Archives

The Task Force on U.S. Korea Policy, co-sponsored by the Center for International Policy and the Center for East Asian Studies of the University of Chicago, writes: Given greater trust the United States would find it easier than in earlier years to negotiate an agreement with North Korea that would end its development of long-range missiles capable of delivering nuclear, chemical or biological weapons to U.S. territory. Similarly, Japan and South Korea would find it easier to negotiate agreements with Pyongyang that would head off the escalating competitive development of short-range and medium-range missiles.

The International Crisis Group, an independent, non-profit, multinational organization, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict, wrote: Talks with North Korea are never easy. There is some skepticism that Pyongyang will never accept a deal, however objectively reasonable. The only way to find out once and for all is to offer it one that at least all five other parties see as such. And that will require more being put on the table than has been the case so far.

Jungmin Kang, an independent nuclear policy analyst in Seoul and Associate of the Nautilus Institute, writes: Via the implementation of the ROK-DPRK-RFE power grid interconnection, the energy support to the DPRK could get the DPRK involved in the multilateral energy cooperation system, reduce political tension around the Korean peninsula, and thereby bring a positive effect in resolving the DPRK nuclear conundrum.

The following is a paper by Jungmin Kang, Tatsujiro Suzuki, Peter Hayes. Jungmin Kang is an independent nuclear policy analyst in Seoul and Associate of Nautilus Institute; Tatsujiro Suzuki is a nuclear analyst affiliated with University of Tokyo in Tokyo; Peter Hayes is Director of Nautilus Institute in San Francisco.

The following is a paper by Cheong Wook-Sik, representative of the Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea. Cheong Wook-Sik writes, “in a situation in which finding a solution to the North Korean nuclear issue has been difficult enough, it seems clear that with the appearance of the South Korean uranium enrichment issue, the six-party talks have run into yet another potential problem. There is room, however, to turn this misfortune into a blessing.”

This special report by Edward P. Reed, the Associate Director of the Center for East Asian Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, was presented at the 2004 Workshop: “Towards a Peaceful Resolution with North Korea: Crafting a New International Engagement Framework in Washington D.C. The workshop, which ran from February 12-13, 2004, was hosted by the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) and the Korea Economic Institute (KEI), in cooperation with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). Reed argues that, “aid agencies must negotiate interventions that are development-oriented, while at same time employing an operational style that builds the institutional and personal trust on which acceptable levels of accountability are based.”

This article may be found at:
http://www.kiep.go.kr/project/workshop.nsf/0/9CA26C701C3FCCCE49256E3F002262C4/$file/Reed.pdf/Reed.pdf

This statement by Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs James A. Kelly was made to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 15th. The statement summarized publicly for the first time the seven-page U.S. proposal presented to North Korea at the most recent Beijing negotiations.

This special report by Liu Ming, professor at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, was presented at the 2004 Workshop: “Towards a Peaceful Resolution with North Korea: Crafting a New International Engagement Framework in Washington D.C. The workshop, which ran from February 12-13, 2004, was hosted by the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) and the Korea Economic Institute (KEI), in cooperation with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). In this paper Professor Liu examines the changing relationship between the PRC and the DPRK noting, “the nuclear crisis offers a chance for China to increase its influence on North Korea and adjusts its traditional relations with and approach to the North.”

This article may be found at: http://www.kiep.go.kr/project/workshop.nsf/0/F0B574A83D21524649256E3F0025237C/$file/Liu.pdf

This special report by Bradley O. Babson, an Asian specialist and former World Bank official, was presented at the 2004 Workshop: “Towards a Peaceful Resolution with North Korea: Crafting a New International Engagement Framework” in Washington D.C. The workshop, which ran from February 12-13, 2004, was hosted by the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) and the Korea Economic Institute (KEI), in cooperation with the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). In this presentation Babson gives an excellent summary of the methods of mobilizing capital for the DPRK. This presentation notes the intricacy of the relationship between political and economic issues in the DPRK. Babson also emphasizes the need for open dialogue between nations to support such an endeavor.

This article may be found at: http://www.kiep.go.kr/project/workshop.nsf/0/1B4202A0D4027DE649256E3F00221C4B/$file/Babson.pdf/Babson.pdf