Two Questions, Unanswered ...
Two contrasting constructs of North Korea are shown in this collection of contending views of leading experts: One is a North Korea aspiring to become a normal country through “economic construction” in exchange for, albeit not complete, denuclearization, the other is an abnormal country obsessed not only with security concerns but with an ideological vision of unifying the Korean Peninsula on its own terms.
Arguments by the contributors here revolve around these two differing versions. Proponents of nuclear negotiations see the formula for success as a mix of flexible sanctions, calibrated economic incentives in response to good behavior, and phased confidence building for the agreed goal of “complete denuclearization.” Opponents contend that the idea of negotiations leading to denuclearization is a fantasy, as North Korea won’t give up its nuclear weapons. For the Kim Jong Un regime, a nuclear arsenal is less a “bargaining chip” than a deterrent, as well as the sole means to the long-term preservation of its regime by ultimately prevailing over incomparably richer South Korea.
As a corollary, the two sides diverge in their policy prescriptions. Conservatives argue for proactive, coercive diplomacy that employs unremitting financial sanctions and multi-faceted information dissemination operations into North Korea. In contrast, liberals say overrelying on economic sanctions, international censure and shows of force as a way to “sharpen North Korea’s choices” needs to give way to proactive and sustained engagement, positive inducements and flexible diplomacy.