Is There a Need for an Update of the Theory of Deterrence?:US Failure in North Korea

Abstract This article will answer why the United States failed in deterring North Korea from its development of nuclear weapons focusing on the basic logic of deterrence and identifying a historical deficiency. This is related to the failure to understand that in addition to the predictability of punishment, in case of unwanted behaviour of the target of deterrence, the non-punishment of non-aggressive action also needs to be made predictable. Focusing on this deficiency in the relationship of deterrence between the United States and North Korea, this article answers the question of why American deterrence has failed to prevent the emergence of North Korea as a de facto nuclear weapons power. The general proof of the failure of post-Cold War deterrence uses statistics of conflict, while the investigation of American deterrence vis-à-vis North Korea will use theory-guided process tracing based on evidence from declassified, primarily American, documents. Keywords</p

The United States and the Arab Spring

This article reveals, by studying correlative relationships between US regime support and regime properties, that the US foreign policy in the Middle East has traditionally helped governments to limit the political participation of Islamists, communists, enemies of Israel and populations that could be hostile to the US oil interests. This way the US economic and strategic security interests have contributed to human insecurity in the region. With the exception of the last interest, the US has relaxed its support for repression of the above-mentioned groups. This seems to be one of the international factors that made the Arab Spring possible

Can the Pragmatic East Asian Approach to Human Security Offer a Way for the Deepening of the Long Peace of East Asia?

East Asia (including Southeast and Northeast Asia) has witnessed the most spectacular pacification in the world during the past 30 years. Certain dimensions related to human security have been perceived as weak points in the long peace of East Asia. Despite progress, authoritarian violence is still a reality in East Asia. At the same time, certain other dimensions of human security - most distinctively those elements related to "freedom from want" - have developed very well during the long peace of East Asia. This article will study whether the concept of human security constructs realities that are useful for peace in East Asia. For this, the article will look at how the way in which "human" and "security" are linked, serve and deepen the existing social realities of peace in the region. Furthermore, the article will look inside the concepts of "human" and "security" to see how human security is constructed and whether the construction serves to deepen the long peace of East Asia. The article will argue that the East Asian human security debate could be an intellectual adaptation strategy useful for the promotion of the long peace of East Asia in a deeper sense

Could the East Asian Way of Peacekeeping Be a Recipe for Global Peace?

This paper offers new evidence in support of an argument that suggests that East Asian way of keeping peace is developmentalist, anti-interventionist and anti-hegemonic and thus even more different from the existing Western prescriptions for peace than realized before. This argument is based on some new data on organized violence, conflict termination and discourses of protection and security and a comparison of current East Asia with other regions, and with its performance three decades before 1980.The article also investigates whether the East Asian recipes for peace and prosperity could offer global prescriptions. Again, based on data on global fatalities of organized violence, the conclusion is clear. The world could learn from East Asia: the recipes the long peace of East Asia is based on, as defined in this article, can be found useful also to the entire world

Less is More:US Engagement with Indonesia, 1945-2021

This chapter aims at offering an overview of how the US engages Indonesia. The intention is not just to offer a novel interpretation on this relationship, but also to build on the existing interpretations of the US approach to Indonesia. The chapter will proceed chronologically but show that some elements of US and Indonesian foreign policy approaches are permanent. Indonesia and the United States have common interests and only by working on the basis of such common interests can US engagement produce results. Focusing on issues areas where such common interests do not exist and on things that require US power to change Indonesia’s ways, tends to be counterproductive

Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity and the Long Peace of East Asia:What Lessons Can They Offer to the World?

This paper looks at how the Jeju Forum as a track two initiative is in line with the formula of the Long Peace of East Asia

Less is More:US Engagement with Indonesia, 1945-2021

This chapter aims at offering an overview of how the US engages Indonesia. The intention is not just to offer a novel interpretation on this relationship, but also to build on the existing interpretations of the US approach to Indonesia. The chapter will proceed chronologically but show that some elements of US and Indonesian foreign policy approaches are permanent. Indonesia and the United States have common interests and only by working on the basis of such common interests can US engagement produce results. Focusing on issues areas where such common interests do not exist and on things that require US power to change Indonesia’s ways, tends to be counterproductive

The United States and the Arab Spring

This article reveals, by studying correlative relationships between US regime support and regime properties, that the US foreign policy in the Middle East has traditionally helped governments to limit the political participation of Islamists, communists, enemies of Israel and populations that could be hostile to the US oil interests. This way the US economic and strategic security interests have contributed to human insecurity in the region. With the exception of the last interest, the US has relaxed its support for repression of the above-mentioned groups. This seems to be one of the international factors that made the Arab Spring possible

Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity and the Long Peace of East Asia:What Lessons Can They Offer to the World?

This paper looks at how the Jeju Forum as a track two initiative is in line with the formula of the Long Peace of East Asia

Power, Contribution and Dependence in NATO Burden Sharing

This article offers three new types of variables for computation of the share that NATO countries should contribute to the common defence. I use Uppsala conflict data (UCDP) on conflict participation to reveal how the asymmetry in power that allows the US to define most of the framings on which NATO’s utility calculations are based, compensates for the greater material contribution made to NATO by the US. Then I follow Ringsmose’s model of NATO burden sharing and create two types of variables crucial to the calculation of burden sharing. One reveals the share of US military protection aimed at protecting its NATO allies. The other measures how much US global security efforts against tyranny and terror are dependent on NATO allies. These two variables are developed by means of computer-assisted discourse analysis of US Presidential Papers. The three new variables contribute to a more complex mathematical model on fair burden sharing, indicating at the same time that the imbalance between US and allied contributions is declining. If European allies have ever exploited the United States in the past, then at least the relationship has become more even during the past two decades.<br/