Policy Forum

Lee Jong Won, Professor at Rikkyo University in Tokyo, writes: “The most significant cause of continued confrontation surrounding policy toward North Korea is the DPRK’s use of the nuclear card as a survival strategy and the tension Pyongyang still creates, thus, resolving these issues is of first priority.”

Ralph A. Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS, a Honolulu-based non-profit research institute affiliated with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, writes: “If the President truly wants a diplomatic solution he must surround himself with true diplomats . . . and he must speak and act diplomatically. Otherwise he will not only lose the diplomatic stand-off with North Korea but will lose the hearts and minds of the South Korean people as well.”

Jason T. Shaplen, Policy Adviser at the Korean Peninsula Energy Organization (KEDO) from 1995-1999, and James Laney, U.S. Ambassador to South Korea from 1993-1997, write: “In Iraq, we had the luxury of destroying the regime first to bring about the change we sought. In North Korea the opposite is true. We must engage the regime first to end and ultimately reverse its nuclear program. We must therefore hold our noses in seeking to bring the North into the world community, including securing its membership in security forums, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank etc.”

Ruediger Frank, Professor of East Asian Political Economy at the University of Vienna, writes: “The recent efforts of South Korea’s president Roh Moo-hyun to establish the country not only as a mediator, but as a balancing power in Northeast Asia to prevent possible disputes in the region are an expression of the dissatisfaction with the progress made under the current arrangement and could be interpreted as a change of the Status quo that benefits Beijing at the expense of the alliance with Washington, which will nevertheless not be given up. Quite remarkably, this position of being an independent actor in international relations corresponds very well with the North Korean position and opens one more field of possible future cooperation of both Koreas.”

The International Crisis Group, an independent, non-profit, multinational organization, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict, writes: “North Korea will not and should not receive significant international development assistance until it gives up its nuclear weapons, but it would be worthwhile trying already to develop a better understanding of the country’s economy and what it will require in the way of help. Whether the regime survives or not, North Korea will need officials who are better versed in economic matters and have a greater exposure to the world.”

Bohyuk Suh, an expert advisor at the National Human Rights Commission of Korea, writes: “The North Korean human rights issue should not be the only issue to be viewed, but rather, the general situation in and outside of Korea, and the task of settling for peace on the Korean peninsular, should be viewed together as a whole.”

Bruce Klingner, an Asia analyst at Eurasia Group, an independent research and consulting firm that provides global political risk analysis, writes: “Pyongyang will calibrate its strategy to take advantage of the divisive political landscape and seek to further isolate the US from South Korea and Japan from South Korea…Such efforts collectively undermine US objectives to present a unified negotiating position to Pyongyang as well as any future attempts to garner international support for stronger measures.”

Byung Chul Koh, Professor Emeritus at the University of Illinois, Chicago, writes: “In sum, whether or not Kim Jong Il can continue to make progress, however small, in building a “powerful and prosperous nation” utilizing “military-first politics” will hinge to a striking extent on his ability to make pragmatic tactical adjustments to the changing strategic environment, thus helping to bring about a peaceful resolution of the nuclear standoff.”

Discussion of “The EU Stretches its Foreign Policy Wings Over Korea” Discussion of “The EU Stretches its Foreign Policy Wings Over Korea” PFO 05-31A: April 12th, 2005 Discussion of “The EU Stretches its Foreign Policy Wings Over Korea” Soyoung Kwon and Glyn Ford (MEP) Copyright (c) 2005 Nautilus of America/The Nautilus Institute CONTENTS I. Introduction […]

Dr. Soyoung Kwon, post-doctorate fellow at the Asia-Pacific Research Centre of Stanford University, and Glyn Ford, member of the Korean Peninsula Delegation in the European Parliament, write: “The EU is increasingly showing a new independent stance on Foreign Policy issues as the logic of its industrial and economic integration plays out in the international arena. Now it has broken ranks over the Korean Peninsula, fed-up and concerned with the failure to resolve the ongoing crisis in North Korea.”

Read discussion of this essay.