Donny Lucy3/11/2004EDGE Research paperBruce LusignanCrisis on the Korean PeninsulaNorth Korea has been the most publicized nation in the last ten years regarding nuclear proliferation. They are often debated in the highest political circles and are considered by many in the United States the US’s greatest threat. However, many politicians and critics are divided on how to deal with North Korea, and the nuclear threat it poses to the rest of the world. In my research I stumbled upon a fascinating book entitled Crisis on the Korean Peninsula that deals precisely with this issue. The book written by, opinion leaders and foreign policy scholars Michael O’Hanlon and Mike Mochizuki, introduces an ambitious strategy that attempts to answer the nuclear problems as well as the problems within the state itself. In the book their strategy is very clear cut and attacks three core issues where they see room for improvement. Foremost, they address the nuclear weapons issue that so clouds North Korea’s present and future global status as well as northeast Asia’s security. Additionally they argue for the reduction of conventional military forces and reconstruction of the nation’s shattered economy. Lastly, they argue for calming security assurances to North Korea’s embattled leaders, who show signs they might welcome such pledges. The three core issues covered by Mochizuki and O’Hanlon will serve as the basis of my research but will be backed by other sources that talk about the same 1important issues from different view points allowing a wide ranging view point. Altogether in my research of North Korea I hope to learn from the ideas of O’Hanlon, Mochizuki and others sources and have the ability to expound on the ideas of these men and women with my own. In order to cover the three main points I divided O’Hanlon’s and Mochizuki’s book into three similar sections: 1. Current situation in North Korea and world regarding nuclear weapons, 2. Confrontation capabilities, and 3. Bargaining possibilities. These sections serve as a road map ultimately conveyingboth the situation of nuclear proliferation in North Korea in their strongest arguments to the reader. Furthermore, as the authors follow these guidelines so will I with my research of their information. I will include in these sections ideas from other papers and authors as well as a section in which I provide some of my own analysis. Current SituationCrisis on the Korean Peninsula opens with a quick history background of the country through the twentieth century. In this background check O’Hanlon and Mochizuki cover the history of the country following the split of Korea after World War II. In this unglamorous review of the country’s history O’Hanlon and Mochizuki mention failed agriculture, famine, brainwashing propaganda, restrictions of freedoms, and make the comparison of Kim Jong II and his political hierarchy to that of Stalin. They go on to explain that the above 2mentioned struggles following WWII are a result of a military state that prides itself in an excess of troops and military spending on items such as nuclear material. Accordingly, O’Hanlon and Mochizuki follow this brief history with their first important question of the book; Is North Korea trying to mend its Ways?O’Hanlon and Mochizuki answer this question in a broad outlook. They argue that due to the financial circumstances that have strapped the country since the end of the Cold War many changes have had to be made. “Meanwhile, his heavy industries are falling into disrepair, a half century of abuse has destroyed much of his country’s farmland, and a half century of brain washing and suppression have left the North Korean people ill-equipped to compete in the modern global economy.”1 As a result of this faltering economy Jong II has had to make some alterations in order to keep the country together and under his power. The provisions mentioned in the chapter refer to the lifting of price controls, increased wages, reduction of terrorism and arm sales, and the signing ofthe Agreed Framework with the United States, which capped its fledgling nuclear capabilities. All of these provisions were made in the 90’s and seemed to promotea more positive view of the situation in North Korea. Unfortunately, O’Hanlon and Mochizuki go on to explain how this little progress, made during the 90’s, hasrecently been marred by the discovery of North Korea’s resuscitated nuclear program. The U.S. discovery of North Korea’s recent nuclear activity has set back any progress made by Jong II, claims O’Hanlon and Mochizuki, and has clearly 1O’Hanlon and Mochizuki, Crisis on the Korean Peninsula, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003) pg. 283violated the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Agreed Framework, and an accord between North Korea and South Korea which was signed in 1991. They also detailed many of the violations. The reprocessing of spent chemical fuel rods, therestart of a small research reactor and even hinted at the idea of testing a nuclear bomb. Furthermore, the two authors add that the motivation for the restarting of North Korea’s nuclear program is highly debated, but believes North Korea’s actions are directly related to the playing out of recent foreign affairs following September 11. North Korea saw what happened to Afghanistan and Iraq and believed nuclear weapons to be essential to their own defense. This information regarding North Korean recent nuclear activities provided by O’Hanlon is backed by a recent speech made by George Tenet to the Senate Arms Committee. In thisrecent speech by Tenet he indicates that little strides are being made by the North Koreans to mend its ways in the area of nuclear weapons. “North Korea is trying to leverage its nuclear weapons programs into international legitimacy and bargaining power, announcing its withdrawal from the Nonproliferation Treaty and openly proclaiming that it has a nuclear deterrent.”2 Also, since withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty Tenet argues that the North Koreans are on a mission to produce enriched uranium. All these indications in Tenet’s recent speech point to information that shows North Korea has no plans of ending its nuclear and military endeavors. O’Hanlon and Mochizuki criticize President Bush’s cabinet for these recent problems noting that the few talks between the country’s have produced 2
View Full Document