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 07-053: Not Going Nuclear: Japan’s Response to North Korea’s Nuclear Test

Hajime Izumi, Professor at the University of Shizuoka in Japan and Katsuhisa Furukawa, a research fellow at the Research Institute of Science and Technology for Society at the Japan Science and Technology Agency, write, “Thus, the consensus in Japan today favors continued reliance on the Japanese-U.S. alliance, the U.S. nuclear umbrella, and missile defense to negate North Korea’s nuclear capability…The focus is to examine what type of bilateral mechanism may be appropriate to conduct regularized dialogue with the United States on nuclear strategy issues, whether in official or unofficial channels, and what agenda Japan may want to discuss as well as what type of information the United States may want to share with Japan under what conditions.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-052: On North Korea, Hippocrates Not Hypocrisy

Katharine H.S. Moon, Associate Fellow at the Asia Society and professor in political science at Wellesley College, writes, “The central principle in any policy should be ‘do no harm’ to those who are already abused. Regime change could worsen human rights conditions… By working with institutions that specialize in various aspects of human rights and welfare, we broaden the international constituency around North Korean human rights. We convey to the North Korean regime that it is not being singled out for demonization, and we show the North Korean people that human rights, theirs included, are of universal concern.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-051: The Prospects for Institutionalizing the Six-Party Talks

Keun-sik Kim, Professor in the Department of Political Diplomacy at Kyungnam University, writes, “It is hoped that the success of the Six-Party Talks and their development into an institution for multilateral security cooperation will serve to promote peace, security, and unity in Northeast Asia.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-050: Japan and India as Partners for the Peace and Stability of Asia

Hiroshi Hirabayashi, a councilor of the Japan Forum on International Relations who is expected to become the president of the Japan-India Association soon and served as Ambassador of Japan to India between 1998 and 2002, writes, “In the Asian theater in particular, where numerous elements of insecurity persist, it [India] is expected to become a guarantor of peace and stability. This will be more effective if India strengthens its partnership with Japan, an increasingly proactive contributor to this end.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-049: Process of Denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula and the Challenges

An Song Nam, the Executive Director at the DPRK’s Institute of Disarmament and Peace in Pyongyang, delivered this presentation at the annual Asia-Pacific Roundtable in Kuala Lumpur in early June, with only minor edits. While presented prior to the recent “breakthrough,” it still provides a useful North Korean perspective on the broader Korean Peninsula denuclearization issue and some of the challenges that may lie ahead.

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-047: Democracy and Peace in Korea Twenty Years After June 1987: Where Are We Now, and Where Do We Go from Here?

Paik Nak-chung, editor of the South Korean literary-intellectual journal, The Quarterly Changbi, and Professor Emeritus of English Literature, Seoul National University, writes, “In contrast, a gradual, step-by-step process opens up space for civic participation. And where, as in South Korea, civil society possesses both the will and the ability to utilize this space, citizens’ say in determining the timing and the specific contents of a given intermediate stage must continue to increase, and eventually it will not be possible to prevent the sphere of civic participation extending to the entire peninsula.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-046: What Next After Kim Jong-il?

Lee Byong-Chul, Senior Fellow at the Institute for Peace and Cooperation(IPC), a non-partisan policy advisory body based in Seoul, South Korea, writes, “Whatever the scenario might be, it is clear in the minds of many that the stability of the communist regime is more important than anything else; in particular, China and the U.S. could not invoke a regime change in North Korea at their own disposal but certainly want to lead the North in the respective directions that they think it needs to go. At present, the only hope they have is North Korea’s complete, verifiable and irrevocable dismantlement of all the nuclear facilities. In other words, Kim Jong-il as a negotiable partner still seems to be on their mind.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-044: Behind the Blacklisting of Banco Delta Asia

Ronda Hauben, researcher, writer and freelance journalist, who has spent the past 14 years studying, writing and participating in online media, writes, “The purpose of the action against the BDA appears not only to have been to target North Korea and its access to the international banking system, but also to send a message to China.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-041: Lessons from the BDA Issue

Keun-sik Kim, Professor at the Institute for Far Eastern Studies at Kyungnam University, writes, “Considering that the role of third parties has been severely limited in breaking the stalemate, one lesson to be learned from the BDA issue is that bilateral frameworks must be in sync with the multilateral framework. Not only DPRK-U.S. negotiations but also simultaneous, active discussion between the U.S. and China, North Korea and China, and the two Koreas can serve as a buffer to help resolve issues.”

Go to the article

Policy Forum 07-040: The New Nuclear Arms Race

Hugh White, Visiting Fellow at the Lowy Institute and Professor of Strategic Studies at ANU, writes, “Short of the elimination of nuclear weapons, the US and China can moderate their nuclear competition and reduce the risk of nuclear war by reaching an agreement about the size and nature of each other’s nuclear forces, offensive and defensive.”

Go to the article