Policy Forum

This essay is by William J. Taylor, an adjunct professor with The Georgetown University School of Foreign Service. This is the fifth in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Taylor argues that the Bush administration, as it works to set its foreign policy, should retain the Clinton administration’s approach to the two Koreas. Taylor defends the cautious North Korean pace of responding to the South and to the US and cites several positive developments in recent years with North Korea. Taylor argues that its unwillingness to negotiate a deal on stopping its missile program is justified by KEDO’s slow pace in bringing the reactors on-line.

This essay is by Daniel A. Pinkston, a Senior Research Associate at the Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies. This is the second in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Pinkston argues that among the first steps the Bush administration must take is to specify its position on the 1994 Agreed Framework, negotiated with the DPRK under former President Bill Clinton, and then state its position on the deal nearly negotiated by Clinton to end the DPRK’s missile program. Pinkston states that the US must support the DPRK’s current reform policies if it is to combat proliferation of nuclear weapons and their delivery systems in Northeast Asia.

This essay is by Leon V. Sigal, Director of the Northeast Asia Cooperative Security Project at the Social Science Research Council and author of “Disarming Strangers: Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea.” This is the third in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Sigal argues that the proposed US missile defense system is too far off to protect the United States from a possible DPRK missile attack, and, therefore, it is in the US interest to conclude a deal to terminate the DPRK’s missile program. Sigal outlines six myths, which he argues have prevented the conclusion of such a missile deal.

This essay is by Cheong Wooksik of the Civil Network for a Peaceful Korea and was translated by You Sanghee. This is the first in a series on the future of US relations with Northeast Asian countries under the administration of incoming US President George W. Bush. Cheong examines the role of DPRK leader Kim Jong-il’s visit to the PRC, US policy on the DPRK and the PRC, the US-proposed National Missile Defense, and other issues in relations among the PRC, DPRK, ROK, Japan, and the US. Cheong concludes that ROK President Kim Dae-jung is a natural mediator for US-DPRK talks.

This contribution is by Ahmad Faruqui, Defense and Energy Economist at EPRI, based in Palo Alto, California. He is currently working on a book entitled “The Price of Strategic Myopia: Reforming Pakistan’s Military.” Faruqui explores the Sino-Pakistani bilateral relationship, which he argues may have run its course. He argues that the relationship may also soon undergo a reversal. Faruqui reviews Pakistan’s historical relationship with the PRC, examines changes in PRC priorities and the influence they have had on its relationships with Pakistan. He concludes with a discussion of future scenarios, including the impact of a changed Sino-Pakistani relationship upon India and the US.

This contribution is by Mi-kyoung Kim, PhD, a policy advisor to North Korean Aid Programs for World Vision Korea. Kim argues that perceptions of the DPRK and its leader Kim Jong-il prior to the recent diplomatic flurry were based on limited information. Kim also argues that it has become clear that the DPRK regime is simultaneously pursuing two policies, that of strengthening international ties and that of internal regime maintenance, but does not have the resources to do both well.

This contribution is by Satu P. Limaye, Director of Research at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. This essay was originally published by Pacific Forum CSIS’s e-journal Comparative Connections. Limaye argues that this third incarnation of India as an Asian state began with the post-nuclear test damage control efforts and was sustained despite the 1999 undeclared Kargil war between Pakistan and India. Limaye reviews India’s bilateral relations with the PRC, Japan, Southeast Asia, and Russia, as well as these countries’ positions on India’s nuclear tests and Pakistan. Limaye argues that India’s sustained dimplomatic pressures have moved beyond damage control and into the significant enhancement of ties with other Asian countries, an effort that has largely been reciprocated.

Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center in Washington and author of the forthcoming “Best of Intentions: America’s Campaign Against Strategic Weapons Proliferation,” published an essay in The Washington Post on October 29, 2000. Sokolski argues that the 1994 Agreed Framework will provide the DPRK with dangerous nuclear technology and know-how. He further argues that a deal that helps the DPRK to launch satellites will provide it with the technology to perfect its long-range missiles. Nautilus will provide responses to this essay in a series examining the DPRK’s offer to halt its missile development program in exchange for assistance with launching satellites into space.

This is the third essay examining the question of the DPRK’s past behavior in the light of the recently completed ROK-DPRK summit. This essay was contributed by William J. Taylor, Senior Advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Taylor examines the psychological profiles that have been constructed and propagated over the years by analysts, and by the DPRK itself, to demonstrate that those outside the DPRK do not know much about its leadership or its intentions. Taylor argues that the DPRK leadership may have bought into Kim Dae-jung’s Sunshine Policy, providing other countries with an opportunity to normalize relations that should not be squandered.

This is the second essay examining the question of the DPRK’s past behavior in the light of the recently completed ROK-DPRK summit. This essay was contributed by Nam Si-uk, professor at Korea University and former publisher of the Munhwa Ilbo in Seoul. Nam questions whether DPRK leader Kim Jong-il’s grand strategy relative to reunification with the ROK still follows a “united front” policy of building alliances with sympathetic factions within the ROK. Nam argues that Kim Jong-il’s attempts at intervention in ROK domestic politics, including the US military presence, gives one reason to be pessimistic about whether Kim Jong-il is sincere about reconciliation. This essay originally appeared in the Korea Times on July 31, as “Is United Front Strategy Still Unchanged?”