posted on 2017-08-15, 02:08authored byJae-Kwon Shim
Given their catastrophic destructive power, the existence
and use of nuclear weapons have found validity primarily in the concept of
‘deterrence’, i.e., the restraint of nuclear war, with political realism as the
main philosophical foundation. Far from its basic aim of ‘war-prevention’,
however, nuclear deterrence has involved in theory and in practice many risks
of ‘war-fighting’, and thus various alternative ideas have been proposed.
<p>Since their emergence in 1948, South-North Korean relations
have been marked by a series of conflicts and tensions, including a fratricidal
hot war. Further, with the U.S. strategy of nuclear deterrence, the Korean
peninsula has long been a highly inflammable potential nuclear theatre which
could ignite even a third world war among nuclear-armed big powers. Moreover,
South Korean attempts to develop nuclear weapons in the 1970s and recent
controversies surrounding the North Korean nuclear potential have raised even
the possibility of the two Koreas’ own nuclearisation.</p>
<p>In order to contribute to removal or significant reduction
of the danger of nuclear war in the Korean peninsula and of South-North Korean
military tensions and conflicts, this study first examines problems related to
the realist security paradigm and nuclear deterrence system. Subsequently, the
origins of the division of the Korean peninsula and major factors which have
sustained South-North Korean confrontation are examined. And while changes, and
the conflict situation, in and around the Korean peninsula after the Cold War
are considered, the adequacy and necessity of establishment of nuclear
weapon-free zone (NWFZ) and a non-provocative defence (NPD) system are explored
as specific alternative security frameworks to increase peace in the peninsula.</p>