More handpicked essays just for you.
International relations with North Korea
International relations with North Korea
United states and north korea essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: International relations with North Korea
What are the 2 most important US national security interests with respect to North Korea. What are their intensities and why? Articulate the primary challenge to each interest.
There are numerous national security interests with respect to North Korea. The two most important national security interests, their intensities, and the challenges around them are discussed in this paper. North Korea’s nuclear weapons program has become a credible threat to the national security of the United States.
The US has two vital security interests specific to North Korea. The first is a stable Korean peninsula without further proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).1 The second is a stable North Korea without further ICBM development.2 Achieving
Throughout the 20th century, successive presidents pursued foreign policy in different ways but with one objective and that is to make America the most powerful nation on earth. Despite the challenges of each administration during this century, presidents found a way to put American at the frontline as the undisputed super power. President Taft pursued an aggressive foreign policy by introducing dollar diplomacy which was meant to encourage U.S. investments in the Latin America and the Caribbean. He used government officials to promote this policy in hope that it will create markets for American products in the region. President Wilson made a promise to the American people that he will focus on domestic policy agenda and rarely will his administration
A. No. After WW II, the US was responsible for South Korea and we owed it to the South Korean people to protect them. Further, if we had not protected South Korea, the Communist would have taken another step toward world domination.
Salter, Christopher L., and Charles F. Gritzner. "Introducing North Korea,." North Korea. 2nd ed. New York: Chelsea House, 2007. . Print.
America’s Policy of Containment was introduced by George Kennan in 1947. This policy had a few good points but many more bad points.Kennan's depiction of communism as a "malignant parasite" that had to be contained by all possible measures became the basis of the Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, and National Security Act in 1947. In his Inaugural Address of January 20, 1949, Truman made four points about his "program for peace and freedom": to support the UN, the European Recovery Program, the collective defence of the North Atlantic, and a “bold new program” for technical aid to poor nations. Because of his programs, "the future of mankind will be assured in a world of justice, harmony and peace." Containment was not just a policy. It was a way of life.
方玥雯[Fang Yue Wen] (2009). 北韓核武研發與東北亞安全：2002-2007. [The North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons and the Security in Northeast Asia: 2002-2007] in台灣[Taiwan]: 國立政治大學[National Cheungchi University] Retrieved 18 July, 2013 from http://nccuir.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/37029
Evaluating threats to America’s national security is a challenge that is undertaken by academics, intelligence analysts, policy-makers, and anyone else with the patience. During the Cold War, America’s biggest concern was easy to define, the only other state capable of competing with America, the Soviet Union. Today, America faces threats from states, non-state actors, domestic groups, and even economic conditions. However, two states should always be kept in mind when discussing national security, China and Russia, with China being the biggest threat.
Since the end of the Korean War, the United States has enacted policies to isolate and undermine the Kim Dynasty in North Korea. A key development took place in the past several decades where North Korea broke away from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to develop their own nuclear weapons and while lacking launch capabilities, they have been successful in their development. During this process, the United States took active policies to deter the North Koreans in pursuit of their goals. It is easy to assume that the United States took this stance in order to maintain a military edge in the region. But under closer examination, this neo-realist perspective does not explain why the United States pursued this policy. In reality, North Korea to this day does not pose a significant military threat, even with limited nuclear capabilities. A constructivist perspective is more able to explain US policy in this instance because it does not focus on sheer militaristic power. It takes into consideration the state's identities which drives their interests. The identities of the US and North Korea and the interactions between them drove both nations to the point of acquiring and deterring nuclear use.
Relations between the United States and North Korea have been unstable since the second world war and with each passing decade the relations have become more tense. The U.S has never have formal international relations with North Korea , however the conflict has caused much controversy in U.S foreign policy. North Korea has been the receiver of millions of dollars in U.S aid and the target of many U.S sanctions. This is due to the fact that North Korea is one of the most oppressive regimes on the planet, that uses unjust techniques such as murder, torture, and starvation to get their citizens to be obedient. They restrict contact from their citizens to the outside world, through censorship of technology and rarely allowing visitors to the country. The root of the US-North Korea conflict however ,has been on the basis of nuclear weapons and North Korea threatening to use those weapons against the U.S and neighboring South Korea. The U.S and other nations have been working for the last few decades to stop the regime from purchasing and utilizing destructive nuclear weapons.
Moreover, according to the same theory, relations among states are derived primarily by their level of power, which constitutes basically their military and economic capability, and in pursuit of the national security states strive to attain as many resources as possible. The theoretical model explains thus why the nuclear issue has eventually resulted in identifying with a security one, meaning that North Korea main concern is to assure its survivor, its efforts are in the first place finalized at meeting that target and its only means of pursuing it consists of the posing of the nuclear threat. North Korea finds itself stuck in an economic and, to some extent, diplomatic isolation; even though the financial sanctions leading to the just mentioned critical conditions have been caused by the government inflexible, aggressive and anti-democratic behavior, the regime has no other choice than restate and strengthen its strict and, apparently, definitive positions to ensure its survivor, since at the moment any concession or move toward a more liberal approach breaking the countrys isolation could easily cause a collapse of the whole system.... ... middle of paper ...
The first paradigm of international relations is the theory of Realism. Realism is focused on ideas of self-interest and the balance of power. Realism is also divided into two categories, classical realism and neo-realism. Famous political theorist, Hans Morgenthau was a classical realist who believed that national interest was based on three elements, balance of power, military force, and self interest (Kleinberg 2010, 32). He uses four levels of analysis to evaluate the power of a state. The first is that power and influence are not always the same thing. Influence means the ability to affect the decision of those who have the power to control outcomes and power is the ability to determine outcomes. An example of influence and power would be the UN’s ability to influence the actions of states within the UN but the state itself has the power to determine how they act. Morgenthau goes on to his next level of analysis in which he explains the difference in force and power in the international realm. Force is physical violence, the use of military power but power is so much more than that. A powerful state can control the actions of another state with the threat of force but not actually need to physical force. He believed that the ability to have power over another state simply with the threat of force was likely to be the most important element in analysis the power of as state (Kleinberg 2010, 33-34).
government. An example of these interests is gaining territory which is under the control of
Since its origin in 1948, North Korea has been isolated and heavily armed, with hostile relations with South Korea and Western countries. It has developed a capability to produce short- and medium-range missiles, chemical weapons, and possibly biological and nuclear weapons. In December 2002, Pyongyang lifted the freeze on its plutonium-based nuclear weapons program and expelled IAEA inspectors who had been monitoring the freeze under the Agreed Framework of October 1994. As the Bush administration was arguing its case at the United Nations for disarming Iraq, the world has been hit with alarming news of a more menacing threat: North Korea has an advanced nuclear weapons program that, U.S. officials believe, has already produced one or two nuclear bombs. As the most recent standoff with North Korea over nuclear missile-testing approaches the decompression point, the United States needs to own up to a central truth: The region of Northeast Asia will never be fully secure until the communist dictatorship of North Korea passes from the scene. After threatening to test a new, long-range missile, Pyongyang says it is willing to negotiate with "the hostile nations" opposing it. But whether the North will actually forgo its test launch is anyone's guess. North Korea first became embroiled with nuclear politics during the Korean War. Although nuclear weapons were never used in Korea, American political leaders and military commanders threatened to use nuclear weapons to end the Korean War on terms favorable to the United States. In 1958, the United States deployed nuclear weapons to South Korea for the first time, and the weapons remained there until President George Bush ordered their withdrawal in 1991. North Korean government stateme...
Through the years the countries continue to take steps forward toward peace by allowing families to unite from the North and South. Then North Korea will make a decision with their threat of nuclear weapons that will separate the countries from one another and they are pulled away from each other again. The only solution to the political differences and to eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction not only to kill and injury the people of North and South Korea, but also of neighboring countries due to chemical and nuclear fallout that will have years of lasting negative health impact to the world. Not only on land, but our valuable resources in the ocean. If we reflect on our history with this type of nuclear destruction such as in Japan or in Russia we see how this impacts the immediate areas, people and for generations. The world needs to agree that the political leadership in North Korea should be moved. The options for removal are limited and pose significant risks for not only the Koreas’, but for the
John F. Kennedy once noted: “Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind.” Rising tensions between two opposing forces can lead to intense conflict. Provided that China and Japan have struggles of their own, North and South Korea have had struggles since 1950 (“Korean War”, 1) and continue to hold their conflicts, which seem to be increasing. South Korea, a democratic nation, is the exact opposite of North Korea; a hyper-nationalist nation - seemingly creating a “personality clash” between the two. Much like World War I, there may be, sometime in the future, a full blown war because of North Korea’s hyper-nationalist secretive rule. North Korea’s isolation, internal struggles, and Kim Jong-un’s intention of proving leadership will increase tensions between North and South Korea and may result in an outbreak of war in the near future.
Progressive era foreign policy was motivated by a variety of factors including racial and national superiority, business and economic interests, strategic concerns, and idealism. Excerpts from For the Record provide various examples supporting the concerns that led to America’s foreign policy.