Ways and Means of Us Policy Towards North Korea
The Ends, Ways, and Means of US Policy Towards North Korea By Cynthia M. Lewis Inter/National Security Studies Lesson 8 22 June 2012 Instructor: Dr. Bruce Bechtol Jr. Air Command and Staff College Distance Learning Maxwell AFB, AL One of the security challenges facing the United States (US) is the US and North Korea relations. The US policy toward North Korea is diplomatic yet firm. North Korea is our longest standing adversary. Policy toward North Korea is one of the most enduring foreign policy challenges. In this essay I will discuss the security challenge of U. S. nd North Korea, the theory of international relation, realism, how it illuminates this challenge and how the instruments of power can be utilized to address this challenge. The stability U. S. relations with North Korea are closely tied to how stable relations are between North Korea and South Korea. According to our lesson, North Korea threatens South Korea, Japan and economic ties through the region (Instructional Narrative, 2012, 8).
Only $13.90 / page
A nuclear North Korea, armed with ballistic missiles capable of reaching Japan, represents Tokyo’s immediate challenge (Corin, 2009, 265).
The instability of North Korea ranks among the most complex of contemporary challenges to international security (Przystup, 2009). Since the end of the Korean War, U. S. national security interests on the Korean Peninsula have focused on deterrence of North Korea, defense of the Republic of Korea (ROK) if deterrence should fail, and support for Korean unification under the ROK. In addition to deterring North Korea, U. S. policy since the early 1990s has defined the denuclearization of North The U. S. ontinues to work to maintain strong unity with South Korea, Japan, and other states with a vested interest in the future of the Korea Peninsula and the stability and wealth of North Asia. According to Corin, (2009, 268) it is North Korea’s attempted development of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile delivery systems that defines the major security challenge. North Korea poses two distinct but interrelated challenges. The first is external: the challenge posed by its nuclear weapons program and the threat of proliferation off the Korean Peninsula.
The second is essentially but not wholly internal: the challenge posed by the pending transfer of power in Pyongyang and potential for instability as the process plays out. This complex reality underscores the need for balance and strategic patience if the twin dangers of proliferation and instability on the peninsula are to be successfully managed. In order to produce these changes in the policy, there must be a determination of the ends/ goals, ways for achieving the goals, and means as the instruments and activities for implementing ways.
The history of the relationship between the United States and North Korea led up to today’s policy of dealing with North Korea through diplomatic channels. The U. S. helped to divide the Korean peninsula at the end of World War II, and then waged war against North Korea in the 1950s. Although the U. S. signed a peace agreement rather than a peace treaty with North Korea after the war, its policy toward the country changed. Instead of trying to overthrow the North Korea government, the U. S. government adopted a policy of containing communism.
During the 1980’s, associations between North Korea and the U. S. start to take on a new diplomatic form. North Korea’s nuclear weapons program had become a pressing international issue (Instructional Narrative, 2012, 3). Two issues that exacerbated North Korea’s situation and caused the U. S. to alter its diplomacy was their nuclear program and their treatment of human rights. In 2005 the U. S. wanted peace talks with North Korea. They sought Six Party peace talks, while North Korea demanded one on one talks with the U. S.
In 2006, North Korea took an initial step to implement an agreement under the support of the Six Party Talks to abandon its nuclear weapons program in return for specified economic and political concessions (Corin, 2010, 163). According to Klinger, (2009, 1), the Six Party Talks should continue but should not be the only venue where the U. S. engages North Korea. If we expect to have any influence over events in North Korea, the U. S. policy must involve commitment with North Korea. The ways of the U. S. policy are the policies and commitments.
The involvement with North Korea should include discussions, negotiations, cultural exchanges, and even diplomatic relations. To involve North Korea, an understanding and influence of the U. S on North Korea can be created. Although, the public perceive a major policy shift toward North Korea, President Obama is continuing the Bush engagement strategy (Kingner, 2009, 1). The goal of the U. S. is to maintain a stable, peaceful Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. To achieve this goal, the U. S. will work to ensure the implementation of U. S. nd international sanctions against North Korea. Nuclear negotiations are currently in a deadlock because North Korea rejects a verification protocol that claimed Pyongyang had previously accepted (Ibid, 2). The international community has a great interest in denuclearization of North Korea. This is a key principle of international policies toward North Korea (Sanghee, 2010, 1). The U. S. assertion is not as simple as the notion that states such as North Korea will follow the U. S. lead in creating a world without nuclear weapons (Spring, 2010, 4).
The ends and/or goals have been identified. The ways are the commitment and policies. The means have been identified as activities to implement the commitment and policies. The goal of U. S. diplomacy remains denuclearization. This will take time, and our security strategy must deal with the world as it is. The commitment of the administration of President Barack Obama to extended deterrence is critical in supporting both U. S. diplomatic and security strategy and its allies. Bibliography Cronin, Patrick M. (ed). “Chapter 8: The Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. In Global Strategic Assessment 2009: America’s Security Role in a Changing Security World. Washington DC: National Defense University Press, 2009: 162-185. Cronin, Patrick M. (ed). “Chapter 12: East and Southeast Asia. ” In Global Strategic Assessment 2009: America’s Security Role in a Changing Security World. Washington DC: National Defense University Press, 2009: 260-284. Instructional Narrative NS04. “Security Issues in Practice: Regional Conflict and the WMD Threat. ” Air Command and Staff College Distance Learning Course: International Security Studies (NS-5510).