Policy Forum

In his essay, Aidan Foster-Carter, honorary senior research fellow in sociology and modern Korea at Leeds University in England, asserts that the numbers regarding North Korean trade as reported by South Korea’s Korea Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy are distorted. On the surface, it appears Japan and China are North Korea’s main market, but closer scrutiny of the number reveals how much inter-Korean trade is in fact transpiring. In the first half of 2003, North-South Korean trade totaled US $269 million, comprising $112 million in Northern exports and $157 million in imports. South Korea is well on track to gain the pole position of Pyongyang’s top market, and second place in trade overall. So why obfuscate it?

The paper below is by Avery Goldstein, Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania and Senior Fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. Goldstein argues that while an agreement guaranteeing a “nuclear-free” North Korea would be desirable for the United States, there remain other strategic outcomes that fall short of that goal, but may nonetheless prove advantageous to US interests in reducing the risk of the spread of nuclear materials.

I. Introduction Peter Hayes, Executive Director for the Nautilus Institute, writes that in the mid-1990s, Ukraine-which had possession of approximately 1,900 former Soviet nuclear warheads-agreed to get rid of them all in exchange for security assurances, economic support, and energy assistance. Hayes argues that this model could be applied to North Korea as well. Through […]

Nichoas Eberstadt, Henry Wendt Chair in Political Economy at the American Enterprise Institute, argues that a negotiated settlement to the North Korean nuclear drama would be the most desirable outcome for all of the DPRK’s neighbors. However, a diplomatic settlement resulting in a permanent and irreversible denuclearization is an exceedingly unlikely prospet. Eberstadt identifies three major obstacles to a peaceful diplomatic solution: Pyongyang’s own nuclear intentions, the international precedents for other would-be proliferators that would be established by any deal that rewarded the DPRK, and Pyongyang’s credibility as a negotiation partner.

Alexandre Y. Mansourov argues that the international community has a rare historical opportunity to use the six-party talks in Beijing not just to settle old scores and pin down old enemies, but to advance the cause of Korean unification thereby finally resolving the North Korean nuclear crisis, reuniting two Koreas in a peaceful and democratic manner, and bringing better governance and economic prosperity to the North Korean people. He believes the Beijing process may well become “the contrarian’s dream come true,” surprise everyone, and turn out to be much more productive, far-reaching, and momentous than any previous talks on the North Korean nuclear problem.

Nautilus Institute Policy Forum Online: Plutonium Pineapples: Avoiding Awful Choices Over North Korean Nuclear Exports PFO 03-40: August 20, 2003 Plutonium Pineapples: Avoiding Awful Choices Over North Korean Nuclear Exports by Peter Hayes CONTENTS I. Introduction II. Essay by Peter Hayes III. Nautilus Invites Your Responses I. Introduction Given the pressures that could lead to […]

Given the pressures that could lead to armed conflict between the United States and the DPRK in the near future, Peter Hayes, Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute, outlines four scenarios that try to answer whether or not possibilities exist for a peaceful resolution between the United States and the DPRK before November, 2004. Hayes also addresses the questions: What are the strategic elements of such scenarios? What are the pitfalls? If the conflict spins out of control, in what ways could one push towards a peaceful outcome? This Op-Ed was based on the second annual Nautilus Institute US-DPRK Scenarios Workshop held in May 2003.

Given the pressures that could lead to armed conflict between the United States and the DPRK in the near future, Peter Hayes, Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute, outlines four scenarios that try to answer whether or not possibilities exist for a peaceful resolution between the United States and the DPRK before November, 2004. Hayes also addresses the questions: What are the strategic elements of such scenarios? What are the pitfalls? If the conflict spins out of control, in what ways could one push towards a peaceful outcome? This Op-Ed was based on the second annual Nautilus Institute US-DPRK Scenarios Workshop held in May 2003.

Leon V. Sigal, director of the Northeast Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council in New York, asserts that the Bush administration has been misleading in its portrayal of North Korea by spreading three “inexactitudes” concerning North Korea’s nuclear intention, role in the Agreed Framework, and the possibility of its collapse. Moreover, a U.S. strategy of strangulation cannot be effective unless all of the North’s neighbors are willing to join in. However, none are willing to, as they all realize that pressure without negotiations won’t work with Pyongyang.

This statement by Paul O’Sullivan, the Chairman of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) at their meeting in Brisbane on 9-10 July