DUJARRIC, Robert, Hudson Institute
China and the End of North Korea
July 26, 2001: PFO #01-05A
PFO essay |
This essay is by Robert Dujarric, Research Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Washington DC. Dujarric argues that the social and economic changes underway in the PRC are undermining the authority of the Communist Party and will eventually lead to a political transformation. He concludes that a post-communist China will not put the same emphasis on maintaining relations with the DPRK, opening the door for the ROK, the US, and Japan to push for absorption of the
Nuclear Insecurity in South Asia
April 19, 2001: PFO #01-04A
PFO essay |
This essay was contributed by Ahmad Faruqui, Defense and Energy Economist at EPRI, based in Palo Alto, California. Disputing a recent article by a US Naval officer, Faruqui writes that Pakistan has some legitimate security concerns regarding India. He reviews the history of the Indo-Pakistani conflict, including the roles played by Russia and the United States. He concludes that nuclear weapons have not increased security for either country, and that both need to reduce their expenditures on armaments and instead concentrate on human development.
PAIK Haksoon, Sejong Institute
North Korea’s change in policy and U.S. policy toward North Korea: Recommendations for the Bush Administration
April 16, 2001: PFO #01-02M
PFO essay |
This essay was contributed by Haksoon Paik, Ph.D., a specialist on the DPRK at the Sejong Institute, an independent think tank in the ROK. Paik argues that the DPRK’s recent opening-up to the outside world is not a sudden phenomenon, but a continuation of policies that began in the early 1990s. He suggests that the US should conclude its review of DPRK policy quickly and positively engage the DPRK, while keeping in mind both the impact of politics within the DPRK and the views of the ROK.
The Good Cop and the Bad Cop
March 22, 2001: PFO #01-02L
PFO essay |
This essay was written by Choi Won-Ki, Editor and Researcher with the Joongang Daily in Seoul. Choi discusses ROK President Kim Dae-jung’s recent visit to the US and Kim’s meetings with US officials. This is the tenth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Choi states that Kim seems unable to convince Bush to follow his Sunshine Policy for warming relations with the DPRK. Choi argues that the internal inconsistency in the US, combined with the US-ROK difference over how to approach the DPRK, created such confusion in the DPRK over future policy that leader Kim Jong-il cancelled the inter-Korean Ministers’ meeting scheduled for after the summit. Choi concludes with the argument that Kim Jong-il can now either cooperate with Kim Dae-jung or abandon the peace effort entirely.
BECK, Peter M.
South Korea and NMD
March 21, 2001: PFO #01-03A
PFO essay |
This essay is by Peter M. Beck, Director of Research and Academic Affairs at the Korea Economic Institute of America, and was originally published in the ROK daily Hankyoreh Shinmun on March 16. This is the first in a series on the debate over missile defense in Asia. Beck states that US President George Bush, while he is spending tens of billions of dollars on a missile program that does not work, is also calling for a massive tax cut that will lead to cuts in social welfare and infrastructure spending. Beck argues that NMD would only alienate America’s allies and encourage China and Russia to devote more resources to defense and push them to become enemies of the United States. He concludes that NMD represents a huge mistake for the US and the Korean Peninsula, and South Korea must help the Bush team reject NMD.
Discussion of William J. Taylor’s “North Korea Policy: Steady As She Goes”
March 20, 2001: PFO #01-02J
PFO essay |
This commentary is Joel Wit, a Guest Scholar at the Brookings Institution and a former US State Department official who worked on DPRK issues from 1993-1999. This is the ninth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Wit responds to the first essay in the series by William J. Taylor, who argues that the Bush administration should retain the Clinton administration’s approach to the two Koreas and he defends the cautious North Korean pace of responding to the overtures in its direction. Wit argues that the Bush administration has not been in office long enough to become “frustrated” with the North Koreans and has not had the opportunity to devote time to policy formation on the DPRK threat beyond vague statements of the need for “transparency” and “reciprocity.” Wit also argues that progress on the 1994 Agreed Framework has been slow because of the North Korean negotiating style and ongoing doubts about its program more than because of US foot-dragging.
This essay is by Georgi Toloraya, Deputy Director-General of the 1st Asian Department in the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Leading Research Fellow at the IMEMO of Russian Academy of Science. This is the eighth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Toloraya argues that a number of developments over the past year have given watchers of North Korea the hope that North Korea is becoming just another developing, if not democratic, country, looking for its place in a new world order. Toloraya argues outsiders should abandon the hope of changing North Korea by forcing it to democratize, as otherwise engagement becomes a threat to the North Korean regime.FOSTER-CARTER, Aidan
Bush Should Listen To A Korean Elder Statesman
March 13, 2001: PFO #01-02G
PFO essay |
This essay is by Aidan Foster-Carter, honorary senior research fellow in sociology and modern Korea at Leeds University, England. He contributed this comment to the International Herald Tribune. This is the seventh in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Foster-Carter argues that to say the ROK-Russia joint statement on the 1972 Anti-Missile Defense Treaty is evidence of the ROK taking Russia’s side in the missile defense debate twists the meaning of their statement. Rather, he argues, the US should take notice when such a pro-US leader does make such statements as a sign of how far from the global consensus the US is on missile defense.
TAYLOR, William J., The Georgetown University School of Foreign Service
North Korea: Avoid Another Crossroads
March 13, 2001: PFO #01-02F
This essay is by William J. Taylor, an adjunct professor with The Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. This is the sixth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush, and responds to the preceding essays by Leon V. Sigal and Daniel A. Pinkston. Taylor argues that it would be a mistake for the Bush Administration to pursue a “get tough” approach toward North Korea, demanding greater, faster reciprocity from Pyongyang in return for the largesse bestowed in outside aid. Taylor states that North Korea has passed its crossroads, and chose the right direction when they held the North-South Summit in Pyongyang and then entered the ongoing process of N-S dialogue. Taylor argues that there are understandable reasons why North Korea is slow to respond, but the US needs to maintain a steady course with persistent, but gentle, diplomacy.
TAYLOR, William J., The Georgetown University School of Foreign Service
North Korea Policy: Steady As She Goes
March 7, 2001: PFO #01-02E
This essay is by William J. Taylor, an adjunct professor with The Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. This is the fifth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Taylor argues that the Bush administration, as it works to set its foreign policy, should retain the Clinton administration’s approach to the two Koreas. Taylor defends the cautious North Korean pace of responding to the South and to the US and cites several positive developments in recent years with North Korea. Taylor argues that its unwillingness to negotiate a deal on stopping its missile program is justified by KEDO’s slow pace in bringing the reactors on-line.
Dove Myths: No Better Than Hawk Myths
March 7, 2001: PFO #01-02D
PFO essay |
This essay is by Aidan Foster-Carter, Senior Research Fellow in Sociology & Modern Korea at Leeds University. In his essay, Foster-Carter responds to an essay (PFO#01-02C) by Leon V. Sigal. This is the fourth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Foster-Carter states that he agrees with Sigal’s conclusions, but not with the assumptions upon which they are based. Foster-Carter argues that a deal with North Korea for the stoppage of its missile program will not be easy or cheap and that the DPRK still wants US troops off the peninsula. He concludes by arguing that North Korea needs a US that will talk to it.
Six Myths About Dealing With Pyongyang
February 20, 2001: PFO #01-02C
PFO essay| Discussion
This essay is by Leon V. Sigal, Director of the Northeast Asia Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council and author of “Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea.” This is the third in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Sigal argues that the proposed US missile defense system is too far off to protect the United States from a possible DPRK missile attack, and, therefore, it is in the US interest to conclude a deal to terminate the DPRK’s missile program. Sigal outlines six myths, which he argues have prevented the conclusion of such a missile deal.
PINKSTON, Daniel A.
DPRK Economic Reforms and U.S. Security Policy in Northeast Asia
February 20, 2001: PFO #01-02
PFO essay |
This essay is by Daniel A. Pinkston, a Senior Research Associate at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. This is the second in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Pinkston argues that among the first steps the Bush administration must take is to specify its position on the 1994 Agreed Framework, negotiated with the DPRK under former President Bill Clinton, and then state its position on the deal nearly negotiated by Clinton to end the DPRK’s missile program. Pinkston states that the US must support the DPRK’s current reform policies if it is to combat proliferation of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems in Northeast Asia.
CHEONG, Wooksik, Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea
Inauguration of President Bush and alliance between China and North Korea
January 31, 2001: PFO #01-02A
PFO essay |
This essay is by Cheong Wooksik of the Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea and was translated by You Sanghee. This is the first in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Cheong examines the role of DPRK leader Kim Jong-il’s visit to the PRC, US policy on the DPRK and the PRC, the US-proposed National Missile Defense, and other issues in relations among the PRC, DPRK, ROK, Japan, and the US. Cheong concludes that ROK President Kim Dae-jung is a natural mediator for US-DPRK talks
The Sino-Pakistani Relationship: From Harmony to Disquiet
January 2, 2001: PFO #01-01A
PFO essay |
This contribution is by Ahmad Faruqui, Defense and Energy Economist at EPRI, based in Palo Alto, California. He is currently working on a book entitled “The Price of Strategic Myopia: Reforming Pakistan’s Military.” Faruqui explores the Sino-Pakistani bilateral relationship, which he argues may have run its course. He argues that the relationship may also soon undergo a reversal. Faruqui reviews Pakistan’s historical relationship with the PRC, examines changes in PRC priorities and the influence they have had on its relationships with Pakistan. He concludes with a discussion of future scenarios, including the impact of a changed Sino-Pakistani relationship upon India and the US.
LIMAYE, Satu P., Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies
India-East Asia Relations: India’s Latest Asian Incarnation
December 1, 2000: PFO #00-8A
PFO essay |
This contribution is by Satu P. Limaye, Director of Research at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. This essay was originally published by Pacific Forum CSIS’s e-journal Comparative Connections. Limaye argues that this third incarnation of India as an Asian state began with the post-nuclear test damage control efforts and was sustained despite the 1999 undeclared Kargil war between Pakistan and India. Limaye reviews India’s bilateral relations with the PRC, Japan, Southeast Asia, and Russia, as well as these countries’ positions on India’s nuclear tests and Pakistan. Limaye argues that India’s sustained dimplomatic pressures have moved beyond damage control and into the significant enhancement of ties with other Asian countries, an effort that has largely been reciprocated.
KIM, Mi-kyoung, World Vision Korea
North Korea: Torn Between Two Logical Decisions, Regime Maintenance or Economic Survival?
December 1, 2000: PFO #00-07B
PFO essay |
This contribution is by Mi-kyoung Kim, PhD, a policy advisor to North Korean Aid Programs for World Vision Korea. Kim argues that perceptions of the DPRK and its leader Kim Jong-il prior to the recent diplomatic flurry were based on limited information. Kim also argues that it has become clear that the DPRK regime is simultaneously pursuing two policies, that of strengthening international ties and that of internal regime maintenance, but does not have the resources to do both well.
SOKOLSKI, Henry, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center
This Is No Way to Curb the North Korean Threat
October 31, 2000: PFO #00-07A
PFO essay |
Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center in Washington and author of the forthcoming “Best of Intentions: America’s Campaign Against Strategic Weapons Proliferation,” published an essay in The Washington Post on October 29, 2000. Sokolski argues that the 1994 Agreed Framework will provide the DPRK with dangerous nuclear technology and know-how. He further argues that a deal that helps the DPRK to launch satellites will provide it with the technology to perfect its long-range missiles. Nautilus will provide responses to this essay in a series examining the DPRK’s offer to halt its missile development program in exchange for assistance with launching satellites into space.
TAYLOR, William J., Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
North Korea’s Kim, Jong-WHO?
October 23, 2000: PFO #00-06C
PFO essay |
This is the third essay examining the question of the DPRK’s past behavior in the light of the recently completed ROK-DPRK summit. This essay was contributed by William J. Taylor, Senior Advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Taylor examines the psychological profiles that have been constructed and propagated over the years by analysts, and by the DPRK itself, to demonstrate that those outside the DPRK do not know much about its leadership or its intentions. Taylor argues that the DPRK leadership may have bought into Kim Dae-jung’s Sunshine Policy, providing other countries with an opportunity to normalize relations that should not be squandered.
United Front Strategy against U.S. Troops
August 3, 2000: PFO #00-06B
PFO essay |
This is the second essay examining the question of the DPRK’s past behavior in the light of the recently completed ROK-DPRK summit. This essay was contributed by Nam Si-uk, professor at Korea University and former publisher of the Munhwa Ilbo in Seoul. Nam questions whether DPRK leader Kim Jong-il’s grand strategy relative to reunification with the ROK still follows a “united front” policy of building alliances with sympathetic factions within the ROK. Nam argues that Kim Jong-il’s attempts at intervention in ROK domestic politics, including the US military presence, gives one reason to be pessimistic about whether Kim Jong-il is sincere about reconciliation. This essay originally appeared in the Korea Times on July 31, as “Is United Front Strategy Still Unchanged?”
North Korea and Moral Hazard: Eyes Wide Shut?
August 2, 2000: PFO #00-06A
PFO essay |
This essay was contributed by Aidan Foster-Carter, an honorary senior research fellow in sociology and modern Korea at Leeds University, England. Looking at the Bangkok meeting of the ASEAN Regional Forum, Foster-Carter questions whether past and current problems with the DPRK should be simply ignored in the process of improving relations with the DPRK. Foster-Carter cites the DPRK’s unwillingness to acknowledge or apologize for terrorist acts in Burma or for kidnapping ROK and Japanese citizens, not to mention using blackmail to gain economic assistance. He argues that this creates a moral hazard for other countries. A shorter, edited version of this essay was published by the International Herald Tribune on July 27.
This essay was contributed by Han Sung-Joo, Professor of International Relations at Korea University and former ROK Foreign Minister. Han made these remarks at the 50th Anniversary Commemorative Conference on “The Korean War: Forgotten No More,” held at Georgetown University in Washington, DC on June 23. Han reviews the history of ideological shifts in the ROK, noting that the divide between left and right becomes apparent whenever the ROK loosens up politically. He argues that while the ROK-DPRK summit has reinvigorated anti-US sentiment in the ROK, when the euphoria from the summit dies down, most people will realize that the costs of keeping US troops in the ROK is worth it to deter war.
This essay was contributed by Hwal-Woong Lee, Senior Advisor to Minjok Tongshin (LA-based Korean-American Web Daily). Formerly, Mr Lee served as a Foreign Service Officer of the ROK Foreign Ministry (1956-71), ROK Consul in Los Angeles (1968-71), President of Korea Reunification Forum in LA (1994-95), and Fellow at Korea 2000, an LA-based research council on Korean reunification (1997-99). Lee argues that the US, as the country responsible for the division of the Korean Peninsula and the main supporter of the ROK, has an obligation to support the ROK-DPRK accord. He further argues that the only way to get the DPRK to abandon its weapons programs is to withdraw US troops from the ROK.
HAYES, Peter, Nautilus Institute
After the Korean Summit: Into Thick Air?
June 29, 2000: PFO #00-05C
PFO essay |
This essay was contributed by Peter Hayes, Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute. It originally appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle on June 28. Dr. Hayes argues that, in the wake of the summit, the real work of economic cooperation will be fraught with difficulties, particularly in regards to providing the energy needed for ROK enterprises that want to do business in the DPRK. Hayes maintains that the problem of the DPRK’s electric grid will require a long-term, holistic solution. He calls on the US to remove the DPRK from the list of terrorism-sponsoring states to allow World Bank involvement in rehabilitating the DPRK’s infrastructure.
This article is by Professor Victor Cha, an East Asia security specialist in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, Washington DC. He is currently a Senior Fulbright Scholar in South Korea. Cha argues that the summit meeting in Pyongyang was long on atmospherics and short on substance. He says that while the summit had important cathartic effects on the Korean psyche, the hard work has yet to be done. He maintains that reunification and withdrawal of US troops are not issues that are going to be solved in the near term.
This article by Timothy L. Savage, Program Officer for Global Peace and Security at the Nautilus Institute, appeared in the Korea Herald on June 21. Savage argues that the summit was an important first step in breaking down the ideological barrier that separates the two Koreas. By embracing Kim Dae-jung, DPRK leader Kim Jong-il signaled a move away from the official designation of the ROK as a puppet state, thus opening up the space to a “Korean” solution to the ongoing problem of the divided peninsula.
This essay is by Lyuba Zarsky, Co-Director of the Nautilus Institute. Ms. Zarsky also sits on the Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Zarsky argues that the debate over China is more about the World Trade Organization than about China itself. She criticizes progressives for focusing too strongly on the immediate tactical battle, and in the process, falling into the trap of China-bashing. Instead, she argues, progressives need to develop a vision for a future policy that embraces China as a member of the world community, in order to promote a multilateral approach to problems of environment and human rights.
CARE’s Withdrawal from North Korea
April 6, 2000: PFO #00-03A
PFO essay |
This article is by Thomas McCarthy, who has worked for over twenty-five years as a consultant in agriculture and rural development. He has undertaken seven extended missions in the DPRK, including work for the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the UN Development Program, and the Food and Agriculture Organization. McCarthy discusses CARE’s recent decision to withdraw from the US Private Voluntary Organization Consortium (PVOC) working on agricultural development in the DPRK. He argues that, while working in the DPRK is never easy, the PVOC bears a large portion of the responsibility for its failure to follow the agreed procedures on managing and monitoring the agricultural development project. He warns that the withdrawal could damage the credibility of US promises to provide developmental aid to the DPRK.
COTTON, James, Australian Defence Force Academy
A New Initiative in Australia-DPRK Relations
March 29, 2000: PFO #00-2D
This essay was written by James Cotton, Professor of Politics, Australian Defence Force Academy, University of New South Wales. Cotton reviews the recent developments in Australian-DPRK relations, and the possibilities of resumption of full relations. He says that Australia is seeking to move away from isolation of the DPRK and to support US and ROK engagement efforts. For its part, the DPRK seeks more Australian trade and investment, and to improve relations with those nations that contributed to the UN force that intervened in the Korean War.
The What-If Question
March 15,2000: PFO #00-02C
PFO essay | Discussion
This article is by Bradley Martin, Contributing Editor, Asia Times Online, Bangkok. It appeared on Asia Times Online. Martin discusses the question of what would happen if the US were to withdraw its troops from the ROK. He warns that doing so would likely lead to an ROK arms buildup that could spark a regional arms race. He also argues that without the automatic intervention promised by US troop presence, the DPRK may decide to launch an invasion if it sees the US occupied elsewhere on the globe.
March 2, 2000: PFO #00-02
PFO essay Discussion
This essay is by Indong Oh, M.D., a fellow and director of Korea-2000, a Los Angeles-based research council on Korean unification. Dr. Oh argues that the continuance of US wartime operational control over ROK forces under the Combined Forces Command hinders the realization of ROK-DPRK dialogue. He calls for shifting the emphasis in peace talks away from US-DPRK bilateral talks and towards direct inter-Korean negotiations.
WIT, Joel, Brookings Institution
Clinton and North Korea: Past, Present, and Future
March 1, 2000: PFO #00-02A
Mr. Wit, a Guest Scholar at the Brookings Institution, is a former US State Department official who worked on DPRK issues from 1993-1999. Wit reviews the history of US President Bill Clinton’s engagement policy of the DPRK. He argues that the Agreed Framework has been successful in preventing the DPRK from developing a nuclear weapons arsenal, but has not been fully implemented across the board. At present, the Perry Report has restored some stability to US-DPRK relations. Further progress in the near future could make it difficult for the next US administration to make drastic changes in policy, although a Republican president is likely to take a somewhat different approach toward the DPRK.
This essay was contributed by Hwal-Woong Lee, former Foreign Service Officer for the ROK Government and currently a Fellow at Korea-2000, an LA based research council on Korean reunification. Lee argues that the continued presence of US troops in the ROK prevents a comprehensive settlement of Korean Peninsula security issues. Instead, he calls for a regionally based approach that would include participation by all interested countries.
CHOI, Won-Ki, Joongang Ilbo
Dealing with North Korea “As It Is”
December 23, 1999: PFO #99-07K
PFO essay |
This essay is by Won-Ki Choi, Editor and Researcher with the Joongang Daily in Seoul. The author reviews the political situation in the DPRK, and how it has been affected by the ongoing economic difficulties. He argues that policies toward the DPRK should be consistent and based on a firm grasp of the reality of the DPRK’s situation. He concludes that, ultimately, the international community will have to lead a large-scale development effort for the DPRK.
CHEONG, Wooksik, Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea
Two Reports on North Korea
December 15, 1999: PFO #99-07J
PFO essay |
This essay is by Cheong Wooksik, a representative of the Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea, and was translated by You Sanghee. Cheong compares the two recent reports on US policy toward the DPRK; that of former Defense Secretary William Perry and that of the US Congress’s North Korea Advisory Group. Cheong argues that while the Perry report was designed to provide policy alternatives, the Republican report was meant to criticize the Clinton administration’s DPRK policy. He concludes that while, compared to the Republican report, the Perry report appears progressive, it makes no new proposals for reducing the reliance on military deterrence on the Korean Peninsula.
LEE, Hwal-Woong, Korea 2000
The Perry Report: Scenario for a Collision Course?
November 9, 1999: PFO #99-07I
PFO essay |
This essay was contributed by Hwal-Woong Lee, former Foreign Service Officer for the ROK Government and currently a Fellow at Korea-2000, an LA based research council on Korean reunification. The author argues that the Perry Report offers little hope to end the DPRK’s weapons of mass destruction programs, which he says are a response to the US threat to the DPRK’s security. He maintains that, in the absence of a political solution that would include the withdrawal of US troops from the ROK, the Perry Report only puts the US and the DPRK on a course to eventual conflict.
KIM, Myong Chol, Center for Korean-American Peace
US-DPRK Will End Up in Shotgun Marriage
October 22, 1999: PFO #99-07G
PFO essay |
This essay was contributed by Kim Myong Chol, Executive Director, the Center for Korean-American Peace, Tokyo, and the former editor of People’s Korea. Kim argues that for the US to truly improve relations with the DPRK, it should abandon its long-standing support for the ROK. He maintains that the only alternatives to full normalization of relations with the DPRK are war or a nuclear arms race.
This essay was contributed by John Feffer and Karin Lee, representatives for the East Asia Quaker International Affairs Program of the American Friends Service Committee. The authors argue that opponents of engagement with the DPRK miss signs of genuine change within the country. They maintain that change in the DPRK should not be compared with that of other countries, as the DPRK remains primarily concerned with preserving its sovereignty. Nonetheless, they argue, the changes are real and long-term, and understanding them will enhance the ability for the US to engage the DPRK in a mutually beneficial manner.
WOLFSTAHL, Jon, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Seizing Opportunity in North Korea
September 23, 1999: PFO #99-07C
PFO essay |
This essay was contributed by Jon Brook Wolfsthal, an associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, in Washington, DC, and a former official of the US Department of Energy. This article was originally published in the Christian Science Monitor on September 21, 1999. Wolfstahl argues that the recent Berlin agreement between the US and the DPRK represents an opportunity to improve US-DPRK relations. He faults the Clinton administration for only concentrating on the DPRK when it takes provocative actions, and argues that, to prevent future tension, the US should move ahead to improve relations as it promised to do in 1994.
This essay was contributed by Nicholas Eberstadt, a researcher with the American Enterprise Institute and author of the forthcoming book, “The End of North Korea.” A version of this essay ran in the Chosun Ilbo on September 13. Eberstadt argues that the recent US-DPRK agreement is unlikely to lead to an opening of relations and an end of the DPRK’s missile program. He notes that for the DPRK to open up to outside trade and investment would go against its ruling philosophy. He also argues that the DPRK sees missile and nuclear development as vital to its national interests, and thus is unlikely to trade them for better relations with the US.
This essay was written by Victor Cha, Professor in the Department of Government at Georgetown University and author of “Alliance Despite Antagonism: The United States-Korea-Japan Security Triangle.” Cha argues that the outcome of the recent US-DPRK Berlin talks demonstrates the possibility of engaging the DPRK under the right circumstances. He further argues that enhanced deterrence through ROK participation in Theater Missile Defense will help promote engagement by assuring DPRK adherence to the agreement.
Paik reviews the state of relations among the US, the ROK, and the DPRK, in the aftermath of the inspection of the underground site at Kumchangni and US DPRK Policy Coordinator William Perry’s trip to the DPRK. Paik argues that the most realistic approach would be for all sides to accept the minimum gains from the inspection and Perry’s visit. Paik concludes that, given its economic difficulties, the DPRK has no choice but to accept the comprehensive package offered by the US and the ROK.
COSSA, Ralph A., Pacific Forum, CSIS
South Korea’s Package Deal
March 19, 1999: PFO #99-05B
Dr. Cossa praises ROK President Kim’s proposed “package deal” with the DPRK as a “valiant attempt” to save both his own “sunshine policy” toward the DPRK and the 1994 Agreed Framework. In contrast, he criticizes both the US and Japan for lacking a comprehensive policy toward the DPRK. He argues that what is needed to bring Kim’s package to fruition is an implementing agency on the lines of KEDO, but headed by the ROK instead of the US.
HUNTLEY, Wade and Timothy L. SAVAGE, Nautilus Institute
Agreed Framework at the Crossroads
March 11, 1999: PFO #99-05
The authors argue that expectations of the immanent collapse of the DPRK have prevented the US and its allies from fully engaging the DPRK, accounting for the current crisis in the Agreed Framework. They maintain that, to convince the DPRK of their sincerity in engagement, the US and Japan must move toward full diplomatic recognition of the DPRK. In exchange, the DPRK must make further commitments, not only to shut down its nuclear and missile programs, but also to reduce its forward military deployment. The authors also propose that the ROK abolish the National Security Law to spur on ROK-DPRK talks.
Examines the creation of NOWPAP, the central regime for marine environmental cooperation in Northeast Asia, and the political problems associated with its smooth functioning.
North Korea’s Coming ICBM
February 10, 1999: PFO #99-03
The author argues that the Clinton administration’s efforts at engagement with the DPRK have failed to curb the DPRK’s missile development. He maintains that the DPRK will likely have Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) capable of reaching parts of the US before the US will be able to build a National Missile Defense to protect against them. He argues that the DPRK will likely use these missiles as a “diplomatic trump card” to make up for the deterioration of its conventional armed forces and to push the US to withdraw its troops from the ROK. He calls on the US to restructure its deterrence policy to make clear to the DPRK that it would face massive retaliation if it attempted to attack the US.
Looks at the prospects for effective regional action to protect the Northwest Pacific marine environment and concludes that at present the outlook is not promising.
Argues that an excellent opportunity exists to build a comprehensive environmental management regime for the Sea of Japan and sets forth an outline for a “model” management regime.
Keep North Korea in the Agreed Framework
January 7, 1999: PFO #98-13E
This essay is by Sung-han Kim, Associate Professor, Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Seoul, Republic of Korea. The views expressed are the author’s own and do not represent the official position of the South Korean government. Dr. Kim argues that the Agreed Framework is vital for maintaining the peace on the Korean peninsula. He maintains that, as the primary goal of the DPRK is regime survival, a comprehensive package from the US, including offers to remove economic sanctions and move toward diplomatic recognition, could serve to bring the DPRK back into compliance with the framework process.
Agreed Framework in Danger of Collapse
December 22, 1998: PFO #98-13D
This essay was written by Peter T.R. Brookes, Senior Advisor for East Asian Affairs with the Republican Staff of the Committee on International Relations in the US House of Representatives. Brookes argues that the 1994 Agreed Framework has failed to accomplish its goals of halting the DPRK’s nuclear program. He attributes this failure both to flaws in the agreement itself and the DPRK’s unwillingness to live up to its side of the bargain. He warns that, unless US concerns about the DPRK’s missile program are addressed quickly, the Agreed Framework is in danger of collapse.
Provided the framework for discussions at the July 1998 ESENA workshop in Tokyo on appropriate and feasible U.S.-Japan policy initiatives which address oil-related marine issues in the Sea of Japan/East Sea.
KIM Myong Chol
Farewell to the Agreed Framework!
November 24, 1998: PFO #98-13C
Kim Myong Chol, an ethnic Korean born and living permanently in Japan has worked as a reporter and editor at “The People’s Korea” and has written extensively on DPRK perspectives on Korean and international relations. Mr. Kim previously contributed to NAPSNet Policy Forum #13, “Kim Jong-il’s Peace Policy.” Mr. Kim argues that the DPRK is fully prepared to stand up to the US in the event that the US decides to scuttle the Agreed Framework, and that the burden for preventing a nuclear exchange lies with the US.
Mr. Wit, Senior Associate at the Henry L. Stimson Center, is currently on leave from the US State Department, where he was in charge of implementing the US-DPRK Agreed Framework since 1995. Wit calls for a more aggressive diplomacy to deal with the DPRK’s nuclear weapons program. He argues that the goal of stopping the DPRK from developing nuclear weapons cannot be accomplished without an overall improvement in US-DPRK relations. Therefore what is needed is an overall diplomatic strategy, which even if it fails, would establish the basis for regional action to deal with the DPRK nuclear problem.
KANTER, Arnold, Forum for International Policy
Future of the Agreed Framework: The Coming North Korean Crisis
November 17, 1998 : PFO #98-13A
Mr. Kanter, a Senior Fellow at the Forum for International Policy, served as US Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs from 1991 to 1993 and Special Assistant to the President for Defense Policy and Arms Control on the National Security Council staff from 1989 to 1991. Kanter discusses the failure of the 1994 Agreed Framework to accomplish its goals, and calls for a thorough reevaluation of US policy toward the DPRK. He argues that the US must forge a new approach to reduce the risk that the DPRK poses to peace, not only on the Korean peninsula, but to the region as a whole. This essay originally appeared as the Forum for International Policy Issue Brief #98-15 on November 6, 1998.
For Sale: North Korea’s Missile Program
November 11, 1998: PFO #98-12
This essay is by Leon V. Sigal, a consultant at the Social Science Research Council in New York and author of Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea (1998). Sigal argues that Japan and the US have overreacted to the DPRK’s August 31 launch of a Taepodong I missile. He states that the DPRK has consistently indicated its willingness to give up its missile program in exchange for an monetary compensation and an easing of the US embargo. Sigal calls on the US and Japan to take the DPRK up on this offer, as part of a comprehensive program to ease tensions on the Korean peninsula.
Describes the compilation of two country-by-county scenarios of electricity supply in Northeast Asia and concludes that, independent of the systems for waste isolation (or recycling) chosen, the quantities of nuclear materials implied in either of the two scenarios will require regional cooperation on nuclear fuel and nuclear waste technologies, handling protocols, and planning.
In this essay, Dr. C. Kenneth Quinones, Asia Foundation Representative to Korea and former North Korean desk officer at the US State Department argues that the media reports of the construction of an alleged underground nuclear facility in the DPRK are the result of deliberate “leaks” by members of the US intelligence community who wish to influence the debate on US policy toward the DPRK. He points to evidence from his own extensive visits to the DPRK that the DPRK relies heavily on underground facilities for a variety of purposes. He argues that, before jumping to any conclusions, the US should demand an on-site inspection of the facility to determine its actual nature.
This essay by George Perkovich, Director of the Secure World Program at the W. Alton Jones Foundation, is adapted from Mr. Perkovich’s article, originally published in the Fall 1998 issue of Foreign Policy. Perkovich argues that the recent nuclear tests by India and Pakistan were motivated more by political pressures than by security interests. For that reason, rolling back nuclear development tends to be more difficult in democratic nations where policymakers are less insulated from domestic politics. Given these conditions, Perkovich argues that nonproliferation efforts need to address the question of inequity in international arms control regimes.
This essay, written by L. Gordon Flake, Associate Director, Program on Conflict Resolution at The Atlantic Council of the United States, originally appeared as PacNet #32 on August 7, 1998. Flake warns that the 1994 Geneva Agreed Framework is at risk of falling apart. He argues that, whereas the US has concentrated on the nuclear “freeze” part of the agreement, the DPRK sees the agreement more as a “framework” for the improvement of relations across the board. He attributes the DPRK’s recent threats to scuttle the agreement to frustration at the lack of progress in several of the areas covered under the Agreed Framework. He calls on the US administration and Congress to work together to ensure that the US lives up to its obligations under the agreement.
This essay was written by Scott Snyder, Program Officer at the U.S. Institute of Peace, based on meetings of the working group on U.S. policy toward the Korean peninsula that focused on political, economic, and security developments in North and South Korea. The meetings were held at the United States Institute of Peace in November and December 1997 and March 1998. The United States Institute of Peace has held an ongoing series of working group meetings since fall 1993, when a group was convened to examine policy options for dealing with the North Korean nuclear challenge. For more information about the meeting series or this report, please contact Scott Snyder at (202) 429-3808 or visit the USIP website.
Mr. Snyder argues that political and economic transitions in both South and North Korea have dramatically changed the context and prospects for initiating a Korean peace process. The South Korean financial crisis and the election of Kim Dae Jung have led to a more conciliatory South Korean policy toward North Korea, while North Korea’s economic distress and the extended process of political transition from Kim Il Sung to his son, Kim Jong Il, have increased North Korea’s dependence on international negotiations to gain resources necessary for the regime to survive.
THAKUR, Ramesh, United Nations University, Tokyo
Implications of South Asian Nuclear Tests: What Can the World Do?
May 27, 1998: PFO #98-06
In this essay, which originally appeared in the International Herald Tribune on May 19, 1998, Professor Ramesh Thakur, vice rector of the United Nations University in Tokyo, Japan, examines the international and domestic causes of the Indian nuclear tests, as well as the international response. He argues that, while regrettable, India’s decision to test is not surprising, given both the domestic pressures on the ruling coalition and the flaws of international nonproliferation regimes. He concludes that the international community’s response to the tests are unlikely to be effective. US sanctions lack moral equivalence due to the lack of progress on disarmament, and any response is likely to play into the hands of Indian hawks.
HUNTLEY, Wade, Nautilus Institute
Implications of South Asian Nuclear Tests: The Proliferation Network
May 21, 1998: PFO #98-05
This essay was written by Wade Huntley, Ph.D., the Program Director for Asia/Pacific Security at the Nautilus Institute. Dr. Huntley examines the connections between the recent nuclear tests conducted by India and the DPRK’s threats to restart its Yongbyon nuclear reactor. He argues that US nonproliferation policies need to be updated to take into account the new realities of proliferation in the post-Cold War era. In addition to responding to horizontal proliferation threats, the US needs to step up efforts to achieve vertical disarmament, while at the same time devising complex engagement strategies to balance negative threats with positive inducements for nonproliferation. Ultimately, Dr. Huntley concludes that promoting nonproliferation requires finding solutions to the outstanding political issues which drive countries to seek a nuclear option.
WRIGHT, David C., Union of Concerned Scientists
Will North Korea Negotiate Away Its Missiles?
April 8, 1998: PFO #98-04
The executive summary of the article “Will North Korea Negotiate Away Its Missiles,” by David C. Wright of the Union of Concerned Scientists. A summary item of news reports of this article was included in the US Section of the Daily Report for April 3. The full text of the article can be downloaded using Adobe Acrobat Reader at the Union of Concerned Scientists website.
This essay, “Democracy and the Origins of the 1997 Korean Economic Crisis,” was written by Jongryon Mo, Assistant Professor of International Relations and Associate Director of the Center for International Studies, and Chung-in Moon, Professor of Political Science at the Graduate School of International Studies, at Yonsei University. The essay explores the relationship between democratic development and the Economic crisis in the ROK. This essay will be forthcoming as the Epilogue in “Democracy and the Korean Economy,” eds. Chung-in Moon and Jongryn Mo, Hoover Institution Press.
Provides a brief overview of the recent and current status of the DPRK energy sector, as well as some of the factors that will influence the development (or continued decline) of the sector over the next eight years and beyond.
Kim Myong Chol is an ethnic Korean born and living permanently in Japan who has worked as a reporter and editor at “The People’s Korea” and has written extensively on DPRK perspectives on Korean and international relations. Mr. Kim previously contributed to NAPSNet Policy Forum Online #4,“DPRK Perspectives on Ending the Korean Armistice”.
This essay examines DPRK Kim Jong-il’s policy toward peace and security on the Korean peninsula in general, and the four-party peace talks in particular. Mr. Kim argues that, whereas the US lacks a clear strategy for the four-party talks, Kim Jong-il has a well-mapped out policy that continues to regard a peace treaty for the Korean Peninsula as a matter to be decided between the DPRK and the US, with the ROK and the PRC playing only supporting roles. While the DPRK still seeks the withdrawal of US troops from the Korean Peninsula, it is likely to settle for a treaty which will “legitimize” and “neutralize” their presence. Finally, Mr. Kim dismisses the possibility of a DPRK collapse, arguing that historical and cultural factors preclude the type of domestic opposition necessary to overthrow the Kim Jong-il regime.
KIHL, Young Whan, Iowa State University
North Korea’s Political Problem
November 25, 1997: PFO #97-23
This essay was originally prepared for the conference on “Korea In The 21st Century: In Search for Peace, Unification and Prosperity,” held at Chongju University, ROK, June 2-3, 1997, and appeared in the summer 1997 issue of “The Economics of Korean Unification.” The author, Young Whan Kihl, is a professor at Iowa State University. Kihl argues that the foremost political problem of the DPRK today is the survival of the Kim Jong-il regime. Ultimately, Kim will need to build his own charisma via achievement-oriented performance. The strategic goal of the DPRK continues to be forcing US troop withdrawal from the ROK, so as to enable the DPRK to realize its dream of Korean reunification in its own terms, i.e., the communization of the ROK by whatever means are deemed necessary, including the use of force.
Managing the Commons: The Future Direction of Environmental Sustainability in Southeast Asia
November 25, 1997: PFO #97-22
Argues that balancing the need for industrial development and environmental protection will require more than establishing green working groups or tightening anti-pollution standards; it will require a fundamental shift from a policy of pollution command-and-control to a system of environmental management as the basis of a regional sustainable development vision.
COSSA, Ralph A., Pacific Forum, CSIS
Monitoring the Agreed Framework
October 30, 1997: PFO #97-21
This essay assessing the current status of the US-DPRK “Agreed Framework” was written by Ralph Cossa, Executive Director of Pacific Forum CSIS in Honolulu, Hawaii, a policy-oriented research institute with programs on security, political, economic, and environmental issues that operates as the Asia-Pacific arm of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC. Cossa is a political-military affairs and national security strategy specialist with extensive experience in US security policy-making in the Asia-Pacific and Near East-South Asia regions, including service as a USAF colonel and former special assistant to the Commander-in-Chief, US Pacific Command. Previous distributions of Cossa’s writings through NAPSNet include his analysis of the then-upcoming four-party Korean peace talks preliminary meeting (see “Four-Party Peace Talks Preliminary Meeting”in the Analysis section of the August 4 Daily Report) and his participation in the previous Forum discussion of the December 1996 DPRK statement of “regret” for the submarine incursion incident (see Policy Forum Online #97-01B).
DUNK, Tim and John MCKAY
Middle Powers and Korean Normalization
October 3, 1997: PFO #97-20
This essay, “The Role of Medium Sized Powers in the Normalization Process on the Korean Peninsula: An Australian Perspective,” was written by Tim Dunk, an official at the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and John McKay, a professor at the Asia Institute at Monash University in Australia. The authors argue that the end of the Cold War affords middle powers a new opportunity to contribute to the normalization process on the Korean peninsula. While they acknowledge that middle powers, like their larger counterparts, have their own interests vis-a-vis the Korean peninsula, the authors nonetheless feel that middle powers can play an important role in promoting the opening of the DPRK as well as facilitating inter-Korean dialogue. The essay continues discussion of the prospects for peace on the Korean peninsula begun in previous NAPSNet Policy Forums.
ZARSKY, Lyuba, Nautilus Institute
Heading for the Doldrums? APEC and the Environment
September 16, 1997: PFO #97-19
Without stronger political winds, APEC’s environmental agenda will be propelled more by drift than by steady progress on a charted course. The question of where the winds might come from is the central question for environmental policymakers and activists alike.
DRENNAN, Col. William M., USAF
Prospects and Implications of Korean Unification
August 22, 1997: PFO #97-18
This essay, “Prospects and Implications of Korean Unification,” was written by Colonel William M. Drennan, USAF, presently Senior Military Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies of the National Defense University in Washington DC. Colonel Drennan is an Asian specialist, with primary emphasis on Korean issues. His previous positions include professor at the National War College; Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations; and Chief of Strategy and Policy, J-5, US Forces Korea. He has served in the White House and the Pentagon and has published works on Korean international and domestic politics. The essay assesses current views on the prospects of Korean unification, taking issue with both the “hard” and “soft” landing scenarios often taken to comprise the only possible outcomes of contemporary circumstances. Colonel Drennan’s essay continues discussion of the prospects for peace on the Korean peninsula begun in previous NAPSNet Policy Forums.
BAJANOV, Evgueni, Institute of Contemporary International Problems
A Russian Perspective on Korean Peace and Security
July 28, 1997: PFO #97-17
This essay, “Russian Perspective On A Post-Armistice Order In Korea,” is by Evgueni Bajanov, Director of the Institute of Contemporary International Problems (ICIP) in the Russian Diplomatic Academy in Moscow, Russian Federation. Prof. Bajanov’s essay offers a provocative look at Korean affairs from the point of view of the Russian Federation, tracing Russia’s historic and contemporary interests in the region, examining the evolution of its relations with the principal countries in the Northeast Asia region, and assessing the role that Russia seeks to play in promoting peace and security on the Korean peninsula. In particular, Prof. Bajanov explains the critical position that Russia has taken toward the US-ROK proposed “four-party” peace talks, and describes the alternative process advocated by Russia which, he argues, would be more effective in solving the problems underlying present tensions and in laying the groundwork for eventual Korean unification. Readers may wish to note the parallels between Prof. Bajanov’s articulation of the “Russian proposal” to achieve Korean peace and security, envisioning a normalization of relations among the principal involved states followed by a convening of an international conference with broader participation, and the proposal discussed by Robert Bedeski in PFO 97-16.
BEDESKI, Robert E.
Challenges to Peace on the Korean Peninsula
July 23, 1997: PFO #97-16
This essay, “Arms Control Inspections, the Armistice Agreement, and New Challenges to Peace on the Korean Peninsula,” is by Robert E. Bedeski, professor of political science at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Canada. Prof. Bedeski’s essay examines the difficult relationship between the interests of the international community and those of Korean nationalists that underlie all efforts either to find short-run means to stave off violent conflicts on the Korean peninsula or to forge long-run solutions to the problems that give rise to the enduring tensions and rivalries. Prof. Bedeski offers a detailed assessment of many dimensions of the present situation, and concludes with a proposal for a four-step process to achieve a lasting peace on the Korean peninsula.
GILINSKY, Victor, Henry SOKOLSKI and Howard DIAMOND
Assessing the Agreed Framework: Article Summaries & Response
July 10, 1997: PFO #97-15
Earlier this year, The Washington Post carried two opinion articles offering contrasting assessments of the 1994 US-DPRK agreement — the “Agreed Framework” — under which the DPRK is to suspend its nuclear program in exchange for the provision of two new light-water nuclear reactors. The first article, by Victor Gilinsky and Henry Sokolski, argued that interpretation of the terms of the Agreed Framework has changed over the course of its implementation, to the degree that the agreement now excessively favors the DPRK and so no longer serves US interests. The second article, by Howard Diamond, argued that Mr. Gilinsky and Mr. Sokolski mischaracterized the agreement and thereby overlooked its significant and ongoing benefits.
Victor Gilinsky has provided to NAPSNet a reply to Howard Diamond’s critique of the original article. This forum contains Mr. Gilinsky’s reply in full below, preceded by summaries of both earlier articles.
Arms Control and Peace on the Korean Peninsula
June 24, 1997: PFO #97-14
PFO essay | Discussions
This essay, “Rethinking Arms Control and Peace on the Korean Peninsula: Search for Alternatives,” is written by Moon Chung-in, professor of political science and associate director of the Institute for Unification Studies, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Prof. Moon writes that examining the dynamic interplay of international, regional, domestic, and perceptual variables suggests alternative ways of thinking about peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. The current policy lines of both Koreas that focus on the realignment of external ties, he argues, are not likely to produce major breakthroughs in stalled inter-Korean relations. Neither recent proposals for four-party talks with the United States and the PRC nor the proposed Pyongyang-Washington peace treaty will yield positive dividends until the domestic and peninsular patterns that continue to reinforce inter-Korean differences are addressed.
Prof. Moon’s essay continues discussion of the prospects for peace on the Korean peninsula begun in previous NAPSNet Policy Forums, and in particular offers a provocative contrast to PFO #97-09, which featured two essays presenting a DPRK perspective on replacing the Korean Armistice Agreement with a permanent peace treaty.
Discusses energy and socioeconomic projections for Northeast Asia and their implications for emissions and suggests potential joint US-Japanese policy initiatives to curb acidifying emissions in the region.
Explores APEC’s relationship to environmental degradation within the Asia-Pacific, gives an overview of APEC’s institutional structure and two track agenda, and finally addresses ways APEC can reconcile the often competing agendas found under its purview.
Examines emissions projections in Northeast Asia, develops sulfur deposition estimates in the region, and suggests potential joint US-Japanese policy initiatives to curb acidifying emissions in the region.
These two essays provide representative views, from the perspective of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), on the possibilities and prospects of replacing the Korean Armistice Agreement with a permanent peace treaty. The authors address issues at the center of recent debates over the terms for beginning this process, and argue forcefully for their positions.
The first essay, “DPRK Perspective on a Post-Armistice Regional Order,” is by Kim Myong Chol, an ethnic Korean born and living permanently in Japan. Mr. Kim’s studies include graduate work in US foreign policy at Tokyo University. Mr. Kim worked as a reporter and editor at “The People’s Korea” and has written extensively on DPRK perspectives on Korean and international relations.
The second essay, “Replacement of the Korean Armistice Agreement: Prerequisite to a Lasting Peace in the Korean Peninsula,” is by Pak Chol Gu, a researcher for the Korean Anti-Nuclear Peace Committee, based in Pyongyang in the DPRK.
Both essays contend directly with a number of the points made in Patrick M. Norton’s essay, “Ending the Korean Armistice Agreement: The Legal Issues,” distributed previously as PFO #97-03. In particular, Kim Myong Chol’s essay extends some of the arguments he made in his discussion of Mr. Norton’s paper, distributed as part of the forum.
PORTER, Gareth, Center for International Environmental Law
Natural Resource Subsidies, Trade and Environment: The Cases of Forests and Fisheries
April 25, 1997: PFO #97-08
PFO essay | html version | pdf version
Presents a conceptual framework for understanding subsidies in the natural resource sector; marshals the evidence that such subsidies harm the environment, focusing on the forest and fisheries sectors as case studies; examines the ways in which natural resource subisidies are being treated in various international fora, including APEC; and proposes ways to integrate the issue into APEC’s work program.
RAZAVI, Dr. Hossein, The World Bank
Innovative Approaches to Financing Environmentally Sustainable Energy Development in Northeast Asia
April 10, 1997: PFO #97-07
PFO essay | html version | pdf version
Examines the current state of energy and electric power financing in Northeast Asia, scenario-specific capital constraints, innovative approaches, likely sources of finance for the Sustainable Energy Development strategy, and concerted unilateral or joint US/Japan initiatives which could address the regional financing needs of East Asian energy development, especially with China.
Describes APEC’s work on environmental issues between 1993, when environmental issues moved into the mainstream of APEC, and 1997, when Environment Ministers will approve implementation of a regional “Action Programme.”
HAYES, Peter, Nautilus Institute
Debating the DPRK-Taiwan Nuclear Waste Deal
March 21, 1997: PFO #97-05
PFO essay and Discussions
The recently announced deal between Taiwan and the DPRK to transport and store Taiwan’s low-level nuclear waste in the DPRK has incited a storm of protest from South Korea and has sparked controversy throughout the region. This essay by Dr. Peter Hayes, Co-Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development and author of numerous published works on nuclear and security issues on the Korean peninsula, departs from the largely political debate over the issue by introducing a technical dimension regarding the quantities and relative significance of the amounts of radioactive waste involved in the deal.
On March 14, the DPRK Mission in New York circulated Dr. Hayes’ first essay with a cover note that attacked the ROK criticisms of the DPRK’s deal to store Tawain’s nuclear waste, calling them “slanderous” and citing Hayes’ article as providing a “correct” understanding of the issue. In response, the ROK Mission in New York reportedly plans to issue the original article with its own cover sheet. (As of March 21 NAPSNet had not yet received this statement). Due to the importance of this issue and the attention the original article has generated from both Korean governments, NAPSNet here provides combined the original essay by Dr. Hayes, a new technical citation addendum, a response to Dr. Hayes by Dr. Gordon Thompson of the Institute for Resource and Security Studies in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and a reply to Dr. Thompson by Dr. Hayes. We invite readers to form their own judgments as to the content and implications of the arguments.
Examines current technological alternatives for reducing emissions from energy production, analyzes costs and externalities associated with these technological alternatives, and suggests possible joint US-Japanese policy initiatives for implementing the technological alternatives.
This new study on the legal issues involved in ending the Korean Armistice is an important contribution to the public understanding of the issues underlying the U.S.-North Korea-South Korea joint briefings on the proposed 4-power talks to end the Korean conflict, schedule to start on March 5. Patrick M. Norton currently is a partner in the law firm Alston & Bird, in Washington D.C. He previously worked for the U.S. State Department studying the legal aspects of ending the Korean Armistice, and is uniquely qualified to provide a U.S. perspective on this topic.
Dr. Hayes, Co-Director of the Nautilus Institute, writes that the “package” deal announced on December 30, 1996, whereby the DPRK apologized for its September 18/96 submarine incursion into ROK waters has been in the making for nearly two months. In that time, U.S. officials have wrestled with both Koreas, but especially with the South Koreans. The outcome of this maneuvering was either an inevitable train-wreck in which the U.S-DPRK Agreed Framework would have been destroyed; or a breakthrough in which everyone agreed to get off the tracks and to concentrate on the big problems, not the small ones. Dr. Hayes has visited North Korea four times and is co-author and editor with Young Whan Kihl of Peace and Security in Northeast Asia: The Nuclear Issue, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, New York, 1996.