On June 12, 2009 the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 1874 under chapter VII of the United Nations (UN) charter. The resolution responded to the decision of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) to challenge the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and previous resolution 1718 by testing a nuclear bomb on May 25, 2009. Resolution 1874 toughened security sanctions and widened the arms embargo already outlined in resolution 1718. This paper will use empirical evidence to analyze neorealism, hegemonic tools theory and constructivism as explanations for the actions of the Security Council in this case. Ultimately, the paper will argue that the Security Council’s actions were best explained by neorealist predictions but underlying constructivist norms and rules were also influential in resolution 1874.
Neorealism
For resolution 1874, Neorealism predicted that the Security Council would have acted as an alliance to balance states against a threat, as a collusion of great powers to control lesser states and as a forum for great powers to battle. The Security Council acted as an alliance that balanced voting members against the threat of the DPRK when they unanimously supported resolution 1874. The DPRK was a threat not only because of its nuclear weapons, but also because they could potentially provide their nuclear knowledge and materials to other states. Each state backed up their vote with the explanation that the DPRK constituted a threat to the international community. For example, Yukio Takasu, Japan’s representative said that the DPRK’s acts “constituted a grave threat to the national security of his country and to international peace and security.” Because, under ...
... middle of paper ...
...rol and Non-Proliferation. 22 February 2008. The FY 2009 Pentagon Spending Request – Global Military Spending. Available online at: http://armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/fy09_dod_request_global/. Accessed 14 November 2011.
Twomey Christopher P. 2011. Asia's Complex Strategic Environment: Nuclear Multipolarity and Other Dangers. Asia Policy 11 (1): 51-78
United Nations Security Council. 12 June 2009. Resolution 1874 (2009). Available online at: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/RES/1874%20(2009). Accessed 14 November 2011.
United Nations Security Council. 5 November 2010. Report of the Panel of Experts established pursuant to Resolution 1874 (2009). Available online at: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/DPRK%20S%202010%20571%20PoE%20Report.pdf. Accessed 14 November 2011.
Moore, Matthew, “Arming the embargoed: a supply-side understanding of arms embargo violations”, Journal of Conflict Resolution (2010) 54 pp. 593-615
United Nations. Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide. Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide. New York: , 2010. Web. .
The United Nations. Resolution 36/103 of the UN General Assembly (1981). N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.
...2009): 8-9. United Nations Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review. Web. 8 Apr. 2014. .
Zacher, Mark W. “The Territorial Integrity Norm: International Boundaries and the Use of Force.” International Organization. Vol. 55, No. 2 (Spring 2001), 215-250.
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
For the past several months the United Nations’ Security Council has debated on whether or not to accept the U.S. proposal to force Iraq to comply the new and former resolutions. The new resolution calls for complete disarmament of Iraq and the re-entrance of weapons inspectors into Iraq. If Iraq fails to comply, then military force would be taken in order to disarm Iraq. This proposal met opposition from council members Russia, China, and France. They thought that the U.S. proposal was too aggressive and that the U.S. should not act alone without U.N. approval. For weeks they refused to believe that the only way to make Iraq disarm is through the threat of force and the fear of being wiped out.
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.
The realism that will be the focus of this paper is that of Kenneth Waltz. Kenneth Waltz presents his theory of realism, within an international system, by offering his central myth that, “Anarchy is the permissive cause of war”. Kenneth Waltz’s central myth helps answer the question as to why war happens in the first place. During the cold war, there was a heightened sense of insecurity between Russia and the United States due to presence of nuclear weapons. The Movie Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb used cold war tension between the two countries to tell the story of a general who went crazy and decided to unleash his fleet of nuclear bombers onto Russian military bases.
War.” Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies after the Cold War. Eds. Ethan B. Kapstein and Michael Mastanduno. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. 1-27.
The theories of Neo-realism and Liberalism place strong emphasis on the structural level in order for a country in the international system to gain as much benefits as possible and prosper. Both theories believe interactions between countries will set them better off than an isolated country would, such as North Korea. Although Liberalism places a much higher emphasis on international organizations, institutions, and trade in order to promote peace than that of Neo-realism, Neo-realist also benefit from international organizations. “International organizations are frequent congenial institutions for weak states”(Keohane. 36). Third...
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...
Mingst, K. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 70-1). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company
Whenever world politics is mentioned, the state that appears to be at the apex of affairs is the United States of America, although some will argue that it isn’t. It is paramount we know that the international system is shaped by certain defining events that has lead to some significant changes, particularly those connected with different chapters of violence. Certainly, the world wars of the twentieth century and the more recent war on terror must be included as defining moments. The warning of brute force on a potentially large scale also highlights the vigorousness of the cold war period, which dominated world politics within an interval of four decades. The practice of international relations (IR) was introduced out of a need to discuss the causes of war and the different conditions for calm in the wake of the first world war, and it is relevant we know that this has remained a crucial focus ever since. However, violence is not the only factor capable of causing interruption in the international system. Economic elements also have a remarkable impact. The great depression that happened in the 1920s, and the global financial crises of the contemporary period can be used as examples. Another concurrent problem concerns the environment, with the human climate being one among different number of important concerns for the continuing future of humankind and the planet in general.
The negotiations on the nuclear threat and the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula have recently shaped the agenda of the North Korean system of international relations, thus affecting the patterns of foreign policy of the DPRK. This issue has gained such a priority to lead to the establishment of the 6PT experiment, thus proving to stand at the core of the debate on the stability and safety debate in the Northeast Asia region. The theory of realism provides reasons why North Korea has positioned the nuclear weapon debate at the centre of its policy. One of the fundamental assumptions of Realism is in fact that each state, embedded in an international order characterized by a condition of antagonism, attempts to pursue its national interest. Besides that, the overriding national interest is defined in terms of national security and survival.