Archives

Jeffrey Robertson, Senior Researcher in Foreign Affairs, Defence and Security at the Australian Parliamentary Library, writes, “What this study demonstrates above all, is the need to capitalize on periods of relatively reduced security tension on the Korean peninsula During these periods of relative calm, stronger coordination devoted to building momentum in coalition building and ultimately garnering major power support would allow the limited resources of middle powers to be dedicated to an objective that lends itself as both practical and achievable.”

Scott Snyder, Senior Associate in the International Relations program of The Asia Foundation and Pacific Forum CSIS, writes, “the existence or absence of a security alliance between the United States and South Korea would probably not have a decisive impact on civil society interactions across all spheres; the end of the alliance (and more specifically the U.S. military presence in Korea) would actually remove a concern shared by South Korean NGOs working to bring greater transparency and accountability to the U.S.-ROK military relationship.”

Rudiger Frank, Professor of East Asian Economy and Society at the University of Vienna, writes, “In comparison with the 2007 issue, the return to old postures (socialism, Party, domestic resources) is the most striking difference. IT, standing at the core of the 2007 editorial, has not been mentioned in 2008; neither has the status as a nuclear power. Improving the standard of living is again an issue, but its coverage was less intense in 2008.”