors to strengthen Russia`s leadership role and the constraint factors to suppress it in the process of problem-solving on the Korean Peninsula, and to suggest implications for Korea`s policy toward Russia in the future.BR It is a matter of fact that Russia, as well as the US and China, are important participants in the international force game around the Korean peninsula. Therefore, without the cooperation and consent of Russia, the peace settlement of the Korean Peninsula and the process of unification can never be smooth, as well as the amicable resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. The recent annexation of the Crimea in Ukraine and the intervention of the Syrian Civil War, in which Russian interests are roughly reflected, have many implications for the Korean government. It is essential to have wisdom to recognize Russia as a strategic asset for the stable promotion of the peace process on the Korean peninsula and to utilize it as a diplomatic resource, in which the geopolitical and geoeconomic interests in the various issues and areas surrounding the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia are quite consistent.

The more the merrier? Sino-Japanese security relations in the context of complex interstate rivalry in the Asia-Pacific region

This paper analyses the evolution of Sino-Japanese rivalry in the security sphere concentrating on the Chinese perspective, and placing it within the wider context of complex interstate rivalry between China, Japan and the United States. From a theoretical viewpoint, this research contributes to the literature on interstate rivalry from multiparty perspective, which has been overlooked in existing research. China–Japan–US complex interstate rivalry includes elements of positional, spatial and ideological rivalry simultaneously. When rivalries mix two or more rivalry types, they become more difficult to resolve. The two broad trends of China’s military build-up and deepening US–Japan alliance evolve in tandem intensifying rivalry dynamics and increasing positional elements of rivalry. There are many indications on various levels that for China, controlling Japan’s international ambitions has become less important and more attention is paid to ways in which Japan helps the United States in reaching its objectives in Asia through their alliance agreement. The cases analysed to display complex interstate rivalry include the Taiwan question, territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas, and the North Korean nuclear issue.

SOUTH CHINA SEA DISPUTE

During the past decade, China has been striving for a more prominent status in the international community. In doing so, China undertook several measures that indicate its willingness to become a supportive collaborator in the international politics, including taking a part in the Six Party Talks regarding to the North Korean nuclear issue as well as striving for the Market Economy Status (MES). However, the recent development of the South China Sea dispute seems to show a contrasting circumstance. As one of the claimant states, China showed a fairly aggressive gesture in expanding and exploiting the disputed territory. Recently, China even declared a refusal against the verdict from the international law which stated that China had no legal base in claiming the territory. This situation sparked a puzzle as the non-compliance against the international law seemed to be violating China�s on- going efforts to win the broader acceptance in the international community. Thus, using two different perspectives, namely structural realism and social constructivism, this study analyses puzzle and finds the contextual relevance behind China�s non- compliance policy. The overall findings show that the rational interest of pursuing the hegemony in the disputed region becomes the primary goal that China is pursuing beyond the interest of adhering to the international law.

A Critical Review of Balanced Diplomacy as a Leadership of Administrative Leader

This paper aims to propose a constructive direction for diplomatic policy through a critical review of the Moon Jae-in adminstration’s ‘balanced diplomacy’. In order to accomplish this, major leadership theory was used as the methodology to analyze the current government’s diplomatic power in the areas of the North Korean nuclear issue, ROK-U.S. ROK-China relations, and ASEAN diplomacy. The current government must consider the North Korean nuclear issue from two perspectives. North Korea, that possesses nuclear weapons, is not in a position to maintain a stable institutional relationship with South Korea. Moreover, the utmost priority of policy towards North Korea is the Korean people. There must not be any ‘cracks’ within Korean society regarding methods of dealing with the North Korean nuclear issue. Secondly, the ROK-U.S. relations must work towards institutionally securing a nuclear umbrella. This must be fulfilled by ensuring practical security through documenting an ‘automatic intervention’ clause in the ROK-U.S. Mutual Defense Agreement. Thirdly, South Korea can show its presence to China in the ROK-China relations only when it is in a strong alliance with the U.S. Fourthly, diplomatic expansion into Southeast Asia can actually be a cause for losing diplomatic balance in Northeast Asia due to it being an escape from the reality of U.S.-China relations. In conclusion, the Moon government’s diplomatic leadership can be categorized as a ‘Transformational leadership’ that acquires political support by casting a vision for government administration and creating motivation. Three positions must be set in order to practice changeover diplomacy: (1) Acknowledging the reality of inter-Korean relations and building constructive relations with North Korea, (2) establishing an innovative ROK-U.S. security position and foundation for ‘self-strengthening security’, and (3) emerging as a confident and flexible diplomacy.

The 2020 NPT Review Conference and the Role of the ROK

The purpose of this paper is to assess the strategic environment of the Republic of Korea (ROK) and to examine what strategies the ROK will develop ahead of the 2020 NPT Review Conference. Nuclear arms control policy-making is very complex for the ROK because of its specific security dilemma. And the role and strategy of the ROK in international regimes are increasingly important for the ROK’s security and status in the world. Thus, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and its review process including the Review Conference and Preparatory Committee are particularly essential to the ROK. In 2020 when the 10th Review Conference will be held, the ROK should present an appropriate strategy. For this, this article first outlines the establishment and development of the NPT and its review process from 1995 to 2015, after the Cold War and the North Korean nuclear issue was raised. And it describes the ROK’s role played in the NPT on the basis of its three pillars and suggests what strategies Korea must retain: Nuclear disarmament and security assurances from Russia and China; Coercing the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) to rejoin the NPT; Continuing the momentum of the Nuclear Security Summit; and Setting and leading a new agenda. This study concludes with a forecast that the year 2020 will be a major turning point for Korea.

The Rebalance, Entrapment Fear, and Collapsism: The Origins of Obama's North Korea Policy

Following the collapse of diplomatic negotiations with North Korea in 2012, the Obama administration settled on a policy approach dubbed "strategic patience." That policy involved the gradually escalating application of nonviolent means of coercion as the North Korean nuclear problem that it purported to arrest grew more acute over time. But what led the Obama administration to adopt this confrontational yet timid approach to North Korea? Using a configurational analysis, this article proposes that the Obama-era policy of "strategic patience" had little to do with North Korea per se, and instead derived primarily from the intersection of three different factors: the prioritizations necessary as part of the US "rebalance to Asia" strategy; fear that South Korean aggression would pull the United States into an unwanted war in Korea; and a prevailing belief among many policymakers that the North Korean regime would eventually collapse under the pressures of its own contradictions. This combination of priorities and beliefs led the Obama administration to treat the North Korean nuclear issue seriously but not urgently, resorting to actions incommensurate with the nature of the problem.

The Comparative Analysis on the Determinant of Export Competitiveness of Korea vs. USA and China FTA

본 연구는 한국과 미국, 한국과 중국 간에 이루어진 FTA의 경제적 효과를 무역경쟁력 측면에서 비교 평가하기 위해 한-미 FTA와 한-중 FTA 발효를 전후하여 한국과 미국 그리고 중국의 수출변화도 분석과 주요 수출산업의 대미국, 대중국 경쟁력 변화를 조사하였다. 이렇게 FTA와의 경제적 연관성을 산업별로 비교 분석한 다음 추가적으로 산업별 패널회귀분석을 통해 무역지수가 수출에 기여하는 영향을 살펴보았다. 주요 연구결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 한미FTA, 한중FTA 체제 이후 산업별로 무역특화지수, 비교우위지수, 무역결합도, 시장점유율 등 무역관련 지수의 변화가 발생하였고, 이들 무역지수의 개선은 수출금액을 증대시킨 한편 이러한 영향은 FTA 체제가 발효된 이후 그리고 한-중FTA에서 보다 두드러지게 나타났다. 이러한 본 연구의 결과는 FTA로 한국의 주력 산업의 무역특화도나 시장점유율도 증가하고 있지만 산업별로 무역지수 개선에 따른 후속 효과를 심도있게 고찰하고 FTA의 경제적 가치를 유지해갈 수 있는 기업 정책과 기업의 노력이 병행되어야 한다는 시사점을 제시한다.The purpose of this study is to examine the economic value of the two largest FTAs between China and the United States among Korea s largest trade - In addition to the analysis of change, it compares and compares changes in Korea s major export industries and the competitiveness of Korea s major export industries, and reaffirms Korea s comparative advantage industry and comparative disadvantage industry through the corresponding FTA. Compared with sustainable growth of comparative advantage industry, the goal is to provide a policy basis to ensure that the macro and micro-economic measurement to both the government and the industry in Korea. In order to increase exports, diversify export markets and pursue the diversity of export industries (items), it is necessary to have close and organic cooperation between the government and enterprises to cultivate industries that meet the reality of Korea and to expand the market. In particular, the study of the Korea-US FTA and the Korea-China FTA at the time when the re-negotiation of the Korea-US FTA begins as the relationship between China and the US, the largest trading partner of Korea, becomes cold due to political issues such as the North Korean nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula, we hope the results will help the macroeconomic policy decisions on the FTA and the export strategy of the enterprise level.

한반도 정세 변화의 요인과 쟁점: 남-북-미 3국간 비핵화를 둘러싼 정치동학

한반도 정세 변화의 요인과 쟁점: 남-북-미 3국간 비핵화를 둘러싼 정치동학

Trust But Verify: Donald Trump, Kim Jong Un and a Denuclearising North Korea after the Singapore Summit

The Trump–Kim Summit in Singapore can be regarded as a meaningful first step in a long journey towards complete denuclearisation of North Korea. At the Singapore summit, President Donald Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un agreed that North Korea would denuclearise completely and that the United States would in return provide North Korea with security guarantees. However, due to political complexity of the North Korean nuclear issue and technical difficulties of nuclear dismantlement, the process towards complete denuclearisation of North Korea is expected to be protracted and difficult. The prospects for future US–North Korea nuclear negotiations will largely depend on how both countries can work out together the concrete steps, phases and timelines for the implementation of denuclearisation.

북핵 문제와 동아시아 담론 : 생산적 접점 마련을 위한 시론

북핵 문제와 동아시아 담론 : 생산적 접점 마련을 위한 시론