Journal ArticleDOI
North Korea and the Major Powers
Donald S. Zagoria,Young Kun Kim +1 more
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
In this article, the authors focus on some of the factors which have determined North Korean policy in recent years and try to make some assessment of the future options open to the North.Abstract:
THE COMMUNIST VICTORY in Indochina has now turned American and Japanese attention to another of the "divided states"Korea. The border between North and South Korea remains one of the most heavily armed borders in the world; the North-South talks which began in 1971 have bogged down in mutual recriminations and there are signs of mounting tension. The North accuses the South and the U.S. of deliberately seeking to foment tension in order to divert attention from the mounting "political crisis" in the South; the South, on the other hand, accuses North Korea of increased efforts at subversion and watches warily for any signs that North Korea will attempt to exploit the American defeat in Indochina. There have been three coastal incidents involving the sinking of several North Korean ships since December 1974. In this article, we want to focus on some of the factors which have determined North Korean policy in recent years and to try to make some assessment of the future options open to the North. We focus on North Korean policy not because it is the sole determinant of what will happen in the Korean peninsula during the next five to ten years-obviously the policy of South Korea and of the great powers will also affect the outcome-but simply because North Korea remains something of an enigma. While there is general agreement that North Korea pursues an independent course of action, there is much less agreement on the factors that shape its policy and even on the content of that policy itself. While some observers consider that North Korea is poised like a cat to pounce on South Korea at the earliest opportunity, others argue that South Korea is as much to blame for the lack of progress in the talks. Some observers consider North Korea to be led by inflexible, fanatical ideologues impervious to recent changes in the international environ-read more
Citations
More filters
Dissertation
The determination of international status : the case of Korea in modern international relations
TL;DR: The authors examines the adaptive responses of North and South Korea to change in the international system and analyzes the effects on their international standing, and produces an explanation for the pattern of international support for each regime, according to the policies they pursued during each distinct period of recent international history.
Journal ArticleDOI
Pronoun Usage as a Measure of Power Personalization: A General Theory with Evidence from the Chinese-Speaking World
TL;DR: The authors found that as leaders personalize power, they are less likely to use "I" (a pronoun linked to credit claiming and blame minimizing) and more likely to using "we" (the leader speaks for or with the populace).
Journal ArticleDOI
In the Shadow of Vietnam: A New Look at North Korea's Militant Strategy, 1962–1970
TL;DR: Kim et al. as discussed by the authors place North Korea's strategy in the context of the Vietnam War and reveal that certain North Korean actions, including the Blue House raid in January 1968 and a series of belligerent acts committed in 1970, were considerably influenced by the military operations in Vietnam and Cambodia.
Journal Article
Talking With the 'Hermit Regime'| Close Encounters of the Nonnuclear Kind: The North Korean Public Relations Campaign in U.S. Media of the 1970s
TL;DR: The authors examined North Korea's public relations campaign in the 1970s through the U.S. media and found that it was similar to those of other developing countries in its objective of gaining attention and influencing its policy making through mass media, but it differed from them in the intentional projection of a belligerent image.