Will the Kim Jong-Un Regime Give up its Nuclear Weapons?

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The current Pyongyang regime is ambivalent about its nuclear arsenal. While North Korea has some reasons for maintaining it, including national security, regime security and predominance over South Korea, there are also some disincentives: improving the population’s livelihood, escaping isolation, and relieving international pressure. In this situation, the positions of concerned nations may play a critical role in Pyongyang’s decision‐making.
The U.S. has the capability to address North Korea’s security concerns and to lift the imposed economic sanctions. If it adopts policies to address Pyongyang’s security concerns and provide economic aid, it will create opportunities for solving the North Korean nuclear problem. South Korea, the potential provider of the most economic aid, could consult with the U.S. on North Korean security issues. With its intention and capability to provide the most economic aid, Seoul could also manipulate Pyongyang’s disincentives to maintain its nuclear program. China, the only other country retaining substantial leverage over North Korea, also has the potential to impact North Korea’s incentives and disincentives to maintain the nuclear program since it could consult with the U.S. and South Korea, as well as with North Korea. In summary, Washington and Seoul need to design strategies, other than expecting Pyongyang’s collapse, that seek substantial actions toward denuclearization, and Beijing needs to be more active in building connections between Washington, Seoul and Pyongyang.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

북한의 김정은 정권은 핵보유를 공언하고 있지만, 핵보유를 지속할 것인지에 대해서는 다양한 평가가 가능하다. 핵보유 지속 요인으로는 국가안보상의 필요, 정권안보, 남한에 대한 우위 확보 등이 거론될 수 있다. 핵을 포기할 가능성 또한 있는데, 핵포기 요인으로는 인민생활의 향상과 고립 탈퇴, 인권과 관련한 국제적 압박 제거 등이 존재하고 있다. 김정은 정권이 핵보유 지속과 핵포기 양측면의 요인을 모두 가지고 있는 상황에서 중요한 것은 주변국의 역할이다.
미국은 북한의 안보불안과 경제제제를 해결해줄 수 있는 능력을 가지고 있다. 미국이 북한정권의 안전을 보장해주고 경제제재를 해제하는 정책을 추진한다면, 북한핵문제는 해결의 국면으로 갈 수 있을 것이다. 한국은 북한에 대해 대규모의 경제적 지원을 할 수 있는 행위자이다. 한국의 강력한 경제적 레버리지는 북한의 인민생활향상 정책과 맞물려 핵포기의 주요한 요인으로 작용할 수 있다. 동시에 한국은 북한의 안전보장 문제에 대해 미국과 깊이 있는 논의를 할 수 있는 입지를 가지고 있다. 중국은 북한에 대해 직접적인 영향력을 가지고 있는 유일한 국가이다. 또, 북한의 핵보유 지속요인과 핵포기 요인을 두고 북핵문제의 주요당사국인 북한과 한국, 미국 등과 가장 효과적으로 협의를 진행할 수 있는 위치를 확보하고 있다.
이러한 환경에서 한국과 미국은 김정은 정권의 붕괴를 기다릴 것이 아니라 비핵화를 위한 실질적인 행동을 적극 취하는데 주안점을 둬야 할 것이다. 중국은 한국과 북한, 미국 사이에 실질적인 협의가 진행될 수 있도록 대화를 촉진하는 역할을 보다 적극화해야 할 것이다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 Kristensen, Hans M., "Worldwide deployments of nuclear weapons, 2014" 70 (70): 2014
• 2 Voice of America, "WFP says North Korea’s February food ration is record‐high in last 12 months"
• 3 South Korean Ministry of Unification, "Understanding North Korea" Ministry of Unification 2014
• 4 Gorman, Siobhan, "U.S. Spy Chief Gives Inside Look at North Korea Prisoner Deal"
• 5 Korean Central News Agency, "The full Text of Kim Jong-un’s remarks at the plenary session of the Party Central Committee"
• 6 Nodong Shinmun, "The U.S. needs to be cautious about the current serious situation"
• 7 Mearsheimer, John, "The Tragedy of Great Power Politics" W. W. Norton 2001
• 8 Cheon, Seong-Whun, "The Kim Jong-un Regime’s ‘Byungjin (Parallel Development) Policy of Economy and Nuclear Weapons and the April 1st Nuclearization Law" Korea Institute for National Unification 2013
• 9 Kim, Sung, "Statement of Sung Kim, U.S. Ambassador to Seoul" 2014
• 10 Bae, Sung-kyu, "South Korea suffers from the North Korean nuclear game"
• 11 SIPRI, "SIPRI Yearbook 2014"
• 12 Cheong, Seong-jang, "Review of the Kim Jong-un regime’s two years"
• 13 Pattisson, Peter, "Qatar’s ambitious future driven on by North Korean forced labour"
• 14 Um, Sang-yoon, "Pyongyang’s change in foreign policy orientation and Seoul’s countermeasures"
• 15 South Korean Ministry of Unification, "Portal for North Korea Information"
• 16 Nodong Shinmun, "Our position on the U.S. anti‐North Korean policy"
• 17 Nodong Shinmun, "Our independent military and people will win in the end"
• 18 Park, Hyeong-jung, "North Korea’s Tension Escalation and Thereafter" Korea Institute for National Unification 2013
• 19 Ahn, Mun Suk, "North Korea’s Nuclear Policy towards the U.S.: The Bureaucratic Politics Model" 6 (6): 2010
• 20 Kim, Myung-sung, "North Koreans compete to attract economic development zones"
• 21 Ahn, Yong-hyun, "North Korea pushes ahead with renovating the power grid with the help of Russia"
• 22 Yang, Seung-sik, "North Korea enters the closing stage of the strong and prosperous military state"
• 23 Korean Statistical Information Service, "North Korea Statistics"
• 24 Ahn, Jun-ho, "North Korea Special Economic Areas attract little"
• 25 Shin, Hyon-hee, "N.K. leader says open to summit with South Korea"
• 26 Yonhap News, "Most of Kim’s activities accompanied by Hwang Pyong‐so in 2014"
• 27 Lee, Ki-cheol, "Meaning of Russia’s Resurge"
• 28 Jung, Sang-don, "Korean citizens’ and soldiers’ change in consciousness about ruling ideology, nation and their leader" 14 (14): 2014
• 29 Lee, Seok-gi, "General Assessment of the North Korean Economy in 2013, and Prospects for 2014" KIET 2014
• 30 Nodong Shinmun, "Do not speak carelessly about our just actions to strengthen our self‐defense capabilities"
• 31 탁성한, "Can North Korea Catch Two Rabbits at Once: Nuke and Economy? One Year of the Byungjin Line in North Korea and Its Future" 한국국방연구원 26 (26): 133-153, 2014
• 32 Park, Hyeong-jung, "Assessment of North Korea’s Internal Affairs and the Main Points for Observation in the Second Half of 2014" Korea Institute for National Unification 2013
• 33 Kim, Taehwan, "Appropriating Economic Rents: North Korean Pathways to Economic Change" IFANS 2014
• 34 Kim, Myung-seong, "Acquiescing in markets for three years"
• 35 Kwon, Yang-joo, "A study of the North Korean Party‐military relations concerning the development of WMD" 13 (13): 2013
• 36 South Korean Ministry of National Defense, "2014 Defense White Paper" Ministry of National Defense 2015