Search

Begin New Search Topic Nuclear Weapons Political Geography Asia

121. North Korea Triumphs Again in Diplomacy

Author:
Nicholas Eberstadt
Publication Date:
10-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
Abstract:
Contrary to conventional wisdom, which holds the North Korean state to be an unremittingly hostile “negotiating partner,” history actually demonstrates that Pyongyang can be a highly obliging interlocutor under certain very specific conditions. All that is necessary to “get to yes” with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) is to concede every important point demanded by the North Korean side while sacrificing vital interests of one's own. The mid-September “breakthrough” at the six-party talks in Beijing would appear to conform precisely to this long-established pattern. The vaunted outcome—a long-desired “consensus statement” inked by North Korea and the other five governments engaged in protracted discussions over North Korean denuclearization—is being celebrated by diplomatic sophisticates in Seoul, Beijing, Moscow, Tokyo, and Washington.
Topic:
International Relations, Diplomacy, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Washington, Beijing, Asia, North Korea, Tokyo, Korea, and Seoul

122. Six-Party Talks: Defining A Realistic Roadmap for Success

Author:
Ralph A. Cossa, Scott Snyder, and Brad Glosserman
Publication Date:
11-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
United States Institute of Peace
Abstract:
The forthcoming resumption of Six-Party Talks to eliminate nuclear weapons from the Korean peninsula is expected to build on the Joint Statement of principles released at the end of the last round on September 19, 2005. While some have criticized the vagueness of the Joint Statement, it represents the first tangible progress in identifying common principles and objectives in two years of sporadic meetings. If North Korea has indeed made a “strategic decision” to abandon its nuclear weapons programs – a thesis still to be tested – it may provide a basis for future progress. For this to occur, however, a more specific negotiating road map and implementing process must be developed. It is important to assess where the current guidelines might lead and to identify the "commitments for commitments" and "actions for actions" that might be envisioned as next steps.
Topic:
International Relations, Security, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Asia and North Korea

123. Prospects Brighten for Long-term Peace in South Asia

Author:
Rafiq Dossani
Publication Date:
11-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Abstract:
Ever since 1998, the year of India and Pakistan's nuclear tests, many commentators have argued that, in the absence of U.S. intervention, the two nations are headed for armed conflict that will likely end in nuclear war. The logic underlying this view is twofold. First, that religious radicalism—defined as the participation in political and/or military activities by groups in the name of religion—has become sufficiently powerful in Pakistan to make ongoing support for the Kashmir insurgency inevitable. Second is that India's concurrent growth of nationalism and religious radicalism, as well as a rise in economic power, will make the state less willing to tolerate Pakistan's support for insurgency in Kashmir. Against this seemingly inevitable clash, Pakistani President Musharraf is viewed as a lonely holdout against the forces of religious radicalism in Pakistan. U.S. support is therefore argued to be critical for sustaining Musharraf, whether through political support for Pakistan's policies in Kashmir, or economic support. This paper reaches a different conclusion: that peace is about to “break out” between India and Pakistan. Our conclusion is based on the following analysis. First, Islamic radicalism in Pakistan relies (and has always relied) on the army to survive, as it lacks sufficient popularity to influence state policy through political parties or popular agitation. Second, the army has previously supported Islamic radicalism tactically, but not ideologically, providing such support only when it has perceived the state to be in crisis. Contrary to a common view, the elections of 2002 were no different in this respect. Third, Hindu radicalism in India, though gaining in both popular and political support, is insufficiently popular to support irrational aggression against Pakistan. At the same time, India's improved economic prospects have influenced its rulers to favor accommodation with Pakistan. Third, the outcomes of recent elections in India and Pakistan have shifted the Pakistani army's strategic priorities toward negotiating a civilian-military balance, and away from destabilizing civilian politics through “crisis-mode” tactics that have included support for Islamic radicalism.
Topic:
Nationalism, Nuclear Weapons, and Religion
Political Geography:
Pakistan, United States, South Asia, India, Asia, and Kashmir

124. Considering China as a Potential Member of the Nuclear Suppliers Group

Author:
Andrew Prosser
Publication Date:
05-2004
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Defense Information
Abstract:
In January 2004, China formally requested to join the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), an informal multilateral export control regime that aims to contribute to the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons through the coordination and implementation of guidelines which govern transfers of nuclear material and technology. The NSG's membership comprises the principal nuclear supplier states in Europe and the Americas, as well as Australia, Japan, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, South Africa, and a number of former Eastern Bloc states, including Russia. The group's decisions, including those concerning the admission of new members, are made on a consensus basis, but the informal nature of the organization means that its decisions cannot be construed as legally binding upon its member countries.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Asia, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand

125. North Korea's Nuclear Ambition: Causes and Consequences

Author:
Mustafa Kibaroglu
Publication Date:
03-2004
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Abstract:
Because of the inferiority complex first against Japan, then against the United States, the North Korean leadership embarked upon nuclear weapons development program from the inception of their state. Due to the tangible and comprehensive support provided by the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China in the field of nuclear science and technology, North Korea has seemingly passed a significant threshold on the way to become a de facto nuclear weapons state. As of 2004, it is widely believed that North Korea has already extracted enough plutonium for a couple of nuclear warheads. Combined with its 1,350 kilometer-range ballistic missile capability, North Korea stands as one of the most significant threats to regional and global security and stability. In the aftermath of the September 11 terror attacks on the United States, Russia and China have greatly reduced their support to North Korea and intensified their efforts to mend the differences between that country and the US, just like Japan and South Korea did for long, with a view to not to pave the way to the escalation of a crisis on the Korean Peninsula.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
United States, Japan, China, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, Soviet Union, and Korean Peninsula

126. The North Korean Nuclear Crisis: Four-plus-two - an idea whose time has come

Author:
Peter Van Ness
Publication Date:
11-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Australian National University Department of International Relations
Abstract:
The six-party negotiations on the Democratic People's Republic of Korea's (DPRK) nuclear programs, held in Beijing in August 2003, concluded with nothing more than the expectation that the six participating nations would meet again—no time or place was announced. Meanwhile, North Korea threatened to escalate tensions further by testing a nuclear device, while the US remained undecided about how to proceed.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, and Nuclear Weapons
Political Geography:
United States, Asia, and North Korea

127. Russia: Grasping Reality of Nuclear Terror

Author:
Simon Saradzhyan
Publication Date:
03-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
The likelihood of a catastrophic terrorist attack against Russia is growing, as radical separatists in troubled Chechnya increasingly become more desperate, and security at many of Russia's civil nuclear facilities remains insufficient. They have already demonstrated their capability and willingness to inflict massive indiscriminate casualties by organizing an apartment bombing in the southern Russian city of Buinaksk. They have acquired radioactive materials, threatened to attack Russia's nuclear facilities, plotted to hijack a nuclear submarine, and have attempted to put pressure on the Russian leadership by planting a container with radioactive materials in Moscow and threatening to detonate it. These incidents occurred between 1994 and 1996, during Russia's first military campaign in Chechnya at a time when separatists were so overwhelmed and outmanned they believed that acts of terrorism employing nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) materials—if not weapons of mass destruction (WMD)—could be the only way to force Russian troops to retreat from Chechnya.
Topic:
Security, Nuclear Weapons, and Terrorism
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Asia

128. Prospects for U.S.-Russian Nonproliferation Cooperation Under Bush and Putin

Author:
Andrea Gabbitas
Publication Date:
01-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
Since September 11, the relationship between the United States and Russia has evolved significantly. At the Crawford summit in November 2001, President George W. Bush and President Vladimir V. Putin officially declared a “new relationship” between the United States and Russia. A significant portion of this new relationship has centered on nonproliferation matters, which have been declared a priority by both presidents. In fighting terrorist threats, Bush and Putin have “agreed to enhance bilateral and multilateral action to stem the export and proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological materials, related technologies, and delivery systems as a critical component of the battle to defeat international terrorism.”
Topic:
International Cooperation, Nuclear Weapons, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Europe, and Asia

129. Options for Dealing with North Korea

Author:
Ted Galen Carpenter
Publication Date:
01-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
North Korea's recent actions in violation of the clear intent of the agreement it signed in 1994 to freeze its nuclear program have ignited a crisis in northeast Asia. Unfortunately, all of the frequently discussed options for dealing with this crisis have major drawbacks.
Topic:
International Political Economy, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
Asia and North Korea

130. Addressing the North Korea Nuclear Challenge

Author:
Michael H. Armacost, Daniel I. Okimoto, and Gi-Wook Shin
Publication Date:
04-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Abstract:
North Korea's renewed bid for nuclear weapons poses an urgent, serious foreign policy challenge to the United States. The current situation—though it bears a resemblance to the events of 1993–1994—is far more dangerous and difficult. North Korea has developed longer-range ballistic missiles; South Korea's growing nationalism has put its U.S. relations on shakier ground; and the United States is distracted by the wars on terrorism and for regime change in Iraq.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Israel, East Asia, Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and Palestine