스톡홀름 합의는 어떻게 가능했는가? - 다원주의 모델에서 본 대북정책 결정 -

Abstract

Japan and North Korea had an agreement for the investigations of the abductees of Japanese nationals by North Korea in the Intergovernmental Consultations held in Stockholm on May 26-28, 2014. Japan-North Korea had once agreement at the Working-Level Consultations on August 8-11, 2008, however North Korea suddenly cancelled the investigations on September 2. The Stockholm Agreement on 2014 was very first agreement in six years between two governments. We can find the differences between two agreements on 2008 and 2014. North Korea agreed the investigations of the Japanese abductees by North Korea and the missing Japanese probably related to North Korea in the agreement on 2008. However North Korea agreed the investigations of not only the Japanese abductees and the missing Japanese, but also remaining Japanese and Japanese spouses, remains of Japanese. Thus North Korea promised they would conduct comprehensive and full-scale investigations on all Japanese nationals. Why did the range of the investigations broaden in the Stockholm agreement? I would like to analyze the decision-making of the Japanese foreign policy toward North Korea with pluralism approach. Foreign policies are decided by conflictions and reconciliations of many actors’ interests in pluralistic democracy as the studies of Roger Hilsman and TomohikoShinoda. I defined actors in Japan are the Cabinet including the bureaucracy, the cartel of the Diet member, and interest groups related in North Korea issues. Of course North Korea is the actor as negotiating partner of the Ministry of Foreign Affair of Japan(MOFA). The public opinions in Japan has most interested in the abduction issue on past and present. Therefore the interest groups related with abduction and missing issues have strong pressure powers to the Diet members. The Diet members form cartel to absorb the pressure from interest groups, and demand the resolutions to the Cabinet which controlling the MOFA. North Korea accepted the investigation which the MOFA demand on 2008, therefore interest groups related remaining Japanese and Japanese spouses, and remains of Japanese have little powers to the Diet member. However North Korea began to try the negotiations with Japan’s government on the issue of the remaining Japanese and Japanese spouses, and remains of Japanese after 2008. Thus those interest groups began have great pressure powers to the Diet members and the Cabinet. The Japan’s government has no way but to accept the demand of those interest groups, however the Japan’s government also has to pursuit the resolutions of the issue of abductions and missing Japanese to North Korea by the interest groups related with the issue of abductions and missing Japanese which have strong pressure powers. We can say that the reason of broadening the range of the investigations in the Stockholm agreement is that North Korean diplomacy toward Japan make the interest groups in Japan strong.