Books > Social sciences > Politics & government > International relations > Diplomacy
|
Buy Now
Redefining Success - Applying Lessons in Nuclear Diplomacy from North Korea to Iran: Institute for National Strategic Studies, Strategic Perspectives, No. 1 (Paperback)
Loot Price: R366
Discovery Miles 3 660
|
|
Redefining Success - Applying Lessons in Nuclear Diplomacy from North Korea to Iran: Institute for National Strategic Studies, Strategic Perspectives, No. 1 (Paperback)
(sign in to rate)
Loot Price R366
Discovery Miles 3 660
Expected to ship within 10 - 15 working days
|
The United States has no good options for resolving the North
Korean and Iranian nuclear challenges. Incentives, pressures, and
threats have not succeeded. A military strike would temporarily set
back these programs, but at unacceptable human and diplomatic
costs, and with a high risk of their reconstitution and
acceleration. For some policymakers, therefore, the best option is
to isolate these regimes until they collapse or pressures build to
compel negotiations on U.S. terms. This option has the veneer of
toughness sufficient to make it politically defensible in
Washington. On closer scrutiny, however, it actually allows North
Korea and Iran to continue their nuclear programs unrestrained. It
also sacrifices more achievable short-term goals of improving
transparency and securing vulnerable nuclear materials to the
uncertain long-term goal of denuclearization. Yet these short-term
goals are deemed critical to U.S. national security in the 2010
Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR).
North Korea and Iran are very different states that share at least
one crucial similarity: decades of estrangement from Washington and
U.S. efforts to isolate them from the international community. They
also play destabilizing roles in the regions they inhabit, lack
respect for basic democratic freedoms, and maintain policies
antagonistic to the United States, its friends, and its allies. It
is hardly surprising that the Washington consensus still supports
isolation. What is striking, however, is the pronounced
international consensus in favor of engagement, which sharply
constrains an already limited U.S. policy arsenal. Assessing two
decades of nuclear diplomacy with North Korea and nearly a decade
of efforts with Iran, it is clear that Washington needs a more
promising strategy. Nothing short of a paradigm shift away from
denuclearization is required to alter the pattern of bad outcomes
in both cases. The new paradigm, predicated on strong bipartisan
support, would recognize the national security advantages of a
negotiated nuclear pause as a prelude to denuclearization. Allowing
North Korea and Iran to retain their current nuclear capability
would give them an important incentive to cooperate with
international monitoring aimed at improving the transparency of
their nuclear programs and capabilities, and securing vulnerable
nuclear materials-the goals identified by the NPR and QDR as vital
to national security. Denuclearization would remain the publicly
declared-and indeed desired-endstate of negotiations, but an
outcome requiring a long time horizon to achieve. In the meantime,
a nuclear pause diminishes the risk of further nuclear advances by
these states and brings North Korea and Iran "inside the tent"
through international monitoring. It also buys time to develop new
policy mechanisms to further contain their programs. More
crucially, it could open up political space in both states for
moderation overall, including accommodation (vice defiance) of
international demands, especially on the nuclear issue. This
comparative study of U.S. nuclear diplomacy toward North Korea and
Iran suggests that the North Korea case offers policymakers crucial
lessons applicable to Iran. It provides policy recommendations
based on four key conclusions: that a common paradigm (nuclear
pause) must be applied to both states; that nuclear deals
negotiated with international outliers like North Korea and Iran
must draw on widely accepted policy or practice; that these deals
should be linked to political/diplomatic strategies relevant to the
domestic and regional policy context of each state; and that the
success of a nuclear pause must be judged by whether it
accomplishes nuclear policy goals, not broader policy goals. Time
is of the essence. North Korea's leadership transition could prove
destabilizing to the region, and Iran's enrichment capability is
steadily advancing.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
|
|
Email address subscribed successfully.
A activation email has been sent to you.
Please click the link in that email to activate your subscription.