The Kim Dynasty and North-East Asian security: breaking the cycle of crises

Research output: Working paper

Abstract

This article considers North Korea and the notion of crisis, by linking historical development over the Korean peninsula to the conflict resolution literature, and investigates why despite a large number of destabilising events, a war involving Pyongyang has yet to erupt. The paper considers historical data and uses a framework developed by Aggarwal et al. in order to highlight patterns of interaction between states such as the United States, North Korea and South Korea, organisations such as the United Nations, as well as processes such as the Six-Party Talk and the Agreed Framework. The paper then develops a crisis framework based on conflict resolution and negotiation literature, and applies it to three North Korean administrations. Findings suggests that an elastic understanding of time (for all parties involved on the peninsula) leads to an impossibility to reach a threshold where full-scale war would be triggered, thus leaving parties in a stable state of crisis for which escalating moves and de-escalating techniques might become irrelevant.
Original languageEnglish
PublisherInternational Institute of Korean Studies
Number of pages29
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

North Korea
conflict resolution
historical development
South Korea
UNO
event
interaction
literature
time

Bibliographical note

This Working paper for the Korea Security Conference, International Institute of
Korean Studies (IKSU), University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), 15-17
October 2014.

Cite this

@techreport{e1149bbe249e4486bd30e810d88c959e,
title = "The Kim Dynasty and North-East Asian security: breaking the cycle of crises",
abstract = "This article considers North Korea and the notion of crisis, by linking historical development over the Korean peninsula to the conflict resolution literature, and investigates why despite a large number of destabilising events, a war involving Pyongyang has yet to erupt. The paper considers historical data and uses a framework developed by Aggarwal et al. in order to highlight patterns of interaction between states such as the United States, North Korea and South Korea, organisations such as the United Nations, as well as processes such as the Six-Party Talk and the Agreed Framework. The paper then develops a crisis framework based on conflict resolution and negotiation literature, and applies it to three North Korean administrations. Findings suggests that an elastic understanding of time (for all parties involved on the peninsula) leads to an impossibility to reach a threshold where full-scale war would be triggered, thus leaving parties in a stable state of crisis for which escalating moves and de-escalating techniques might become irrelevant.",
author = "Grzelczyk, {Virginie M}",
note = "This Working paper for the Korea Security Conference, International Institute of Korean Studies (IKSU), University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), 15-17 October 2014.",
year = "2014",
language = "English",
publisher = "International Institute of Korean Studies",
type = "WorkingPaper",
institution = "International Institute of Korean Studies",

}

The Kim Dynasty and North-East Asian security : breaking the cycle of crises. / Grzelczyk, Virginie M.

International Institute of Korean Studies, 2014.

Research output: Working paper

TY - UNPB

T1 - The Kim Dynasty and North-East Asian security

T2 - breaking the cycle of crises

AU - Grzelczyk, Virginie M

N1 - This Working paper for the Korea Security Conference, International Institute of Korean Studies (IKSU), University of Central Lancashire (UCLan), 15-17 October 2014.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - This article considers North Korea and the notion of crisis, by linking historical development over the Korean peninsula to the conflict resolution literature, and investigates why despite a large number of destabilising events, a war involving Pyongyang has yet to erupt. The paper considers historical data and uses a framework developed by Aggarwal et al. in order to highlight patterns of interaction between states such as the United States, North Korea and South Korea, organisations such as the United Nations, as well as processes such as the Six-Party Talk and the Agreed Framework. The paper then develops a crisis framework based on conflict resolution and negotiation literature, and applies it to three North Korean administrations. Findings suggests that an elastic understanding of time (for all parties involved on the peninsula) leads to an impossibility to reach a threshold where full-scale war would be triggered, thus leaving parties in a stable state of crisis for which escalating moves and de-escalating techniques might become irrelevant.

AB - This article considers North Korea and the notion of crisis, by linking historical development over the Korean peninsula to the conflict resolution literature, and investigates why despite a large number of destabilising events, a war involving Pyongyang has yet to erupt. The paper considers historical data and uses a framework developed by Aggarwal et al. in order to highlight patterns of interaction between states such as the United States, North Korea and South Korea, organisations such as the United Nations, as well as processes such as the Six-Party Talk and the Agreed Framework. The paper then develops a crisis framework based on conflict resolution and negotiation literature, and applies it to three North Korean administrations. Findings suggests that an elastic understanding of time (for all parties involved on the peninsula) leads to an impossibility to reach a threshold where full-scale war would be triggered, thus leaving parties in a stable state of crisis for which escalating moves and de-escalating techniques might become irrelevant.

M3 - Working paper

BT - The Kim Dynasty and North-East Asian security

PB - International Institute of Korean Studies

ER -