Relations between the DPRK and the ROK
The establishment of Sino-US diplomatic relations and its influence on the two countries’ interaction model on the Korean Peninsula issue
Contemporary Korea,2014,No. 03
【Abstract】 Based on the theory of interaction, this paper explores the Sino-US interaction process on the Korean Peninsula issue. Their interaction model on the Korean Peninsula issue which was conflictual due to the Korea War did not change until the establishment of the two countries’ diplomatic relations. The establishment of diplomatic relations does not change the two countries’ interaction essence on the Korean Peninsula issue immediately, but it is a turning point for the transformation of their interaction model. These factors, such as the cognitive change of the two countries’ leaders, the increase of their political interaction, and the change of the two countries’ foreign policy towards the Korean Peninsula, make a transformation of Sino-US interaction model on the Korean Peninsula issue from “conflictive interaction” to “competitive interaction.”
Northeast Asia Forum,2015,Vol 24,No. 05
【Abstract】 The basic reasons for the periodic tension on the Korean Peninsula include legacy of the Cold War, the policy of the US and the Republic of Korea (ROK) towards the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), as well as the competition and opposition between the DPRK and the ROK. Nuclear weapons development is an important measure for the DPRK to sustain regime survival and to cope with the power imbalance between the ROK and the DPRK. It is also one of the reasons for the intense situation on the Korean Peninsula. Russia has security and economy concerns and interest on the Korean Peninsula; to maintain peace and stability is in line with Russian interests. Russia does not permit the DPRK to develop nuclear weapons, but it keeps relatively prudent and restraint attitude towards the issue. Since entering the new century, Russia has taken a pragmatic and flexible policy on the Korean Peninsula affairs. On the one hand, it has strengthened economic cooperation and further develops relations with the ROK. On the other hand, it continues to develop relations with the DPRK. The relations between Russia and the DPRK improved obviously in 2014. Russia would like to promote conciliation between the ROK and the DPRK. Though it could play the role of mediating to some extent, its influence and mediation function are extremely limited.
Northeast Asia Forum,2014,Vol 23,No. 01
【Abstract】 After taking office as the 18th president of the Republic of Korea, Park Geun-hye, confronting the thorniest external environment of the 21st century, clarified the diplomatic targets: building foundation for peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula, establishing the peaceful cooperation system in Northeast Asia and contributing to world peace. Although Park’s diplomatic achievements have won favorable comments from both domestic and international society, there are still many issues to be handled: firstly, how to improve inter-Korean relations and open a new era of “Trust-Building Process on the Korean Peninsula” against the background of the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue; secondly, how to maintain balance between China and the U.S. and build the China-US-ROK trilateral cooperation mechanism; thirdly, how to make Japan resolve the history problems with an attitude of “taking responsible and sincere measures” to increase China and the ROK’s trust in Japan and achieve reconciliation among the three countries; finally, how to promote multilateral cooperation in Northeast Asia to realize the vision of regional peace, where the security dilemma has no sign to relieve. Those four challenges are the severe trial the Park Geun-hye administration confronted.
Northeast Asia Forum,2014,Vol 23,No. 03
【Abstract】 The Park Geun-hye administration initiatively named its policy toward the DPRK as “trust-building process on the Korean Peninsula” with “trust” as its core concept and solid security system as its base. The new policy emphasizes fundamental principles and at the same time, embodies flexibility, accommodating both conservativeness and progressiveness. It contributes to avoiding shocks to the North Korea-South Korea Relations that arisen from administration changes of the ROK. Therefore, the new policy has obtained domestic and international support. In order to realize substantive advance for the North Korea-South Korea Relations, several key questions require logical and self-consistent answers. For example, is the policy based on the judgment that the DPRK will be politically stable or the one that its political situation will be increasingly unpredictable? How should the ROK enhance trust with the DPRK while strengthening the ROK-US alliance? etc.
Northeast Asia Forum,2014,Vol 23,No. 05
【Abstract】 The continuous tense security on the Korean Peninsula since 2013 has posed substantial threat to the peace and stability of Northeast Asia. It has become more urgent and necessary to safeguard the peace and stability of this area. As a principle recognized by the international society to deal with global affairs, “peaceful coexistence” should and could play a role in achieving the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. It is necessary to make “peaceful coexistence” a core basis of principles in solving the Korean Peninsula issue in a peaceful way.
Northeast Asia Forum,2016,Vol 25,No. 03
【Abstract】 At the beginning of 2016, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) conducted the fourth nuclear test, and the scale of joint military exercises of the United States (US) and the Republic of Korea (ROK) expanded correspondingly. As a result, the “spastic tension” of the Korean Peninsula re-emerged, casting a shadow over the security of Northeast Asia. It is difficult to anticipate whether the Resolution 2270 approved by the United Nations Security Council can promote the DPRK to return to the “six-party talk.” The US attempt of deploying the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system in ROK has been firmly opposed by China and Russia, adding to the complication and uncertainties of security and geopolitics in Northeast Asia. The key to the DPRK nuclear issue is that both the US and the DPRK firmly believe that the nuclear balance of terror is the only way to peace and national security. However, this logic has frustrated denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. In the event of war, the entire Peninsula will face a catastrophe. At this critical point of history, relevant countries should establish the concept of sustainable security and seek new efforts. The possible way of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and a peaceful and stable future might be building a security community featured with common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security.
Is the enemy of my ally also an ally? The mystery of “two sided alliances” of ancient Korean Peninsula countries
Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies,2015,No. 05
【Abstract】 Even it is not inconceivable that a state concurrently forms alliances with two states that are hostile towards one another; it is difficult to understand the conditions under which this might occur. However, such phenomenon can be found in ancient East Asia on the Korean Peninsula, where both Joseon and Goryeo both entered simultaneously into alliances with two antagonistic countries, which are also the first and second most powerful states of that time. In order to decipher the mystery, this article takes the principle of supply and demand as a starting point for identifying general mechanism whereby a small state might form alliances with two mutually competitive great powers. First, the small state should have at least two critical needs which cannot be satisfied on its own, and the two great powers (either subjectively or objectively) can each respectively satisfy only one of these needs. Second, there should be a stalemate between the two powers, such that neither feels confident to challenge the other. As the central members of the ancient East Asia tributary system, both Goryeo and Joseon relied on external security assurance from great powers, while at the same time the legitimacy of their regime also almost completely derived from recognition and honor conferred by the Han nationality’s Dynasties. With the rise of north nomadic regimes as great powers in the system, the security assurance and the political legitimacy were separately provided by different great powers. As strategic stalemate occurred between the great powers, the so-called “two sided alliances” began to emerge. The existence of such “two sided alliances” reflects the diversity of interstate dynamics and has provocative implications for possible modes of power competition between great powers.
Northeast Asia Forum,2017,Vol 26,No. 01
【Abstract】 The situation in Northeast Asia has attracted worldwide attention because of the fourth and fifth nuclear tests conducted by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the deployment of “Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)” by the Republic of Korea (ROK) and the US on the Korean Peninsula. Scholars have launched a new discussion on how to deal with these crises brought about by these changes. Based on an analytic framework of the relationship between the theory of state autonomy and the state’s decision making behavior, this paper attempts to analyze the behavioral logic of the two countries on the Korean Peninsula in terms of the choice of foreign policy, pointing out that the main factors influencing the decision-making process of DPRK and ROK are domestic politics and the strategy of great powers. And this paper proposes two policy recommendations, one of which is rejuvenation of the economy of DPRK and the other a change for ROK from the “balancer” to “coordinator.” A prosperous and peaceful future of the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia can be ensured only by weakening the policy orientation of “power politics” and emphasizing and focusing on governance and economic growth in policy formulations and implementations.
Northeast Asia Forum,2017,Vol 26,No. 05
【Abstract】 US policy towards Korean Peninsula served as a significant part of its strategy to Asia-Pacific. To meet the need of competition between China and US on the leadership in the Asia-Pacific region, the US made utmost effort to weaken China’s influence on the Korean Peninsula, adopting a wedge strategy and sowing discord in both China-DPRK relations and China-ROK relations. The US used a continuous pressure policy to alienate China and the DPRK by separately handling the two countries in both way of confrontation and association, constantly intensifying internal conflicts, so that the DPRK was turned into China’s strategic burden instead of Strategic asset. When it refers to the ROK, the US economic move such as signing US-ROK FTA, inviting the ROK to join TPP and preventing it from AIIB has limited effects. Yet US’s wedge strategy concerning security is more effective, with the deployment of THAAD being an example. US double alienation wedge policy entangled the Korean Peninsula situation and intensified strategic competition between China and the US, thus giving rise to much incompatibility in Northeast Asia.
Rethinking the two sided alliances: a review of “Is the enemy of my ally also an ally? The mystery of ‘two sided alliances’ on the Korean Peninsula in Ancient Times”
Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific Studies,2016,No. 04
【Abstract】 It is more or less a rare phenomenon in international relations that a state forms an alliance with two mutually hostile states. Based on the previous research of Cao and Yang on this topic, this article pointed out the differences between modern theories of alliances and alliance types found in international relations in ancient East Asia such as “treaty between brothers” or “treaty between uncle and nephew.” Through the historical analyses of cases of two sided alliances, the article finds that this phenomenon still exists in contemporary international relations, and when faced with serious external pressures, many small states have the incentives to form such alliances. The real difficulty of two sided alliance stems from whether a major state will tolerate a small state ally to forge an alliance with its enemy.
Contemporary Korea,2018,No. 01
【Abstract】 There is a long historical association between China and Korean Peninsula, and the peninsula is of great significance in geopolitics. After the end of the Cold War, China not only kept the tradition of friendly communication with the DPRK, but also normalized the relations with the ROK. Since the establishment of China-ROK diplomatic relations, the bilateral relations have been developing quickly in many fields and have developed into the strategic partnerships. However, the relations encountered a heavy blow and the connection of national developing strategies was frustrated because of the THAAD issue. In October 2017, China and the ROK reached a certain understanding about the issue, which was helpful in improving the bilateral relations and promoting the relations to come into the new era. With the connection of China’s Belt and Road Initiative and ROK’s national developing strategy, China-ROK relations will become a model of the new-typed relations between countries.
Influence of China’s “Double-track” and “Double Suspension” on the situation of “Double Postponement” on the Korean Peninsula
Contemporary Korea,2018,No. 02
【Abstract】 In view of the deadlock on the Korean Peninsula, China put forward the idea of “Double-Track” and “Double Suspension” in consideration of the situation, which indicates China’s unremitting efforts to promote the denuclearization of the peninsula and provides a direction of development from easing the nuclear crisis on the Peninsula to finally solve the problem. Since 2018, the DPRK and the ROK have taken advantage of the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics to build a “Double Postponements,” the postponement of the DPRK’s nuclear and missile test and the postponement of the joint military exercises of South Korea. This is a benign situation that both the DPRK and the ROK have actively promoted on the basis of the “Double Postponement” thoughts, they approach to delay the crisis and start dialogue. The idea of “Double Postponement” is important that marks a positive direction and a huge international “platform” of progress, which will guide the DPRK and South Korea to take steps to achieve a smooth transition and design a blueprint for the peace on the Peninsula. At the same time, “Double Postponement” not only opened the way for the Kim’s meeting with Moon Jae-in, but also laid a solid foundation for the success of the meeting of Kim Jong-un and Trump. The relevant countries should consolidate the results of the“double postponement” and continue to adhere to the dialogue and negotiation in accordance with this thought, striving for the long lasting peace and stability of the Korean Peninsula.
Contemporary Korea,2018,No. 03
【Abstract】 The Korean Peninsula issue emerged during the Second World War, which was further developed during the Cold War and has yet to be resolved. The confrontation between the two systems that have enveloped the Peninsula for more than 60 years is one of the most important regional and global issues. Therefore, the nature and importance of the issue not only concerns the tragic fate of the Peninsula, but also concerns regional and international security threat. The North Korea nuclear issue is a pressing issue concerning the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The danger is that the situation could spiral out of control and approach an irreversible dead end, leading to military conflict, military intervention and, consequently, regional and international crises.
Contemporary Korea,2018,No. 03
【Abstract】 In recent years, both external and the internal environment on the Korean Peninsula have undergone drastic changes. Waxing and waning of global political power, acceleration of power shift and conversion of contradictions give rise to internal political changes on the Korean Peninsula. Since 2018, Korean Peninsula has undergone tremendous changes, and Summit between the US and the DPRK, and between the DPRK and the ROK, as well as a series of events show the hope of permanent peace in the Korea Peninsula. In the meanwhile, the United Nations sanctions still exist. Under such circumstances, China should offer new momentum for solving nuclear issues according to new mentality and prohibiting possible turmoil through the cooperation and collaboration with other major powers.
Contemporary Korea,2018,No. 04
【Abstract】 The relaxation of tension of the situation in the Korean Peninsula since 2018 is not only related to the adjustment of great powers’ policies to the Korean Peninsula, but also inseparable from the policy adjustment of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and the Republic of Korea (ROK) and their positive roles to this end. Relatively speaking, the pursuit of strategic autonomy by the DPRK and the ROK has promoted the reconciliation between these two sides, mitigated the tense security situation on the Korean Peninsula and improved the strategic autonomy of it. And, the alleviation of DPRK-ROK relations, based on strategic autonomy, has manifested in establishing Korean national autonomy, reducing military confrontation, strengthening economic cooperation, promoting reconciliation between these two nations, and accelerating the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Besides, the cooperation of the two countries has resulted in the enhancement of strategic autonomy of the Korean Peninsula, which will have complex influence on the DPRK-ROK relations, the security situation on the Korean Peninsula, great power relations and the order of Northeast Asia. However, considering that replacing the armistice with a peace regime in the Korean Peninsula cannot be separated from the support of relevant great powers, referring to the continuity of the DPRK and ROK policies and the tough U.S. policies toward DPRK, there is still a large degree of uncertainty as to whether the improvement of strategic autonomy of the Korean Peninsula can be extended.
Literary Review,2019,No. 01
【Abstract】 For the Korean Peninsula residents, creation of the Ci-poetry meant an adaption to a challenging literary genre from foreign countries. Seen from some data, two major historical events ever affected such a process of adaption: 1. exchange between Chinese and Korean literati and literature during the Song Dynasty of China and the Koryo Dynasty of Korea; 2. eastward spread of the Ci-poetic lyrics of the Tang melody. Both the music and lyric of such a melody were introduced from China in a transplanting cultural exchange model. Through their long exposure to the Ci-poetry and continued study, the Koryo literati developed their own genre of the literature in a progressive cultural exchange model as well as a mainstream way to produce the Ci-poetry on the Korean Peninsula. For the latest, the genre took shape during the reign of the (1084–1094). Empirically, only by distinguishing the relevance and difference between literature and music and the cultural connotations between Ci-poetry content elements and melody form elements, can one have a correct comprehension of the generation process of the Ci-poetry at the Korean Peninsula. To establish such knowledge will facilitate in-depth understanding of the ancient oriental literature from the cultural perspective.