US and DPRK: Two Views

Here are two essays on the recent agreement between the DPRK and the US on North Korea’s nuclear program. The first is by John Bolton, the former US ambassador to the United Nations in the administration of George W. Bush. The other is by Ralph Cossa, President of the Pacific Forum CSIS in Honolulu, which is affiliated with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC.

Advertisements
Leave a comment

7 Comments

  1. Nadine

     /  29/03/2012

    Interesting historical perspective on United States’ strategy in Korea and what it means for neighboring countries: http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/united-states-korea-strategy-inertia

    Reply
  2. Stanley Hua

     /  06/04/2012

    Based on the two articles it seems the U.S. plans on giving in to Korea’s every need in order to announce success in nuclear proliferation. Funny enough that it happened this year right when Obama shifts into full-on campaign mode. It is also quite alarming how we also seem to be feeding NK’s military–first time I’ve heard about that.

    The author of the WSJ article also makes a good point that the U.S. must be out of their minds if they think that NK is being honest that they have implemented a moratorium on missile manufacturing especially considering how NK has many unknown sites where they create these weapons.

    Reply
  3. Things certainly seem to have unravelled since the “breakthrough”. South Korean media have just announced that the DPRK is planning a third nuclear test at the same underground facility as the 2006 and 2009 detonations. Of course, this may turn out to be as unfounded as the Kim Jong Un assassination rumours that did the rounds on twitter recently, but the very fact that this possibility is being mentioned highlights the extent to which negotiations have come off the rails since the DPRK’s missile launch plans were made public.

    http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/wire-news/north-korea-planning-third-nuclear-test-yonhap_690003.html

    Reply
  4. Maximilian Barth

     /  15/04/2012

    Speaking of rumours, it would be interesting to see how rumors circulated by the Media and speculative statements made by governmental bodies (possibly negatively) affect the negotiations and the domestic/ foreign policy course of the DPRK, something that is rarely examined as the world always seems to break out in hysteria once the DPRK coughs or wiggles with its little toe.

    Reply
  5. Magan Haycock

     /  16/04/2012

    A skepticism I have is whether the North Korea will actually openly declare all of its nuclear programs and what its nuclear power actually is, etc. Coercing a state into such forced-transparency is quite unethical in international relations, unless the same is reciprocated for the “coercer”. Thus, if the US expects NK to go public with information that NK may think matters of national security, the US cannot rightly condemn an organization like WikiLeaks for exposing documents of national security. Thus, just as the US as state affairs that should be kept from the international sphere, how can it force NK to be more transparent?

    Reply
  6. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4219638,00.html

    There are still those who wish to help the DPRK-but whether the motivation behind the help is to spite the western world attempts at sanctions or whether it is for genuine humanitarian purposes remains to be seen

    Freddie

    Reply
  7. One of the most interesting points of last months failed missile launch was the way it was handled by the DPRK. With the failed missile launches in 2006 and 1998 Kim Jong il’s regime continued to insist that the operations had been successes despite the hard evidence uncovered by the US and South Koreans to suggest otherwise. Conversely the government in 2012 was quick to admit to the failure of the satellite missile launch. This change of diplomatic tact is probably not the result of a new leader, but instead it shows a sense of acceptance by the DPRK ministers put in place by Kim Jong il that it is not possible to control certain aspects of information flow in 21st century foreign affairs.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: