SOUTH KOREA PLUS UNITED STATES MINUS NORTH KOREA: THE ADVENT OF NUCLEAR ERA _____________________________________________________ A RESEARCH PAPER

SUBMITTED TO THE SOCIAL SCIENCES DIVISION UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES IN THE VISAYAS CEBU COLLEGE LAHUG, CEBU CITY _____________________________________________________ IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR POLITICAL SCIENCE 182 _____________________________________________________ SUBMITTED BY: REJUSO, JOVELLE CARMEL E. ROSALES. MELODY S. SAYSON, GERLYN MAE C ____________________________________________________ SUBMITTED TO: PROF. MAE CLAIRE JABINES _____________________________________________________ OCTOBER 19, 2009

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

RATIONALE
South Korea, North Korea and United States of America have a very complicated relationship. The relation of South Korea with US dated back to 1948. It was the time of Cold War and Korea was divided into two- the North and the South. US supported South Korea to protect it from Communism which rapidly spread in North Korea and to gain an ally. Up to now, US and South Korea still continue to cooperate for the past few years, they have been trying to have a talk with North Korea but failed. North Korea continued to close its doors. Since the Korean War, North Korea has been viewed as a potential threat (because of its nuclear proliferation) not only by the United States, but also by several major countries in northeast Asia. It is US long adversary since 1948. US maintained a fifty year economic sanction to North Korea because of the latter’s connection to Russia. Nevertheless, North Korea became a useful demon to US- it became a justification on the need of US troops to maintain in South Korea and increase in the military budget. Compared to the negative relationship of North Korea to the United States, South Korea has a positive and a closer relationship with US. This relationship started since 1948. According to the US Library of Congress (internet copy), the relation was perhaps inevitable becau se South Korea was primarily established by the United States and was saved from a total collapse in the course of the Korean War (1950-53) by the United States-initiated, United Nations-sponsored rescue operation.

2|P a ge

Regarding on North Korea and South Korea relationship, although there are efforts to reunite the two Koreas they were not able to reach a compromise. North Korea always have this feeling that South Korea is deceiving them- that somewhat a kind of discrimination will exist because people in the North are poor compared to the industrialize South. Also the reunification of the two Korea, on the perception of the US- she cannot say that he will approve it o not and usually she intervenes the negotiation happen between the two Korea. Now, the “threat” posed by North Korea because of its regain nuclear building is affecting the South and US wherein the latter is feeling that the nuclear proliferation of North Korea is for world domination and the start of a new war. US is facing a security dilemma because she is unaware if North Korea’s nuclear arm would be for defense or offense. With that she will be more watchful to North Korea and always prepare for anything. The researchers have made this as their topic so as to know how the nuclear proliferation of North Korea would affect US and other countries that surrounds it as well as it affects South Korea. In here we can see the theory of realism in which the interrelation of the state and the system is espoused. According to Robert Jervis (Jervis, 1973: 146) , the main point of the security dilemma is that an increase in one state’s security decreases the security of others. In line with this theory, the researchers would want to know if the nuclear proliferation of North Korea is for defense or offense purposes and to explain the implications that this will make in the international system.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This research aims to give answers to the problems presented below: 1. Is the nuclear proliferation of North Korea for defense, offense or both purposes in

3|P a ge

pursuit of their national interests? 2. What are the effects of North Korea’s nuclear proliferation to its neighboring state, South Korea and to the number one advocate of nuclear proliferation treaty, the US? 3. What are the dynamics of nuclear proliferation and how do this action contribute to the trends of either tribalism or globalization?

OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this study are as follows: 1. To know if the nuclear proliferation of North Korea is for defense or for the offense of their national interest. 2. To present the effects of North Korea’s nuclear proliferation to its neighboring state, South Korea and to the number one advocate of nuclear proliferation treaty, the US. 3. To present and explain the dynamics of such action (nuclear proliferation) and how they contribute to the trends of either tribalism or globalization.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
National security is embedded on a state whose protection of territorial sovereignty is a national interest. In a system where zero-sum is the name of the game. National security is a factor for state’s survival within that type of system. At its greater extent, rational security can also dictate who will dominate who, when, and how in a system where instability and conflict are inescapable realities. As the world gets smaller for all existing states, territorial sovereignty is at risk. National
4|P a ge

security can now be a reason to embrace cooperation within, making it as means. On the other hand, it can be a reason for a state to isolate from a “cooperation” that threatens its sovereignty, making national security as an end. This is what the issue between a state that enhances its nuclear capabilities such as North Korea, and states advocating or nuclear non-proliferation such as U.S. and its allies, South Korea as one. This study will give the researchers a better understanding on how nuclear proliferation can protect territory and sovereignty, and how it can pose threat to other state’s security. Such threat can be reason to call for a unified response to such threat thus, making the former susceptible to attack. Susceptibility to attack and high propensity to war defeats the purpose of having a secured state.

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS
The study aims to know if the nuclear proliferation of North Korea is for defense or for the offense of their national interest; to present the effects of North Korea’s nuclear proliferation to its neighboring state, South Korea and to the number one advocate of nuclear proliferation treaty, the US; and to present and explain the dynamics of such action (nuclear proliferation) and how they contribute to the trends of either tribalism or globalization. In doing the research, the researchers will focus only to three actors namely North Korea, South Korea, and United States. The issue is focus mainly on nuclear proliferation as the reason behind the actors’ actions and their effects to their own state, to other states, and in the international system. The study will also include a historical background starting from Cold War up to the present. The emphasis of the study will be national security but the researchers will use social, economic, and political issues to establish the cause and to predict the effects of such

5|P a ge

issue to the actors. On the approach of the study, the researchers will use Realist Theory particularly the Offense and Defense and will touch some concept of the anarchical system under Neorealist Theory. We will also use state and system level analysis in making the analysis of the paper. Problems faced by the researchers in making the study is mainly the insufficiency of sources about North Korea.

6|P a ge

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
As basis to their research and for a thorough understanding of the study, the researchers used the theory of offense, defense and national security dilemma, the realist and neorealist theory in studying the relations of the three countries. They also use the system and state level of analysis. These theories, and levels of analysis are significant to explain the acts of South Korea and US towards North Korea and vice versa. It will also explain how these acts affect the international system. The realist theory, at root are negative about human nature. It is the human nature that shapes the world politics. (Rourke, 2005: 18) Like humans they also view states as an organism that has an innate desire to dominate others. States are aggressive and selfish- the reason why they want to overpower others and conquer territories. They are competing to be powerful and for them to be secured. It describes the international system as a struggle among states striving for power and have a negative view on eliminating conflict and war between states because of their pessimistic view on human nature. The neorealist theory compared to the realist, disregard the human nature and focused more on the international system. According to the stand of Stephen Waltz on his article entitled “International Relations: One World, Many Theories,” the international system consisted on a number of great powers, each seeking to survive. According to Waltz, because the system is anarchic, each state has to survive for its own by forming alliances with other countries and choosing defensive military postures. But because there is no “ authoritative power” that will regulate the actions of the each states and settle the conflict that exist between states, states are the only one to judge, act as a jury and hangmen and often, according to Rourke, resort to force to achieve their security interest. We then go back to the realist view that it is inescapable to have

7|P a ge

war and conflict because of the anarchical system. And since the states still pursue their national interest in the international system, I would like to quote the statement of one scholar on Rourke’s book that says, “ Even in a world that is clearly becoming more interconnected, the game is domestic politics for national policymakers who continue to make foreign policy based on national interest. (Rourke 2005: 18). In other words, even though there are alliances and the existence of an international organization, the state still play the rules of the game of the domestic politics wherein the policymakers make foreign policies that are based in the national interest which in turn lead to conflict and states were not able to reach a compromise because they have different national interest. As a refinement to the realist theory, the offense- defense theory of Robert Jervis will be of great help. There are two crucial variables in this theory namely: distinguishing of defensive weapons from offensive ones and whether the offense or the defense has the advantage. States in this theory must determine if they will be voting for defense or offense to have security. If in case in their security, offense has the advantage, they cannot only easy attack other state and gain territories but also it is difficult for other states to defend themselves because it is expensive for them to increase their defense. Also when the defense has the advantage over the offense, a large increase in one states security only slightly decreases the security of the others, and status quo powers can all enjoy a high level of security and largely escape from the state of nature which is chaotic. But the problem of the state arise whether it is weak or strong is when its enemy have a weapon that is difficult to say if it is for defense or offense. Security dilemma now comes in. with that states must be more watchful and always be ready for what things may come. False rumor is acceptable just to have a little info about the security status of the state. Base on the advantage of either offense or defense, there are four possible worlds that

8|P a ge

were identified. The first world is the worst for the status quo worlds. There is no way to get security without menacing others, and security through defense is difficult to obtain. (Jervis, 1973:162) It is because offense is the advantage, and defense will be very expensive. Attacking is the best route to security rather than accepting the attack. Status quo states will behave like aggressors to protect what they have. In the second world, the security dilemma operates because both the offense and defense is very difficult to distinguish; but it is different from the first world because defense has the advantage. The advantage of defense assures the state that it can maintain a high degree of security with the number of arms lower than their enemy. Compared to the first world, attacking is unnecessary because without acting as aggressor, the status quo state can achieve security. In the third world, there will be no security dilemma but there are security problems. Offense has the advantage, meaning aggression will be possible. According to Jervis, states need not to react to states that are also armed but can wait for the warnings they would receive if the others will deploy offensive weapons. (Jervis, 1973: 166) States will be more watchful for them to receive and be ready for the warning. Since the offense has the advantage, defense will be costly and it did not even decrease the security of the other states dealing on the offensive side. The fourth world is doubly safe. The advantage is defense- the propensity to war will be lessen and states will not be tempted to procure offensive forces. (Jervis, 1973: 167) There is a clear differentiation of offensive and defensive forces that permit’s the states to be out in the security dilemma. To understand more about the international system, the researchers use the system and state levels of analysis. In the system level of analysis, it adopts a top- down approach in studying world politics. System analysts believe that each system’s specific characteristics cause

9|P a ge

its actors to behave in somewhat predictable ways. (Rourke, 2005: 58) In general sense, the international system influences the behavior and determines the action of states. Even though the state does not want to follow the set of international norms they have no choice because it is a norm that be followed- it is binding. While in the state level analysis, it emphasizes the

characteristics of states, what states do and how they make foreign policy choices. According to Rourke, the most important in this analysis is the foreign policy process- the influences and activities within a country that cause its government to decide to adopt one or another foreign policy. (Rourke, 2005: 70) The decision of the state affects its relations to other states and the international system because of the emergence of interdependence between cou ntries.

10 | P a g e

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 1.1

DATA GATHERING (secondary sources e.g. books, journals, and internet articles)
APPROACH

Realist Theory (OffenseDefense) Rationale of North Korea’s Nuclear Proliferation Neorealist Theory (Anarchic Structure of World Politics)

ANALYSIS

State Level Analysis

Effects of nuclear proliferation to actors: North Korea, South Korea, and US

System Level Analysis

Dynamics of such action and its contribution to the international system

11 | P a g e

The researchers wanted to present explanations of how state as primary actor in the system make decisions and to understand the causes and effects of such decision or action to that state, to other states, and to the whole international system where it belongs. In doing the study, the researchers will be using secondary sources such as books, journals, and internet articles in gathering our data. This is to supplement our understanding on how states behave and to be able to answer the problems presented in this study. The researchers will first provide the historical background from which the relation among North Korea, South Korea and US has started. This is to establish a relationship which will be the basis of interpreting their actions and response to each other. By using our state and system level approach and the realist and neorealist theories, the researchers will present the rationale behind North Korea’s nuclear proliferation, how it will affect South Korea and US, and how it contribute to the current trends in the international system namely disintegration (tribalism) and integration (globalization).

DEFINITION OF TERMS
1. Alliance- an association of groups, people, or nations who agree to cooperate to achieve a common goal (Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.) 2. Containment- a. attempt to stop spread of something: action taken to restrict the spread of a hostile element such as an enemy or something undesirable such as a disease; b. control measure in nuclear reactions: the use of magnetic fields to prevent the reacting particles from touching the containing vessel's walls in a reactor (Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.)

12 | P a g e

3. Disintegration- separate from a system that threatens your culture which defines the states identity 4. Globalization- to become adopted on a global scale, or cause something, especially social institutions, to become adopted on a global scale (Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.) 5. Integration- the process of becoming an accepted member of a group or community (Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.) 6. norm- a standard pattern of behavior that is considered normal in a society (Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.) 7. Power map- set of powerful state in the international system 8. Rogue state- outlaw nation: a nation whose leadership intentionally refuses to adhere to the conventions of international law, does not honor established treaties, and may engage in terrorism and warfare (Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.) 9. Security Dilemma- an approach in which weapons cannot be distinguished as offensive or defensive thereby causes instability. (Jervis, 1992: 165) 10. System- a combination of related parts organized into a complex whole (Encarta ® World English Dictionary © & (P) 1998-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.) 11. Tribalism- act of disintegration

13 | P a g e

CHAPTER TWO

HISTORICAL REVIEW OF THE STUDY DISCUSSION
US-SOUTH KOREA RELATIONS The relationship of South Korea and US begun to the early years of the Cold War. The Soviet Union and the US split the country into two, namely the North and the South, with the agreement that there will be a national election but that did not happen. In 1948, the United Nations declared the Republic of Korea, with Seoul as its capital, as the only legitimate source of authority in the peninsula. Soviet Union opposed this assertion and on 1950, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea invaded which started the Korean War. Because South is a US ally, it was expected that US should come to its aid. The war lasted until 1953. It only stopped due to a ceasefire stopped them at the thirty-eighth parallel. US and South Korea signed a mutual security agreement on 1950 in which they agreed to defend each other in times of external aggression. On the following years, both countries built up a combined forces command in which the base is located in South Korea. For forty years, South Korea started to become economically, politically and militarily developed. They started to become independent from US. South Korea because they started to seek progressive partnership. Strains then started to emerge because of the change in the relationship of US and South Korea. Trade is one area which spiked up the strain between US and South Korea. United States was South Korea’s largest trading partner and South Korea was the seventh largest market for US state goods and the second market for its agricultural products. Another source of strain was

14 | P a g e

security. South Korea had no qualms about US troops staying in their country. Aggressions were impossible at the presence of US. However, the strain lied on the part of US. Rumors about their increase of US troops in South Korea did not helped US’ image. Even though there are many strains, US and South Korea maintained their cordial relations. Their combined forces were seen when North Korea started their first nuclear testing. US and South Korea both used their combined efforts in trying to have a diplomatic talk with North Korea but so far, the effort was futile.

US-NORTH KOREA RELATIONS It started at the early years of Cold War. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) has been US’ long-standing opposition. US helped in dividing the peninsula and then waged war against them. Also US, for fifty years, had imposed economic sanctions on the North. The Pentagon has inflated the North Korean threat in order to rationalize its desire for a missile defense system, to justify a capacity to fight two wars simultaneously, and to explain the need to maintain 37,000 troops in South Korea (and 100,000 troops in Asia overall).

http://www.acus.org/docs/070413_US-North_Korean_Relations_Analytic_Compendium.pdf Contrary to its relations to South Korea, US did not have amiable relation with the North. This hostile relation worsened when North Korea expanded their nuclear program and when US considered in bombing the suspected facilities. Jimmy Carter and Kim Il Sung talked about this and came up with an agreement. They agreed that North Korea will stop its nuclear program in exchange of heavy fuel oil from US and two light water reactors to be built by US commissioned builders. Also, the two leaders talked about the full diplomatic relation of US and North Korea.
15 | P a g e

But the agreement did not create permanent peace. US still continue to criticize North Korea’s sales of advance missile technologies to Iran and Pakistan. On August 1998, North Korea launched a missile/satellite that demonstrated its three-stage rocket technology. Also, US and South Korean agencies had leaked informations that North Korea is building a nuclear weapon somewhere. North Korea also had misgivings on US. They accused US of not conforming with the previous agreement. US delivery of the heavy fuel oils was delayed and the building of light water reactors were not forwarded as planned. It also criticized the Clinton government for not lifting up the economic sanctions. Finally, it criticized the buildup of US military in Northeast Asia. However, the relationship of North Korea and US isn’t that entirely negative. The Clinton administration provided millions of dollars in humanitarian aid through UN when North Korea was undergoing a food crisis. The two countries also cooperated in finding the bodies of the US soldiers killed during the Korean War. North Korea also sent delegations to US for technical assistance in agriculture and energy. At the moment, relationship of US and North Korea is at strain. Peace talks are continuing. North Korea is sometimes open to talks with US but then some factors are making it turn its back to talks and continue going on like a Hermit Kingdom.

NORTH AND SOUTH KOREA RELATIONS Again, the not-so-good relation of North and South Korea dated back to the early times of the Cold War. The peninsula was divided into two parts by the Soviet Union and the US, thus the creation of the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The latter is

16 | P a g e

the democratic wing while the former is the Communist wing. The disparities between the two Koreas started during the Korean War. It killed an estimated 3,000,000 persons. US and UN came to South Korea’s aid while the People’s Republic of China helped the North. The war ended in 1953 within the 38 th parallel. After the negotiation of uniting the two Koreas failed, they have accepted the creation of two separate states. The Communist North was permanently established under Soviet auspices when the Soviet Union refused to cooperate with UN in having an election. On June 25, 1950, North Korea planned an attack against South Korea. The UN Security Council convened to talk about this plan of attack and all agreed to stop the North Korea from attacking the South. The Korean War brought a great devastation to the two Koreas. Many were killed, millions of Koreans became refugees, South Korea’s industrial plants were damaged and North Korea was heavily damaged by US bombing campaigns. North Korea’s launching and testing of nuclear weapons furthermore enhanced the negative relationship between the two Koreas. The nuclear launching of the North served as a threat to the security of the South. Also, US participation in this phenomenon may or may not help the straining relationship between the two countries.

17 | P a g e

ANALYSIS USING THEORIES
REALIST PERSPECTIVE North Korea is a very good picture of what realist theory is, saying about the nature of state in a system where the struggle for survival and power is the main purpose of the existence of each state. Its proliferation and enhancement of its nuclear capabilities are manifestations of the aggressiveness of a state, always working to establish a powerful position that will dominate the weaker states and always proving its dominance to an “equally powerful” state that threatens their authority and doing it in the mask of national security; trying to justify their action as enhancing its security for its own national interest. The action of South Korea condemning its neighboring state’s, North Korea’s, action is a manifestation of how a state will try to encroach another state’s decision that will threaten their security given that North Korea and South Korea has been antagonistic to each other since the Cold War has started. Because of their historical background, South Korea has been doubtful that any action of North Korea is dedicated for their subjugation to its communist government; an action manifesting realism. North Korea’s nuclear proliferation has an impact to United State since the latter’s dominant position in the international system is now shaken by the emergence of the former who has developed a powerful weapon for threatening other states and for asserting power over other. US’s explicit opposition to North Korea’s action is another manifestation of realism, where a state secures its powerful position in the system.

18 | P a g e

NEOREALIST PERSPECTIVE The alliance being formed together by United States and South Korea is also a concrete example of how neorealist works in the system. Each state benefits from such alliance and the benefits exceeding the cost is the very reason for the strengthening of such alliance. US benefits in such alliance in a way that encouraging other states to support its fight to stop the nuclear proliferation of North Korea will help them maintain their status in the system. The more follower or supporter US can get, the more secure it will be on the top position. South Korea also benefits from such alliance because having a powerful back up, not to mention its nuclear capacity, means having a secured territory from a neighboring state with nuclear power. Neorealism is manifested in the way that alliances is used in order to survive on an alwayscompeting international system. Neorealism advocates cooperation between states, but it also recognizes that there is no authoritative power that will regulate the states action and settle disputes that exist between states and the states are the only judge and jury of their actions. With this, the action of North Korea in nuclear proliferation will not be condemned by UN but states who feel that they are threatened like US and South Korea will be the one to make efforts to negotiate with North Korea and persuade other states to join in their goal to stop the proliferation of North Korea for them to feel secure. The absence of authoritative power in the international system was the point of neorealist why war is inevitable not only in settling disputes but also to make states secure. But US did not wage war to North Korea to settle security situation not because they are not capable of instigating war but because they are suffering a security dilemma.

19 | P a g e

OFFENSE- DEFENSE AND NATIONAL SECURITY DILEMMA Security dilemma, according to the Offense-Defense theory, states that an increase in one state’s security decreases the security of others. North Korea’s increase in its nuclear arms decreased the security both of South Korea, US, and also the security of its neighbouring state. They are obviously threatened by the nuclear arms possessed by North Korea but they, particularly US, have not done anything yet. Neither US nor South Korea attacked North Korea first because defense is still possible against a heavily armed force and states that really care about self-protection would not engage in arms races. Because US and South Korea are threatened by the nuclear proliferation of North Korea, they in turn started to acquire and improve their weapons and warfare technologies. They even used the North’s proliferation of nuclear arms as an excuse for deploying more military troops and facilities in South Korea. This is US and South Korea’s response to North Korea’s proliferation of nuclear arms. In this way, these two countries’ security relative to the North Korea’s increase in arms is increased, too. It is explained by Robert Jervis (Jervis, 1973: 147) in his Offense-Defense theory that although that an increase in one side’s arms and security will still decrease the other’s security, the former’s increase will be larger than the latter’s decrease. So if one state increases its arms, the other state could also increase its security by just adding a small amount of force. That is what US and South Korea are doing now. Also, in the security situation, it has been stated above that there are four worlds existing depending on what aspect is advantageous- either the offense or the defense. US will be placed in the second world because of their actions. There is a security dilemma but it does not operate strongly as in the first world because the defense has the advantage. With this, the non-

20 | P a g e

instigation of war of US will be placed in the second world because again they cannot distinguish whether the nuclear proliferation of North Korea is for defense or offense. But the US defense has the advantage adding to its non-instigation of war to North Korea. US and South Korea did not attack North Korea because as defensive has the advantage, they do not preempt since that would be a wasteful act. Instead, they prepare for the opponent’s attack. Another reason is seen why there is no attack. Defense really has the primacy. Security s relatively cheap and both sides can, at the same time, gain security in the form of second-strike capability. Second-strike capability can also be maintained in the face of wide variations in the opponent’s side. US can just adjust their actions and weapons to the changes in North Korea’s change of style. And lastly, probably the main reason why US or South Korea did not attack North is that there are no incentives to strike first in a crisis. Why? The researchers think that aside from waste of funds, it would not be good to attack first because of what will other states think of it and it will create negative notions on US and South Korea and will make them the negative to everyone’s eyes.

STATE LEVEL ANALYSIS Using the state-level analysis, each action of the three actors was influenced by their experience that can be traced back to its history which dealt on ideological conflict brought by the Cold War. Because of their historical background, South Korea and North Korea tend to be antagonistic with each other while South Korea tends to cooperate more with US which shares the same ideology with them.

21 | P a g e

On the current economic and political condition, North Korea tends to strengthen its nuclear capability and national security so as to have a way of putting themselves into “power map” which they cannot do if power is based on economy and politics. Economically, they are poor while politically, they have a communist government which diminished its power after the Cold War. The current economic and political power that US is enjoying after its opponents, communist states, have disintegrated and split up is now being challenged by a communist state whose nuclear power is rising up, leveling with US’s. To secure their survival as a powerful state, they have to oppose a rising one. The current situation of South Korea which is geographically the closest state to North Korea, a rogue state, instills fear to its people since they are sleeping with nuclear weapons hundred of steps away from them. Its decision to seek support from allies is being justified by the nature of the state to protect its very existence.

SYSTEM LEVEL ANALYSIS Each actors (states) operate in the same system. In this system there are social norms and trends being set which then became the basis of its states decision and action towards other states that are part of the system.\ Accepting the fact that respecting the existence of other states, acknowledging its sovereignty and the state’s ability to pursue its national interest as the international system’s norm states then will follow the norms of the system no whether they like it or not. They have
22 | P a g e

free will but because of the set norms their choice will be predictable which is in accordance to the norm of international system. North Korea’s action of nuclear proliferation, leads to the strengthening the alliance of US and South Korea because it has been perceived by US that such action is violating the norm of international system. The alliance of US to South Korea (being the closest state to North Korea) meant that US can monitor the activities of North Korea by posting military bases. It is not only US and South Korea that are threatened but also the stability of the international system- basing on the trend of security, protection of world peace, international stability and order. With North Korea’s action, it is evident that it has disintegrated itself from the system. It had separated from the international system and isolated itself from other countries. The action then is different from US and South Korea that calls for integration to the international system. They open themselves to globalization which results to interdependence between them and other countries. The disintegration of North Korea to the international system strengthens the alliance of US and South Korea and their campaign to persuade other countries to integrate in the system.

23 | P a g e

CHAPTER THREE
SYNTHESIS
The main topic of this research is the nuclear proliferation of North Korea which threatens the security of United States and South Korea. Using the realist perspective, to settle this security problem, US and South Korea must then attack North Korea. While in the neorealist perspective, US will seek an alliance to gain benefits by adding more troops to South Korea

and monitor the activities of North Korea, to persuade other states to be on their side in fighting against this nuclear proliferation and lastly to have allies whenever they will resort to wage war against North Korea. But in the offense- defense theory (which is a refinement to the realist theory), US and South Korea did not wage war to North Korea because, as it is being classified in the second world, it is suffering a security dilemma with defense as the advantage. Since they did not know if the nuclear weapon of North Korea is for defense or offense, US and South Korea is just being watchful and focus on their defense and by making moves to have peace talk to North Korea but the latter declines this peace talk because they do not agree on six- party talks. North Korea only wanted to talk to US, not any other state. Such action of North Korea does not only affect the other state’s behavior towards them but also the international system. The stability of peace and order is being threatened creating fear to the countries which are part of the international system. With this, it is expected that the norm that these countries (especially US) will follow, is to protect the stability of the international system by any means either increasing its offense or increasing its offense. They
24 | P a g e

will not only protect the stability f the system but also for them to feel secure.

CONCLUSION
Given the analysis of the study, the researchers conclude that North Korea’s nuclear proliferation is for defense because of their disintegration from the international system, and isolation from other countries. North Korea was driven by paranoia. Their action can be explained with the belief that “We are neighbors but we are not friends and anytime you can attack me. You threaten the security of my country. Before you could attack me, I must be ready to accept that attack.” Such action of North Korea challenge the ever adversary US and threaten its neighboring state, South Korea. The impact of this nuclear proliferation is that it tends to lower the superpower status of US by challenging the monopoly of US in nuclear proliferation and supply nuclear arms to other Asian states such as Iran. Given that North Korea is economically poor and politically weak because Communism ideology is declining based on the happenings in the international system wherein globalization is the dominant trend, it is a big insult to the part of US. It is like hearing US saying, “How come you can create more bombs to challenge us and threaten world peace while you cannot even feed your people.” On the part of South Korea, the nuclear proliferation of its neighboring state threatens their national security. Its effect to South Korea is that instead of pursuing a good relationship to North Korea given that they came from one race and one kingdom, the gap between them widen since South Korea opt to ally with US to protect its very existence. It strengthens the US- South

25 | P a g e

Korea alliance and the possibility of diplomatic relations between the two Korea’s remains a dream. North Korea’s disintegration in the international system shows the possibility for the spread of tribalism in Asia. It’s being fundamentalist contributes to tribalism wherein they isolate themselves to any call of globalization, interaction and interdependence between states. This act of engaging in tribalism helps them protect their culture and the survival of their own state and their own identity. They want to exist as a state having their own identity and not dictated by uniformity brought by globalization where US and other Western countries are the standards. South Korea- US alliance is a manifestation of integration. Integration which is a process of becoming an accepted member of a group or community is manifested in South Korea’s action of becoming a US ally, following the standards set by US that aim for economic cooperation for development and international cooperation for world order. and goals became binding to all countries making an integrated community. This standards

26 | P a g e

CHAPTER FOUR
RECOMMENDATION
The researchers recommend the future researchers: 1. To have an in depth research applying the liberal and neo-liberal theories and the individual level of analysis in understanding even more the behavior of US, South Korea and North Korea. 2. To look at the reason why North Korea remains an isolationist state. The researchers also recommend to US that it must limit its intervention to North- South Korea relations. US must stop acting as if they are the international police and thinking that it is their burden to settle any conflict that exists between states most especially if it threatens the international stability. To South Korea, the researchers recommend that they must not rely their national security to US. They should learn to be independent in protecting their own survival. To North Korea, the researchers recommend that they must consider the six- party talks for the other states not to feel a single threat. They must also distinguish if their weapons are for offensive or defensive so that the anarchic system will not be threaten. They must consider economic cooperation for the sustainability of its domestic economy.

27 | P a g e

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOK:
Art, Robert & Jervis, Robert. International Politics: Enduring Concept and Contemporary Issues. Harper-Colins.1992. Rourke, John T. International Politics on World Stage, 10 th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2004.

MAGAZINE
“ America and South Korea: The Ambivalent Alliance.” Current History Sept, 2003: 279 284.

INTERNET
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2792.htm Access on 17/10/09 http://www.fpif.org/briefs/vol4/v4n15nkor.html Access on 17/10/09 http://www.acus.org/docs/070413_USNorth_Korean_Relations_Analytic_Compendium.pdf Access on 17/10/09 http://www.cfr.org/publication/11459/ussouth_korea_alliance.html Access on 17/10/09 http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke.htm Access on 17/10/09 http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2800.htm Access on 17/10/09 http://countrystudies.us/south-korea/80.htm
28 | P a g e

Access on 17/10/09 http://usforeignpolicy.about.com/od/countryprofile1/a/dprkdiplomacy.htm Access on 17/10/09 http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/04/03/koreas.military/index.html Access on 17/10/09 http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/0702qnorthkorea_southkorea.pdf Access on 17/10/09 http://www.onwar.com/aced/data/kilo/korean1950.htm Access on 17/10/09 http://www.fpa.org/newsletter_info2569/newsletter_info.htm Access on 17/10/09 http://thormay.net/koreadiary/northsouth1.html Access on 17/10/09

29 | P a g e

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful