The Ethics and Politics of North Korea’s Denuclearization
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
With its six nuclear tests, North Korea aims to be regarded as a nuclear power by international society. However, such a status has been denied to North Korea, especially after its fourth and fifth nuclear tests in 2016 and the sixth in 2017. North Korea's international isolation has been strengthened with the UN Security Council resolutions, and the tensions in the relations between North and South Korea and between North Korea and the U.S. have been heightened. The problem of North Korea's nuclear weapons is both political and ethical one. There are four political and ethical approaches to nuclear weapons: nuclear maximalism, nuclear minimalism, nuclear reductionism, and anti-nuclearism. A nuclear maximalist approach to North Korean nuclear weapons may cause a second Korean War, and a nuclear minimalist approach to them also has the danger to increase and escalate tensions on the Korean Peninsula. Therefore, either a nuclear reductionist approach or an anti-nuclearism approach to the problem of North Korean nuclear weapons is more desirable. Three models of denuclearization can be helpful in achieving the North Korean denuclearization: Ukraine model, South African model, and Libya model. Each model can provide its own lessons and implications. Especially, considering the importance and significance of the Budapest Memorandum in the process of the Ukraine model, an East Asian version of Budapest Memorandum is needed for the successful North Korean denuclearization.
Abstract
With its six nuclear tests, North Korea aims to be regarded as a nuclear power by international society. However, such a status has been denied to North Korea, especially after its fourth and fifth nuclear tests in 2016 and the sixth in 2017. North Korea's international isolation has been strengthened with the UN Security Council resolutions, and the tensions in the relations between North and South Korea and between North Korea and the U.S. have been heightened. The problem of North Korea's nuclear weapons is both political and ethical one. There are four political and ethical approaches to nuclear weapons: nuclear maximalism, nuclear minimalism, nuclear reductionism, and anti-nuclearism. A nuclear maximalist approach to North Korean nuclear weapons may cause a second Korean War, and a nuclear minimalist approach to them also has the danger to increase and escalate tensions on the Korean Peninsula. Therefore, either a nuclear reductionist approach or an anti-nuclearism approach to the problem of North Korean nuclear weapons is more desirable. Three models of denuclearization can be helpful in achieving the North Korean denuclearization: Ukraine model, South African model, and Libya model. Each model can provide its own lessons and implications. Especially, considering the importance and significance of the Budapest Memorandum in the process of the Ukraine model, an East Asian version of Budapest Memorandum is needed for the successful North Korean denuclearization.
참고문헌 (26)
- Bull, Hedley, "The Anarchical Society" (1977), Columbia University Press
- Mearsheimer, John J., "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics" (2001), W. W. Norton & Company
- Nye, Joseph, "Nuclear Ethics" (1986), The Free Press
- Rawls, John, "The Law of Peoples" (1999), Harvard University Press
- Reiss, Mitchell, "Bridled Ambition: Why Countries Constrain Their Nuclear Capabilities" (1995), Woodrow Wilson Center Press
- Rosenthal, Joel H., "Ethics & International Affairs: A Reader" (1995), Georgetown University Press
- Sagan, Scott D., "The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: An Enduring Debate" (2013), W. W. Norton & Company
- Waltz, Kenneth N., "Theory of International Politics" (1979), Addison-Wesley
- Zakaria, Fareed, "The Post-American World" (2008), W. W. Norton & Company
- Falk, Richard, "Indefensible Weapons:The Political and Psychological Case Against Nuclearism", pp.127~265 (1982), Basic Books
- Goodin, Robert E., "Nuclear Disarmament as a Moral Certainty", Ethics, 95, pp.641~658 (1985)
- Hecker, Siegfried S., "Lessons Learned from the North Korean Nuclear Crises", Daedalus, 139, pp.44~56 (2010)
- Liberman, Peter, "The Rise and Fall of the South African Bomb", International Security, 26, pp.45~86 (2001)
- Mearsheimer, John J., "The Case for a Ukrainian Nuclear Deterrent", Foreign Affairs, 72 (1993)
- Larry Niksch, "China’s Policies toward North Korea’s Nuclear and Missile Programs", International Journal of Korean Unification Studies, 24(2), pp.1~40 (2015), 통일연구원
- Purkitt, Helen E., "South Africa’s Nuclear Decisions", International Security, 27, pp.186~194 (2002)
- Sagan, Scott D., "Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons? Three Models in Search of a Bomb", International Security, 21, pp.54~86 (1997)
- Sarotte, Mary Elise, "A Broken Promise? What the West Really Told Moscow About NATO Expansion", Foreign Affairs, 93, pp.90~97 (2014)
- Solingen, Etel, "The Political Economy of Nuclear Restraint", International Security, 19, pp.126~169 (1994)
- Ullman, Richard, "Denuclearizing International Politics", Ethics, 95, pp.567~588 (1985)
- Villiers, J. W., "Why South Africa Gave Up the Bomb", Foreign Affairs, 72, pp.98~109 (1993)
- Waltz, Kenneth N., "Why Iran Should Get the Bomb: Nuclear Balancing Would Mean Stability", Foreign Affairs, 91, pp.2~5 (2012)
- Yost, David S., "The Budapest Memorandum and Russia’s Intervention in Ukraine", International Affairs, 91, pp.505~538 (2015)
- ""U.S. Policy Toward North Korea," Council on Foreign Relations, SERI Quarterly (January 2013)"[URL]