Daily Report Archives
Established in December 1993, the Nautilus Institute’s *N*ortheast *A*sia *P*eace and *S*ecurity *N*etwork (NAPSNet) Daily Report served thousands of readers in more than forty countries, including policy makers, diplomats, aid organizations, scholars, donors, activists, students, and journalists.
The NAPSNet Daily Report aimed to serve a community of practitioners engaged in solving the complex security and sustainability issues in the region, especially those posed by the DPRK’s nuclear weapons program and the threat of nuclear war in the region. It was distributed by email rom 1993-1997, and went on-line in December 1997, which is when the archive on this site begins. The format at that time can be seen here.
However, for multiple reasons—the rise of instantaneous news services, the evolution of the North Korea and nuclear issues, the increasing demand for specialized and synthetic analysis of these and related issues, and the decline in donor support for NAPSNet—the Institute stopped producing the Daily Report news summary service as of December 17, 2010.
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.
Go to the article
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.
Go to the article
Nautilus Institute Policy Forum Online: Comments on PFO 01-02: US Policy Toward Asia Under the Bush Administration Nautilus Institute Policy Forum Online: Comments on PFO 01-02: US Policy Toward Asia Under the Bush Administration PFO 01-02H: March 20, 2001 Comments on PFO 01-02: US Policy Toward Asia Under the Bush Administration CONTENTS I. Introduction II. […]
Go to the article
Nuclear Weapons 1. Israel Nuclear Program Avner Cohen, author of “Israel and the Bomb” and currently a Senior Researcher at the National Security Archive at George Washington University, returns soon to Israel for the first time since his book’s publication in 1998. The book includes no technical or operational details about Israel’s nuclear arsenal, but […]
Go to the article
Korea 1. US-DPRK Missile TalksSeveral US Congressmen urged US President George Bush to not commit himself to the 1994 Agreed Framework with the DPRK. US Secretary of State Colin Powell said in a press conference that “We are monitoring the Agreed Framework, and we’ve continued to support the 1994 Agreed framework.” “US-DPRK Missile Talks” (NPP […]
Go to the article