Mitchell Reiss

A Nuclear-armed North Korea: Accepting the ‘Unacceptable’?

Perhaps the least noted and most astonishing aspect of the entire diplomatic process involving North Korea during the past few years has been the almost complete inability of four of the worlds strongest military and economic powers – the United States, China, Russia and Japan, which include three nuclear weapons states and three members of the UN Security Council – to shape the strategic environment in Northeast Asia. They have proven thoroughly incapable of preventing an impoverished, dysfunctional country from consistently endangering the peace and stability of the worlds most economically dynamic region. This has been nothing less than a collective failure. Only when the other parties to the Six-Party Talks undertake a fundamental reassessment of the costs and benefits of their current policies will there be a chance to rein in, never mind reverse, Pyongyangs nuclear-weapons programme.

Lessons of the Northern Ireland Peace Process

Among the eight lessons that the authors have learned from the peace process in Northern Ireland, they single out three as the most important. They also explain why they are optimistic about the outcome of the IRAs decision to decommission the remaining arms in its arsenal.

Drifting apart? The U.S.–ROK alliance at risk

Abstract Given the success of the U.S.–ROK alliance over the past five and half decades, it is far easier to envision that it will remain undisturbed than to imagine major change, let alone the end of the alliance. Yet past history is no guarantee of future success. Major shifts in American foreign policy, new transnational challenges and a changing political, economic, and security environment in Northeast Asia, call into question whether the alliance will last another 10 years, let alone another half century. By the start of the twenty-first century, the United States had increasingly conceptualized the alliance in regional or even global terms, whereas the ROK military, despite some impressive blue-water naval assets, was still wedded to the mission of peninsular defense. Ideally, the United States would like the ROK to join with U.S. forces in addressing regional and global contingencies, in addition to fulfilling its primary missions to deter and, if necessary, defeat North Korea. Yet Americas reori...

Restoring America's Image: What the Next President Can Do

Americas image in the world today is not all that it should be. Blame for this is most often assigned to President George W. Bush, but greater responsibility rests with deeper changes in the international system: the resentment (and fear) caused by the preponderance of American power, the loosening of alliances after the demise of the Soviet Union, a fundamental rethinking of the laws of war and peace in an age of terror, the co-branding of the United States with the forces of modernity and globalisation, and a demographic change that has sidelined the post-Second World War generation with their historical memories of American bravery and generosity. The next US president can start to restore Americas image by setting a new tone, adroitly managing the US presence in the Persian Gulf and adopting new policies on climate change, immigration, world trade, and Guantanamo Bay. Even so, resurrecting Americas image will be a slow, long-term process.

Korean changes, Asian challenges and the US role

The George W. Bush administration faces difficult challenges in Asia associated with the rise of China and the potential for instability in Indonesia. Yet perhaps the most pressing early decisions facing the new administration concern the Korean Peninsula. This Korean challenge is a somewhat incongruous one. Major strategic issues in Asia are usually associated with negative developments, such as instability across the Taiwan Strait. The June 2000 North-South Korean summit, however, has presented the United States with the opposite dilemma. Enhanced stability on the Korean Peninsula raises the prospect of an overall improvement in the strategic situation in North-east Asia. But these developments also carry uncertain implications for the United States and its influence in Asia.

The Last Nuclear Summit

Visions of post-cold war security structures, from President George Bush’s “new world order” to National Security Adviser Anthony Lake’s “democratic enlargement,” place front and center the prevention of the spread of nuclear weapons (as well as other weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery). Central to past success in the nuclear sphere has been the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the associated safeguards system applied by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Multiplying political instabilities and the dissemination of advanced technologies make this global regime even more important in the post-cold war world.

The New Soviet Union: An unfinished revolution

The attempted coup in the Soviet Union in August of this year appeared to many to finally signal the collapse of communist power and to herald in a new age of reform and democracy. However, the aftermath of the coup has shown that there can be no straightforward answers to the myriad problems of the crumbling Union, from the disintegration of central and local power structures, through rising crime and the growing influence of the mafia, to a chaotic and bankrupt economy. The resulting instability poses serious threats, not only to the centre and the republics, but also to Europe and the rest of the world. As Jameson and Reiss argue, in order to achieve reforms, leaders may first turn to authoritarian measures before the long suffering Soviet people overcome their inbred inertia and begin to take initiatives to alleviate their predicaments themselves.

The importance of being earnest: The NPT review and extension conference

The threat that nuclear power presents to the world has been offset by the fact that when it is properly constrained, it provides an important deterrent. This delicate equilibrium depends on many factors, not least on the control of the spread of nuclear weapons to rogue states—which is where the nuclear Non‐Proliferation Treaty has been of paramount importance. Mitchell Reiss here outlines US preparations to help ensure the extension of the treaty in New York and possible obstacles in its path— namely, potential spoiler countries and the complexities, of voting’ procedures: Failure to extend the treaty has dangerous ramifications for us all.

South Asia and nuclear proliferation: A future unlike the past?

According to the CIA, the most likely future use of nuclear weapons will be on the Indian sub‐continent between India and Pakistan. The strained relations between the two countries are a source of great anxiety. Both countries have weak governments and ongoing territorial disputes, over which there is little, if any meaningful dialogue. Diplomatic efforts are directed at trying to persuade the two to adopt non‐proliferation measures, but the nuclear issue cannot be dealt with in isolation. Mitchell Reiss here, explores the domestic, regional and global preconditions underlying the mutual refusal to sign the Non‐Proliferation Treaty, describing the serious consequences for the peace and stability of South Asia as a whole if international efforts to come to terms with these issues fail.

GATT: guidelines for arms control

Traditional nuclear arms control negotiations have been slow and rigid. A new and flexible approach based on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade may meet U.S. political requirements as well as the security needs of both superpowers.