Search results

The article attempts to analyze the situation surrounding the nuclear problem on the Korean Peninsula. Today, the nuclear issue is a whole complex of issues related to security on the Korean Peninsula. These include, first of all, the implementation by the North Korean leadership of programs to create nuclear and missile weapons in violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the adoption by Pyongyang of a military doctrine allowing for the possibility of using nuclear weapons in the event of a conflict in Korea, as well as reciprocal steps from the United States and the Republic of Korea (ROK), aimed at implementing nuclear deterrence. Considering the reasons for the failure of international negotiations, the author pays attention to the proposals made by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) to conclude a peace treaty (non-aggression treaty) with the United States, as well as other North Korean initiatives aimed at normalizing relations with the U. S. By failing to respond rationally to these steps, Washington missed the opportunity to reach an agreement with Pyongyang on a mutually acceptable basis. Particular attention is paid to new aspects in the approaches of DPRK, which declares the "irreversibility" and "legitimate nature" of its nuclear status. Today, the path to a nuclear settlement on the Korean Peninsula appears to be much more difficult than it was a decade ago, and certainly during the Six-Party Talks (2003–2008). Now the states involved are demonstrating mutual bitterness, categorical rejection of each other, and are relying primarily on forceful methods to protect their own interests. Therefore, returning to a normal diplomatic agenda, which alone will create a chance to resolve the nuclear and other problems of the Korean Peninsula, is possible only through de-escalation of confrontation, transition from military-political deterrence to restraint, and restoration of interrupted communication channels between interested states. Apparently, this will require time and considerable effort from all participants.

The article studies new foreign policy of South Korea after the administration change in Seoul in May 2022. Over the last period, the external environment for the country has become more complex. That was due to the growth of rivalry between the USA and China, COVID‑19 pandemic implications as well as the Ukrainian crisis, which resulted in increased global and regional instability and disruption of previously established supply chains. Along with that, the confrontation on the Korean Peninsula has become deeper and more protracted with no way forward to break that impasse. All previous attempts to engage North Korea into the dialogue, made by the Moon Jae-in administration, have failed. Those factors affected the priorities chosen by the new administration in foreign affairs. The author concentrates on the concept of the "global pivotal state" announced by the Yoon Suk-yeol's government. With the criticism of the previous government's approach that was narrowly focused on Inter-Korean agendas, the new foreign policy team is going to pursue the brand of a "value diplomacy", emphasizing South Korea's role in promoting "liberal democracy" and "rules-based regional order". As for North Korea, Yoon Suk-yeol has shifted his strategy to a hard-line approach which implied strengthening deterrence and raising credibility of the U.S. assurances to provide a nuclear umbrella to defend its ally. The article highlights Seoul's new policy aimed at rebuilding and strengthening the "comprehensive global alliance" between the ROK and the USA that presupposes cooperation on a wide range of international and regional agendas beyond the Korean Peninsula. The paper explores some emerging political dimensions of South Korea in the Indo-Pacific region. It is shown that Seoul wishes to be an active participant of the U.S. – led minilateral arrangements to ensure its expanded economic and security interests in the region.

The article provides an analysis of the USA policy with regard to the DPRK under President Joe Biden administration. The issues related to transformation of American approaches are examined against the background of the President Trump failure to reach a Grand Bargain with Kim Chong Un on the nuclear problem. The peculiarity of the situation on the Korean Peninsula is that over the past quarter of century a variety of avenues and modalities have been explored and applied by the United States and other parties concerned to approach the resolution of nuclear problem. However, all of those attempts have proved to be unsuccessful so far. Although the Biden administration rolled out its North Korea policy review still in April 2021, the White House has yet to chart its clearly articulated strategy aimed at breaking the current crisis around nuclear issue. While distancing itself from the previous course for achieving final and comprehensive resolution of the nuclear problem, nowadays Washington is aiming at addressing more limited but practical goals related to ensuring the security concerns of both the United States and its Asian allies like Japan and South Korea. Particular attention is given to the new concepts of "arms control" and "risk management" in tackling nuclear issue which are gaining some popularity and have been broadly discussed by American academic community. The author argues that any move to accept directly or indirectly North Korea's nuclear status and deal with it as nuclear power may have profound and negative impact on security situation on the Korean Peninsula and North East Asia as a whole. The only acceptable goal is to achieve nuclear disarmament of North Korea with proper verification measures although move forward towards that goal would require time and energy.

The advancement and promoting by the United States of its concept of Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) has shaped many of political discussions in Asian countries in recent years. The Republic of Korea is no exception. From this perspective, the article reviews the basic aspects of the evolution of South Korea's foreign policy course as well as new priorities in that area which have been forged with the advent of President Moon Jae-in administration. The paper shows that the complex fluctuations of the South Korea's external policy have been defined by the need to maintain the focus on the United States, on one side, and desire to nurture strategic partnership with China, on the other side. However, finding the right balance in that political equation has been significantly complicated due to the growing confrontation between the two global powers. Special attention is given to the role and place of South Korea in the U. S. Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy. The article examines the main directions, some of the outcomes and the prospects of cooperation between Washington and Seoul aimed at harmonizing their regional strategies in view of the factors facilitating those interactions as well as those hampering them. President Trump highlighted that the United States – the Republic of Korea alliance remains a linchpin for security, stability and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific. However, the dialogue between the two partners has not revealed the willingness of South Korea to collaborate with the United States on that theme beyond a narrow framework of purely economic coordination. Particularly, South Korea has consistently rejected the attempts of its ally to involve the country into the activities of Quad for fear of a possible adverse effect for the Korea–China relationships. All of those questions are examined in the article in linkage with a number of bilateral problems prevailing in the ROK–USA alliance which have complicated the collaboration between the two countries on regional issues in recent times.

Aus sowjetischer Sicht