Today, as it is called the Second Nuclear Age, nations seeking to possess nuclear weapons and the international community are in constant distress. In order to solve problems related to nuclear weapons, the international community has proposed coercive or conciliatory solutions through cooperation.
However, because the development motives and strategies of potential nuclear states are different from each other, the solution of solving the nuclear issue is not applied in a lump. Therefore, analyzing the motives for development (WHY) and nuclear acquisition and operation strategies (HOW) of these potential nuclear states could be the first step to solve the nuclear problem. Therefore, the purposes of this study are to examine the factors that influence the nuclear negotiations by examining the motives, nuclear acquisition and operation strategies of the potential nuclear states and to suggest measures for concluding nuclear negotiations.
The main determinants of Iran's nuclear development are security threats and regional hegemony. The most dangerous factor in Iran's security situation was Iraq in the 1980's and then Israel as a major threat. The Iran Iraq war that broke out in 1980 led to Iran's decision to pursue a nuclear arsenal. After that, the enrichment of neighboring countries and hostile countries, and the provision of US nuclear umbrella contributed to the further development of Iran's nuclear development. Since Iran began nuclear development as a "nuclear program for peace" supported by the West, the initial nuclear weapons acquisition strategy was a hedging strategy. Since then, the Islamic Republic's nuclear acquisition strategy has been a hiding strategy to avoid international sanctions and surveillance. The nuclear operation strategy can be regarded as a catalytic that regards Russia as a sponsor country. In Russia, however, depending on whether it has a relationship with the West, it may or may not help Iran. Therefore, it is prudent for Iran to choose a catalytic strategy against Russia. For asymmetric escalation strategy, Iran is not exposed to serious security threats at present, so it is unlikely to choose this strategy. Recalling that Iran's supreme leader takes control of the military, a assured retaliation strategy is the most likely strategy to choose. In addition, since Iran's nuclear target is deterred by its opponents' use of nuclear weapons, a strategy that can be controlled from a central point is more appropriate.
North Korea felt a serious security threat when it was reported that the US could use nuclear weapons at the time of the Korean War and then started nuclear development. Therefore, the main driver of North Korea's nuclear development is related to security. In addition, it has some purposes of maintaining the regime, making a leap in conventional military force with South Korea, guaranteeing military security, normalizing relations with the United States, and improving negotiating power for normal status. The Kim Il Sung regime, with the support of the Soviet Union in the name of energy development, started a nuclear program despite the opposition of the Soviet Union. In particular, the Soviet Union, which was in conflict with the United States during the Cold War, built a strategy to pursue a barrier and continued nuclear weapon development. The Kim Jong-il regime has also pursued nuclear development in spite of international condemnation and sanctions, and has chosen the strategy of hiding in order to avoid the sanctions of the international community. Since then, the Kim Jong-Eun government has completed the nuclear development through the hiding strategy and reached the nuclear test. North Korea's nuclear strategy is a catalytic strategy to place the Soviet Union and China as a powerful sponsor. As long as North Korea does not deteriorate its relationship with China, it is unlikely to choose the strategies of assured retaliation or asymmetric escalation. In the case of assured retaliation, North Korea's leadership can pick it up because it is possible to take control of the military. However, not the actual use of nuclear weapons, but just the nuclear threat can not be passed on to the United States, and the asymmetric escalation type has not the possibility of being chosen in the case that North Korea's second-strike is not proved. Therefore, it is the best choice for Kim Jong-Eun regime to resolve the situation through the intervention of the sponsoring powers when threatening to use nuclear armed forces.
The impact on Iran and North Korea's nuclear negotiations can be largely divided into international factors and domestic factors. In the case of Iran, international political factors include the US policy toward Iran, the role of the European Union in mediation, and Israel's willingness to actively negotiate with the nuclear powers. Domestic political factors include the change of power from hard-core to mid-moderate conservatives, serious economic hardship, and public opinion of Iranian people who want to reform and open up. North Korea has international political factors such as US policy toward North Korea, China's involvement, and South Korean government's North Korea policy. Domestic political factors include the maintenance of the system and the economic difficulties derived from international sanctions.
The international and domestic political factors that have influenced the Iranian and North Korean nuclear development processes have been parameters that affect the nuclear negotiations of these countries along with nuclear development decision factors, nuclear acquisition and nuclear operation strategies.
The nuclear issues of Iran and North Korea today have become common ones for the international community to solve together. Before presenting the solution, I think it is desirable to solve the nuclear problem by examining the causes and processes of starting the nuclear issue and resolving it from the root of the problem. In addition, it is important to build confidence and willingness to resolve the nuclear issues of the parties involved in nuclear negotiations. If two states and the international society go through the transition process from their security assurances and the resolution of the problems connected with survival to the transparent nuclear disarmament demanded by the international community such as the United States, the road map for the solution of the nuclear problem will be completed.
카카오톡
페이스북
블로그