Siegfried S. Hecker, Professor at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) at Stanford University, writes, “the most important risk-reduction actions now are to stop the production of more plutonium and to stop export of existing plutonium and nuclear technologies. The current situation puts us within reach of stopping plutonium production for the foreseeable future. The five parties should do everything in their power to get the DPRK to finish the disablement expeditiously and to move on to dismantlement.”

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.”