Search

tab bibliog

tab illus bibliog

bibliog

tab bibliog

tab bibliog

INSIDE THE Beltway and on op-ed pages across the United States, it has become increasingly popular to lament the demise of U.S. influence in Asia. Power transitions, resurgent Asian nationalism, [...]

The various issues surrounding the unification of North and South Korea are discussed, with special emphasis on the financial limitations facing both countries in the process. Implications of alternatives to unification, primarily the condoning of a nuclearized North Korea, are discussed, and it is shown that the unification process may be more affordable than is widely believed.

The North Korean state under a young and unproven leader faces severe challenges. The regime will not change because of a leadership transition or because of the West’s hope of reform. It could crack because its ideology is at odds with the country’s incremental societal change.

South Korea's first leftist-controlled party came to power after 40 years, increasing its seats from 49 to 152, making it a miraculous victory on April 15, 2004. Asia's most vibrant democracy, though rough-and-tumble will have to represent the entire political spectrum.

For the Obama administration, unforeseen dynamics in East Asia over the past year have escalated the importance of the U.S.-ROK alliance to unprecedented levels for the United States. But the alliance remains vulnerable to external shocks, rendering the continuation of the current phase of unmitigated harmonious ties far from certain.

The article presents a defense of U.S. foreign policy in Asia under the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush. The rise of a three-way partnership among the U.S., China, and Japan is discussed, as are military relations on the Korean peninsula, including the six-party talks to curb North Korea's nuclear weapons program. U.S. relations with Southeast Asia are also explored, with attention to the goodwill created by the U.S. humanitarian aid effort following the 2004 tsunami. Topics discussed in depth include relations with North Korea, regional political and economic organizations, and the military and economic rise of China.

The variables presaging fundamental change on the Korean Peninsula are many. This assessment of South Korea seeks to lay out the political, economic, and military events of 2004 and their relationship to South Korean grand strategy. It also seeks to analyze the linkages between Seoul's grand strategy and the U.S.-led global war on terror.

Discusses issues relating to North Korea. Relations between North Korea and the so-called Axis of Evil countries that were identified by United States President George W. Bush; Characterization of Kim Jong Il as a rational and brutal dictator; North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons to deter adversaries; Question of whether North Korea honors international commitments; Political and economic stability of the country; Influence of China on North Korea; Historical background on the DMZ, or demilitarized zone in Korea; How the policies of the Clinton Administration and the Bush Administration have contributed to a crisis situation; The issue of American troops in South Korea.

Korea is one of the most complex, critical, and yet understudied of Japan's foreign policy relationships. While much attention in US policy and academic circles has focused on Japan's future relations with China as the key variable for regional stability in the twenty first century, an integral part of the security dynamic in East Asia has been driven by the Japan–Korea axis. In the late-nineteenth century and early twentieth century, two major power wars in Asia (i.e., Sino-Japanese and Russo-Japanese) had this relationship as a proximate cause. During the cold war, the Japan–Republic of Korea (ROK) axis facilitated the American presence as an Asia-Pacific power and security guarantor. And in the post-cold war era, outcomes in the Japan–Korea (united or still divided) relationship are critical to the shape of future balance of power dynamics in the region and with it, the future American security presence. How then should we be thinking about future Japanese relations with the Korean peninsula? What are Tokyo's hopes and concerns with regard to Korea? How do they view the prospect of a united Korea? Is there a Japanese ‘grand strategy’ regarding the peninsula?

Abstract:Straightforward realist calculations of political and economic interests would suggest much higher levels of cooperation than have been evidenced between the Republic of Korea (ROK) and Japan. An often-cited example of their puzzling interaction is the June 1965 normalization treaty. While highly beneficial to both countries, this settlement came about only after 14 years of acerbic and seemingly unnecessarily protracted negotiations. Conventional wisdom highlights the historical enmity and psychological barriers that separate Koreans and Japanese as a key explanatory variable for the tortured treaty process as well as the primary impediment to generally greater cooperation in the relationship. However, recently declassified U.S. government documents and new primary source materials shed new light on the importance of broader geostrategic variables in the 1965 settlement. This article contends that the heightened Cold War security environment in East Asia compelled a normalization settlement between Korea and Japan. The primary causal factor in this regard was the United States. Rising threats from China, coupled with burdensome entanglements in Vietnam, prompted the U.S. to place the highest priority on reconciliation between its two key allies in the region. While U.S. pressure for an ROK—Japan settlement had existed since the start of negotiations in 1951, these efforts became particularly pronounced from 1964 and were critical to the treaty's conclusion in 1965. These findings have implications for the study of Korea—Japan relations generally as well as for the application of international relations theory to East Asia.

Abstract:With the end of the Cold War and uncertainties about the continued viability of the North Korean regime, the distant goal of national unification may finally be on the horizon. As Korea progresses toward the end of this long and winding road, a sharper focus on the once abstract notion of unification is appropriate. This article offers three perspectives on the topic. First it analyzes from a historical perspective why unification dialogue between the two Koreas has been largely unproductive. Second, it overviews some of the potential problems and policy priorities in the future process of unification. And third, it assesses the potential impact of a united Korea on the balance of power in East Asia.

(Bloomberg Opinion) -- To Get North Korea Deal, Talk About Human Rights: Victor D. Cha Even at Trump's behest, no general counsel of any U.S. company would recommend investing in North Korea if human-rights abuses in the supply chain might put them in violation of U.S. law. [Extracted from the article]