Policy Forum

Stephen Noerper, Senior Fellow, Asia, at the EastWest Institute and Senior Associate of the Nautilus Institute, writes, “As a refreshing alternative to tussles with a bellicose North Korea, oft labeled a hermit, the United States should applaud Mongolia, the horseman of North Asia. Mongolia has listened to international requests, embraced its responsibilities and grown itself as one of the region’s more vibrant locales.”

Mark Valencia, a Visiting Senior Fellow with the Maritime Institute of Malaysia and Nautilus Institute Senior Associate, writes, “To get China and Russia to agree to more binding and mandatory language, the U.S. should ‘walk the talk’’ of President Obama’s promise to ‘listen’, ‘compromise’ and ‘co-operate’ in multilateral endeavors. In other words, it will have to give up control of the decision to interdict, the definition of ‘reasonable grounds’ to do so, and the actual interdiction itself.”

Chaesung Chun, the Chair of the Asia Security Initiative at the East Asia Institute and an associate professor in the Department of International Relations at Seoul National University, recommends eight strategic principals for dealing with the DPRK nuclear issues including, “Search for new policy issues that will contribute to the project of ‘normalizing North Korea.’… We need to convince the North that the common goal of South Korea and the United States is to further the successful long-term future of North Korea, so long as it functions within global norms. Projects might focus on long-term policy areas such as education, infrastructure, and state finance.”

Leon V. Sigal, Director of the Northeast Asia Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council, writes, “The only way to [test North Korea’s intentions] is to probe through sustained diplomatic give-and-take. That requires offering meaningful steps toward a new political, economic, and strategic relationship–including diplomatic recognition, a summit meeting, a peace treaty to end the Korean war, negative security assurances, and a multilateral pledge not to introduce nuclear weapons into the Korea Peninsula as well as other benefits to its security, agricultural and energy assistance, and conventional power plants if possible or nuclear power plants if necessary.”

Emily B. Landau and Ephraim Asculai, Senior Research Fellows at the Institute for National Security Studies, write, “Without strong action on the part of the US, we might enter a new dynamic with parallel developments: nuclear proliferation that proceeds at an accelerated pace, together with inspiring but ineffective talk about (unheeded) international arms control treaties. So unless the US and its allies coordinate their moves, recognizing the acute seriousness of the North Korean nuclear challenge for both the immediate region and beyond, the situation will continue to deteriorate and could reach a dangerous point of no return.”

Peter Hayes, Executive Director of the Nautilus Institute, and Scott Bruce, Director of the Institute’s San Francisco office, write, “it is time to win the game, not play it forever. This is within President Obama’s reach, but only if he rises above emotional and unrealistic talk of punishing North Korea and focuses on the big picture changes to the strategic landscape that would be necessary to strike a deal with Kim Jong Il worth having.”

Stephen Noerper, Senior Fellow, Asia, at the EastWest Institute and Senior Associate of the Nautilus Institute, writes, “What needs to occur among the U.S., its allies Japan and South Korea, and dialogue partners China and Russia is a seriously enhanced commitment toward solving rather than simply managing the North Korea problem.”

Drew Thompson, Director of China Studies and Starr Senior Fellow at The Nixon Center, and Carla Freeman, Associate Director of China Studies at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies, write, “Chinese authorities are likely to conclude that based on the challenges that they will undoubtedly face in addressing a North Korean refugee crisis unfolding in Yanbian and elsewhere in the border region, the best solution available to them is to prevent a refugee crisis from unfolding on Chinese territory at all. It is therefore possible that PRC authorities are considering mounting operations within DPRK territory to prevent the largest waves of refugees from reaching the border and overwhelming civilian agencies operating within China.

Jia Xijin, Associate Professor at the NGO Research Center at Tsinghua University, and Zhao Yusi, Project Assistant of NGO Research Center at Tsinghua University, describe the increase in donations to NGOs and public charities in China after the snow storm and Wenchuan earthquake. They note trends on the source of these donations, the organizations receiving them, and the oversight and transparency involved in the donation process.

Georgy Toloraya, Director of Korean Research Programs at the Institute of Economics at the Russian Academy of Science, writes, “First, a paradigm of US-DPRK coexistence has to be worked out based on the assumption that the Pyongyang regime is here to stay and should be recognized. A tacit understanding on the future of the DPRK and an easing of pressure on the country should be effected… This new approach should be seriously presented to North Korea by a communication at the highest level, without the demand for immediate ‘tit for tat’. Only after doing that could new arrangements for security on the Korean peninsula be discussed, with demilitarization and denuclearization remaining a vital but distant goal.”