Be Careful What You Wish For

There is a lacuna in the literature analyzing the mid-term (6-24 months) period after a DPRK contingency that results in the Pyongyang regime’s relatively sudden and unmanaged fall. This article helps fill that gap, particularly with respect to security issues that would challenge Korean unification efforts during such a period. Following an Introduction, Section I first makes the case for a DPRK contingency being the most plausible end to the Pyongyang regime. Assuming the scenarios from Section I, Section II addresses the question of what critical issues a unifying Korea will face over the mid-term, and how dealing with these challenges will condition the type of end-state that a unified Korea will embody. In particular we examine three challenges: (a) mid-term security provision related to potential weapons proliferation, cyber-security, organized criminality, and human security; (b) the foundations of institution-building through measures dealing with issues of transitional justice, disputed land title claims, and generating broad domestic stakeholder buy-in in a unifying Korea; (c) the disposition of Korea’s strategic alignment in a Northeast Asia that will have undergone a major alteration of the regional system. Section III concludes with policy recommendations concerning what efforts should be made now to prepare for the situations described in Sections I and II

Business · Computer security · Contingency · Contingency plan · Deterrence theory · Face (sociological concept · Geography · Law and economics · Peninsula · Political science · Principal (computer security · Section (typography · Security interest · Security policy · Sociology · Unification · Computer Science · Korean Peninsula Historical and Political Studies · Law · Public Administration

• To Double Down or Decouple? North Korea and China as Challenges to the U.S.‐South Korea Alliance

  Open Access•Jangho Kim, Daewon Ohn et al.•Asian Politics & Policy•2020

  Add to list