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

Q2 Arts and Humanities Asian International Studies Review Pub Date : 2022-06-02 DOI:10.1163/2667078x-bja10011
T. Kivimäki
{"title":"Is There a Need for an Update of the Theory of Deterrence? US Failure in North Korea","authors":"T. Kivimäki","doi":"10.1163/2667078x-bja10011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n 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.","PeriodicalId":37023,"journal":{"name":"Asian International Studies Review","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian International Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/2667078x-bja10011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
威慑理论是否需要更新?美国在朝鲜的失败
本文将围绕威慑的基本逻辑和历史缺陷,回答美国阻止北韩核武器开发失败的原因。这是由于未能理解,除了惩罚的可预测性之外,在威慑目标出现不希望的行为时,非侵略行动的不惩罚也需要是可预测的。本文着眼于美国和朝鲜之间威慑关系的这一缺陷,回答了为什么美国的威慑未能阻止朝鲜成为事实上的核武器大国的问题。冷战后威慑失败的一般证据使用冲突统计数据,而对美国对-à-vis朝鲜的威慑的调查将使用基于解密(主要是美国)文件证据的理论指导过程追踪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Asian International Studies Review
Asian International Studies Review Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Liberal Convergence or Differential Exclusion? Temporary Labor Migration Policy in Japan and Korea The Impacts of Community-Driven Development Program in Conflict-Affected Regions: Evidence from Cambodia Assessing the Political Clout of Thailand’s “Monarchized” Military in 2023 Whose Ideas Matter? The Changing Meaning of Health Protocols in Indonesia’s Border Management Policies in the Pandemic Era Securitizing Non-Traditional Security (NTS) Threats: China’s Track 2 Diplomacy in Southeast Asia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1