Policy Forum

Nautilus Institute’s Policy Forum‘s focus is on the timely publication of expert analysis and op-ed style pieces on the foremost of security-related issues to Northeast Asia. Its mission is to facilitate a multilateral flow of information among an international network of policy-makers, analysts, scholars, media, and readers. Policy Forum essays are typically from a wide range of expertise, political orientations, as well as geographic regions and seeks to present readers with opinions and analysis by experts on the issues as well as alternative voices not typically presented or heard. Feedback, comments, responses from Policy Forum readers are highly encouraged.

NAPSNet, Policy Forum

Policy Forum 08-072: The Future of Political Leadership in North Korea

Rudiger Frank, Professor of East Asian Political Economy at the University of Vienna, writes, “There is always the possibility that a power-hungry family clan of one of Kim Jong-il’s wives, or of another line in the family, or an ambitious leader from the military will try to grab power without considering the long-term consequences for political stability in North Korea… However, collective leadership is the most likely, the most logical option for North Korea’s political future, simply because dynastic succession will not work.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-071: The Way We Should Deal with North Korea

Haksoon Paik, North Korea specialist at the Sejong Institute in South Korea, an independent think tank devoted to the study of national strategy of Korea, writes, “Complete denuclearization of North Korea will come only with full-fledged trust. North Koreans appear to regard the U.S. demand for a “complete” verification mechanism as a trap set up by the hardliners in Washington D.C. to undermine not only the hitherto gained achievements in the nuclear negotiations, but also the North Korean regime itself.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-070: Preparing for Regime Change in North Korea: The Need for International Cooperation

Steve Noerper, Senior Fellow, Asia Pacific and Director, worldwide issue networks, for the EastWest Institute, writes, “These challenges require considerable international coordination – a growth of efforts beyond the current denuclearization dialogue. The mandate of the Six-Party talks could be expanded to include other security and development questions. Participation in the talks could also be expanded to include contributors like Mongolia, Canada and Australia, and prove more effective by forming mini-laterals – groupings of two or three concerned nations – to tackle specific problem areas.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-069: Australia and the DPRK: The Sixty Years of Relationship

Leonid A. Petrov, Research Associate at the Australian National University, writes, “Australia’s DPRK policy has for too long been copying the US policy toward North Korea and has finally reached the same dead end. Driven to this by the previous government, it now needs urgent attention and adjustment. If neglected, Australia risks loosing many lucrative opportunities still available for our exporters and investors.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-068: The Maritime Self-Defence Force Mission in the Indian Ocean: Afghanistan, NATO and Japan’s Political Impasse

Richard Tanter, Director of the Australia office of the Nautilus Institute, writes, “The twin sources…

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-067: Denuclearization of the DPRK­A Role for the United Nations?

Anne Wu, an Associate with the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government, writes, “A strengthened ‘good offices’ role for the UN secretary-general that couples the message of denuclearization with a humane, well-coordinated package of proposals that address the security, economic, energy, and humanitarian concerns of the DPRK could effectively serve to advance the six-party talks toward a successful conclusion.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-066: Visiting the Kaesong Industrial Complex

Suk Hi Kim, Editor of North Korean Review (www.northkoreanreview.com), writes, “the solution of information issues, such as communication, customs clearance, and passage for KIC investors, largely depends on North Korea. The solution of these two key issues will not only make KIC investors more competitive, but it will also alleviate tensions on the Korean peninsula as well as spurring the economic growth of the two countries.”

Go to the article

China Civil Society Report: Mass Incidents in China

Policy Forum Online 08-065A: August 26th, 2008 China Civil Society Report: Mass Incidents in China By Yu Jianrong and Yu Debao CONTENTS I. Introduction II. Article by Yu Jianrong and Yu Debao III. Citations   I. Introduction Yu Jianrong, Research/Professor of Institute of Rural Development at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and Yu Debao, […]

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-064: President Lee Myongbak’s Learning Curve

Mikyoung Kim, Assistant Professor at Hiroshima City University – Hiroshima Peace Institute, writes, Mr. Lee leaves an impression that he rushed to declare himself different from his predecessor by ingratiating himself to our allies, and selling out Korea in the process. It is dangerous to reveal all your cards at once, given the precarious nature of international collaboration.

Go to the article

Policy Forum 08-063: How A Mock Trial Could Turn Victory into Defeat on North Koreas Nuclear Arms

Leon V. Sigal, Director of the Northeast Asia Cooperative Security Project in New York and author of Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea, writes, Diplomatic give-and-take with North Korea is yielding payoffs for American and regional security. Turning the talks into a mock trial would only be a waste of time.

Read a discussion of this article here.

Go to the article