North Korean Contingency and Resolving Conflicts among Regional States

IntroductionNorth Korea is at a crossroads. Its ailing leader, seemingly rapid political transition, and unstable domestic political and economic situation all lead to a greater possibility of regime collapse. Although the leadership of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) still has a strong grip on its political power and maintains tight control of every layer of the society, a possible DPRK collapse or contingency continues to be one of the main issues for North Korea watchers, including pundits, scholars, policymakers, and even laymen who are interested in the changing North Korean affairs and their implications in the domestic and/or international arenas.1If North Korea collapses, then it would be a failed state in the sense that its government could not sustain its citizenry. Some commentators even say that the collapse of the DPRK has already begun. Thus, it is critical that regional powers discuss the possible outcomes of the North Korean stalemate and its impact on Northeast Asian regional security. The Republic of Korea (ROK) government, especially, should prepare for the possible outcomes of a North Korean catastrophe based on discussions, dialogues, and consultations with influential regional actors, such as the United States and the People's Republic of China (PRC). Of the various possible future scenarios concerning the future of the DPRK regime, this article will focus on its deteriorating situations, analyze surrounding states' policy positions, and provide some meaningful policy considerations that the ROK government might consider in terms of the political, security, and legal aspects of the North Korean contingency. Regional powers surrounding the peninsula would play a critical role in a North Korean catastrophe for the following reasons: first, China has vital interests in North Korea; second, the U.S., the strategic ally of South Korea, is supposed to protect South Korea from any effect of the turbulence in North Korea; third, Russia and Japan also have strategic interests on the Korean Peninsula, so they may try to step in any contingency situation; and fourth, the U.S. and China would be highly concerned about the situation especially in the context of Sino-U.S. competition over East Asia and the Korean Peninsula. Nonetheless, the South Korean government will be a key player in dealing with this matter, given that changes in North Korea could have a direct influence on the government in terms of security, economics, geography, and even national status. It is, therefore, timely and of the utmost importance to think about the possibility of the North Korean contingency from the perspective of the ROK.This article attempts to explain the general issue of North Korean contingency and then explores the various political and security considerations among concerned states, especially China. Next, it focuses on the legal perspectives that the South Korean government can and should employ in case of a catastrophic situation in North Korea and ends with conclusions and a summary of the main argument.The North Korean Contingency: Legal Aspects, Security Problems, and Regional ImplicationsAlthough regional stakeholders surrounding the Korean Peninsula have an acute interest in preventing any kind of catastrophic outcomes within North Korea, given the current stalemate in the North Korean situation, it is time to take more seriously any possibility of North Korean contingency in relation to its regime failure and collapse.2 North Korean contingency, if it happens, could be characterized as complex, uncertain, and unstable.First, legally speaking, the North Korean contingency has both domestic and international characteristics. In principle, resolution of the state of anarchy or the state of civil war in North Korea is a matter within North Korean domestic jurisdiction; it is a domestic matter. The principle of nonintervention in domestic matters is expressly stipulated in Article 2. …