A Review of the Chinese, Russian, US and EU Strategies in the Korean Peninsula from 2006-2012

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study attempts to better understand the recent history of the different strategies adopted by four key regional and world players–China, Russia, the US and the EU–toward the Korean Peninsula. It also uses this analysis to infer trends in these strategies, so that we may get a better idea of what to expect in the near future. Since research shows that in the absence of some form of diplomatic and strategic common ground between international actors stability is not likely to be achieved, the research pays particular attention to levels of “trust” between the different parties.
The methodology used involves a qualitative examination of the strategic and geopolitical context in which each actor was embedded in from 2006 to 2012, in order to identify what circumstances contributed to better relations and what circumstances did not. In addition, the study’s methodology focuses on events that unfolded in the arena of the UN Security Council (since all four players considered here are represented there) and on UN Security Council resolutions that relate to the security problem of a divided Korea and the issue of weapons proliferation. The study comes to the following conclusion.
Every time a Security Council resolutions responded to the long-term strategic interests of the larger regional players, periods of relative calm and trust ensued. In particular, any arrangement that (a) allowed China to further its role as a major stakeholder in the region or (b) allowed the US to advance the case for its continued military presence in Japan and South Korea would, quite interestingly, increase the level of mutual trust between the different players. We find therefore that arrangements (a) and (b) are not necessarily in contradiction to each other.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Howard, Peter, "Why Not Invade North Korea? Threats, Language Games, and U.S. Foreign Policy" 48 (48): 805-828, 2004

2 "US Asks for Tough UN Sanctions on North Korea"

3 "UN ‘Deplores’ North Korea Botched Rocket Launch"

4 Crail, Peter, "UN Tightens North Korea Sanctions" Arms Control Association 2009

5 "UN Security Council to Meet on North Korea"

6 "UN Security Council Resolution 1695"

7 MacFarquhar, Neil, "UN Security Council Pushes North Korea by Passing Sanctions"

8 Varner, Bill, "UN Council Demands North Korea End Missile Program"

9 Hoge, Warren, "U. N. Council, in Weakened Resolution, Demands End to North Korean Missile Program"

10 Hayes, Peter, "The Stalker State : North Korean Proliferation and the End of American Nuclear Hegemony"

11 Kerr, David, "The Sino-Russian Partnership and U.S. Policy Toward North Korea: From Hegemony to Concert in Northeast Asia" 49 (49): 411-438, 2005

12 Noland, Marcus, "The Non-Impact of UN Sanctions in North Korea" (7) : 61-88, 2009

13 Asmus, Ronald D, "The Little War that Shook the World: Georgia, Russia and the Future of the West" Palgrave Macmillan 2010

14 Ogilvie-White, Tanya, "The Defiant States: The Nuclear Diplomacy of North Korea and Iran" 17 (17): 115-138, 2010

15 United Nations Department of Public Information, "Security Council, Acting Unanimously, Condemns in Strongest Terms Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Nuclear Test, Toughens Sanctions" 2009

16 "Security Council Imposes Sanctions on DPR Korea After its Claimed Nuclear Test"

17 United Nations Department of Public Information, "Security Council Condemns Nuclear Test by Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Unanimously Adopting Resolution 1718 (2006)" 2006

18 United Nations Department of Public Information, "Security Council Condemns Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s Satellite Launch as Breach of Resolutions Barring Country’s Use of Ballistic Missile Technology" 2012

19 Security Council Report, "Security Council Action Under Chapter VII: Myths and Realities" 2008

20 "Report: Kim “Sorry” About N. Korea Nuclear Test"

21 "Press Split After North Korean Rocket Launch"

22 Tang, Wenfang, "Political and Social Trends in the Post-Deng Urban ChinaThe China Quarterly 168890909"

23 Haass, Richard, "North Korea’s Failure : The Good and the Bad" Council on Foreign Relations 2012

24 Choe, Sang-hun, "North Korean Rocket Fails Moments after Liftoff"

25 Peter Hayes, "North Korean Nuclear Nationalism and the Threat of Nuclear War in Korea" 국제관계연구소 26 (26): 65-89, 2011

26 "North Korea: Adoption of Resolution 1874—Remarks to the Press by Mr. Jean-Maurice Ripert, Permanent Representative of France to the United Nations"

27 "North Korea to Rejoin 6-Nation Nuclear Talks" Associated Press 2006

28 Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, "Joint Press Statement V4+ Japan Foreign Ministers’ Meeting" Press Release 2006

29 "Japan to Seek UN Security Council Resolution Against North Korea Over Missile Launch"

30 Portela, Clara, "Impact of Sanctions and Isolation Measures with North Korea, Burma/Myanmar, Iran and Zimbabwe as Case Studies" 2011

31 Wei, Ting, "Europe-Asia Relations: Building Multilateralisms" Palgrave MacMillan 2008

32 Bridges, Brian, "Europe-Asia Relations: Building Multilateralisms" Palgrave MacMillan 2008

33 Guérot, Ulrike, "Europe Could Become the First Post-Modern Superpower" The European Institute 2004

34 "Economic Sanctions and U.S. Department of Treasury Actions 1955–April 2009" The National Committee on North Korea 2009

35 Korean Central News Agency, "DPRK Successfully Conducts Underground Nuclear Test" Press Release 2006

36 Korean Central News Agency, "DPRK Foreign Ministry Refutes Resolution of UN Security Council" Press Release 2006

37 Korean Central News Agency, "DPRK Foreign Ministry Declares Strong Counter-Measures Against UNSC’s ‘Resolution’ 1874" Press Release 2009

38 "Chinese Government ‘Resolutely Opposes’ DPRK’s Nuclear Test"

39 Clinton, Hillary Rodham, "America's Pacific Century"

40 Bleiker, Roland, "A Rogue Is a Rogue Is a Rogue: US Foreign Policy and the Korean Nuclear Crisis" 79 (79): 719-737, 2003

41 Shankar, Thom, "A Different Tactic for Rice : Speaking Softly Without the Stick"

42 Hoffman, Aaron M, "A Conceptualization of Trust in International Relations" 8 (8): 375-401, 2002