Search

The primary purpose of this article is to propose general conditions for establishing a nuclear weapon-free zone (NWFZ) in the Korean Peninsula from the viewpoint of international law. North Korea's nuclear weapons development has created the most negative environment for the peace and security of Northeast Asia since the early 1990s. In spite of painstaking negotiations to denuclearize North Korea, the parties concerned have not found any fundamental solution yet. This interim failure is due to the uncompromising positions of the two sides as well as the inherently paradoxical structure of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which legalizes the development of nuclear weapons by the recognized nuclear powers. The most reasonable solution is to completely and fairly denuclearize the whole Korean Peninsula under an NWFZ. This paper scrutinizes legal, political and technical problems for realizing the plan for a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula. In a world that all too often seems dark and ominous, the Treaty of Tlatelolco will shine like a beacon. This Treaty is a practical demonstration to all humanity of what can be accomplished when sufficient dedication and the necessary will exist.U Thant [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Northeast Asia is notable for the relative absence of regional institutions. The Six Party Talks could constitute an embryonic starting point for the development of such institutions. The path toward greater institutionalization is likely to begin in a modest fashion. Functional working groups on topics such as the environment, maritime transport, technical barriers to trade, road and rail links, and energy could provide the locus for integrating North Korea into the broader regional and global economies. Foreign ministries will inevitably take the lead in developing the Northeast Asia Peace and Security Mechanism (NEAPSM), but meaningful economic achievements will require the involvement of other ministries. North Korea has proved problematic in this regard thus far. Moreover, given the importance of private-sector involvement in achieving sustainable economic development in North Korea, modalities will have to be developed to integrate private-sector actors when possible. The governments of the region, and particularly China and South Korea, may continue support on a bilateral basis as a hedge against North Korea's collapse or as inducements in the context of the nuclear talks. But the development of more permanent multilateral structures is unlikely until the nuclear issue is resolved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

North Korea is at the top of the agenda of Asia-Pacific security, but the agenda remains almost exclusively reactive, not proactive. Against this backdrop, the article argues that the key to dealing with North Korea is Pyongyang's culture of self-destruction, collectively held ideas of state-centred sacrifice designed to ensure regime survival. Fears of insecurity embedded in unequal relations with Asia-Pacific powers have lead this authoritarian state to construct and reconstruct a national identity narrative of life and death, fostering domestic solidarity against foreign powers. As an inseparable part of this ideational power, its nuclear weapons are primarily utilized to attract international attention, to maximize political and economic gains and, in the end, to guarantee regime survival. Given the dynamic of increasing accessibility to dual-use technology, ideology-based non-proliferation rules, and North Korean determination to weaponize its nuclear technology, it is time for the Asia-Pacific powers to acknowledge that North Korean nuclear proliferation is about knowledge of nuclear technology and weapons, and will continue to remain uncontrolled and directionless. Autonomy of knowledge suggests that the Non-Proliferation Treaty is unenforceable in North Korea and, by extension, in other parts of the world, a problem the international community must face and accept. North Korea's neighbours, not the distant powers, must take the lead in regional security, seeking solutions acceptable to all the parties for peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the implications of the inability of a six-party forum established as a foundation for creating an East Asian model of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to resolve the nuclear problem on the Korean Peninsula. It cites that the U.S. opposed the creation of a multilateral structure in the Asia-Pacific region due to its reliance on bilateral military alliances with Asian countries. It stresses that the formal continuation of the forum can become a mechanism that can actually influence the correlation of forces.

Focuses on the call for a Northeast Asia nuclear weapon free zone. Construction of underground nuclear facilities in North Korea; Launching of three-stage Taepodong missile or satellite over Japanese territory; Intrusion of two spy boats into Japanese territorial waters; Strengthening of Japan's military capabilities.