| Description |
1 online resource (v, 54 pages). |
|
text txt rdacontent |
|
computer c rdamedia |
|
online resource cr rdacarrier |
| Series |
Institute for National Strategic Studies strategic perspectives ; no. 1 |
|
Strategic perspectives (National Defense University. Institute for National Strategic Studies) ; no. 1.
|
| Note |
Title from title screen (viewed Oct. 13, 2010). |
|
"September 2010." |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references (pages 46-52). |
| Summary |
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). In the case of North Korea, this paper recommends that the United States develop the following: (1) a political/diplomatic strategy to cope with North Korean leadership transition; (2) procedures for coordinating responses with South Korea, Japan, China, and Russia to a succession that could spin out of control; and (3) with the concurrence of South Korea and Japan, a strategy of nuclear pause that caps the North Korean arsenal under international oversight and conditions humanitarian aid on economic progress. In the case of Iran, this paper recommends two approaches: (1) a nuclear pause allowing limited uranium enrichment in Iran under international oversight, and nuclear safety cooperation with regional participation; and (2) pragmatic containment of Iran that links the prospect of improved relations to Iranian support for U.S. efforts to stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan and to establish a strategic partnership with Pakistan. |
| Subject |
Diplomatic negotiations in international disputes.
|
|
Nuclear nonproliferation -- Korea (North) -- International cooperation.
|
|
Nuclear nonproliferation -- Iran -- International cooperation.
|
|
Nuclear arms control -- Iran -- International cooperation.
|
|
Nuclear arms control -- Korea (North) -- International cooperation.
|
|
Diplomatic negotiations in international disputes. (OCoLC)fst00894387
|
|
Nuclear arms control -- International cooperation.
(OCoLC)fst01039888
|
|
Nuclear nonproliferation -- International cooperation.
(OCoLC)fst01040380
|
|
Iran. (OCoLC)fst01204889
|
|
Korea (North) (OCoLC)fst01214151
|
| Added Author |
National Defense University. Institute for National Strategic Studies.
|
| Added Title |
Applying lessons in nuclear diplomacy from North Korea to Iran |
| Other Form: |
Print version: Saeed, Ferial Ara. Redefining success (DLC) 2010478985 (OCoLC)670250093 |
|
Online version: Saeed, Ferial Ara. Redefining success. Washington, D.C. : National Defense University Press, [2010] (OCoLC)1011598648 |
| Gpo Item No. |
0378-H-29 (online) |
| Sudoc No. |
D 5.417/5:1 |
|
