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 01-02I: Korean Peninsula: Are There Things More Important, than Peace?

This essay is by Georgi Toloraya, Deputy Director-General of the 1st Asian Department in the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Leading Research Fellow at the IMEMO of Russian Academy of Science. This is the eighth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Toloraya argues that a number of developments over the past year have given watchers of North Korea the hope that North Korea is becoming just another developing, if not democratic, country, looking for its place in a new world order. Toloraya argues outsiders should abandon the hope of changing North Korea by forcing it to democratize, as otherwise engagement becomes a threat to the North Korean regime.

Go to the article

Nautilus Institute Policy Forum Online: Comments on PFO 01-02I: “Korean Peninsula: Are There Things More Important, than Peace?” by Georgi Toloraya

Nautilus Institute Policy Forum Online: Comments on PFO 01-02I: “Korean Peninsula: Are There Things More Important, than Peace?” by Georgi Toloraya Nautilus Institute Policy Forum Online: Comments on PFO 01-02I: “Korean Peninsula: Are There Things More Important, than Peace?” by Georgi Toloraya PFO 01-02K: March 22, 2001 Comments on PFO 01-02I: “Korean Peninsula: Are There […]

Go to the article

Policy Forum 01-02L: The Good Cop and the Bad Cop

This essay was written by Choi Won-Ki, Editor and Researcher with the Joongang Daily in Seoul. Choi discusses ROK President Kim Dae-jung’s recent visit to the US and Kim’s meetings with US officials. This is the tenth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Choi states that Kim seems unable to convince Bush to follow his Sunshine Policy for warming relations with the DPRK. Choi argues that the internal inconsistency in the US, combined with the US-ROK difference over how to approach the DPRK, created such confusion in the DPRK over future policy that leader Kim Jong-il cancelled the inter-Korean Ministers’ meeting scheduled for after the summit. Choi concludes with the argument that Kim Jong-il can now either cooperate with Kim Dae-jung or abandon the peace effort entirely.

Go to the article

Policy Forum 01-02J: Discussion of William J. Taylor’s “North Korea Policy: Steady As She Goes”

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

Policy Forum 01-03A: South Korea and NMD

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 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

Policy Forum 01-02F: North Korea: Avoid Another Crossroads

This essay is by William J. Taylor, an adjunct professor with The Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. This is the sixth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush, and responds to the preceding essays by Leon V. Sigal and Daniel A. Pinkston. Taylor argues that it would be a mistake for the Bush Administration to pursue a “get tough” approach toward North Korea, demanding greater, faster reciprocity from Pyongyang in return for the largesse bestowed in outside aid. Taylor states that North Korea has passed its crossroads, and chose the right direction when they held the North-South Summit in Pyongyang and then entered the ongoing process of N-S dialogue. Taylor argues that there are understandable reasons why North Korea is slow to respond, but the US needs to maintain a steady course with persistent, but gentle, diplomacy.

Go to the article

Policy Forum 01-02G: Bush Should Listen To A Korean Elder Statesman

This essay is by Aidan Foster-Carter, honorary senior research fellow in sociology and modern Korea at Leeds University, England. He contributed this comment to the International Herald Tribune. This is the seventh in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Foster-Carter argues that to say the ROK-Russia joint statement on the 1972 Anti-Missile Defense Treaty is evidence of the ROK taking Russia’s side in the missile defense debate twists the meaning of their statement. Rather, he argues, the US should take notice when such a pro-US leader does make such statements as a sign of how far from the global consensus the US is on missile defense.

Go to the article

Policy Forum 01-02D: Dove Myths: No Better Than Hawk Myths

This essay is by Aidan Foster-Carter, Senior Research Fellow in Sociology & Modern Korea at Leeds University. In his essay, Foster-Carter responds to an essay (PFO#01-02C) by Leon V. Sigal. This is the fourth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Foster-Carter states that he agrees with Sigal’s conclusions, but not with the assumptions upon which they are based. Foster-Carter argues that a deal with North Korea for the stoppage of its missile program will not be easy or cheap and that the DPRK still wants US troops off the peninsula. He concludes by arguing that North Korea needs a US that will talk to it.

Go to the article

Policy Forum 01-02D: Dove Myths: No Better Than Hawk Myths

This essay is by Aidan Foster-Carter, Senior Research Fellow in Sociology & Modern Korea at Leeds University. In his essay, Foster-Carter responds to an essay (PFO#01-02C) by Leon V. Sigal. This is the fourth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Foster-Carter states that he agrees with Sigal’s conclusions, but not with the assumptions upon which they are based. Foster-Carter argues that a deal with North Korea for the stoppage of its missile program will not be easy or cheap and that the DPRK still wants US troops off the peninsula. He concludes by arguing that North Korea needs a US that will talk to it.

Go to the article