Skip to main content
Log in

The EU, regional cooperation, and the North Korean nuclear crisis

Asia Europe Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

North Korea poses a security threat by developing nuclear weapons. To address this source of regional insecurity, institutionalized frameworks of regional cooperation have been employed. Despite its usefulness as an alternative route to deal with the North Korean case, controversies still remain in terms of its relevance and effectiveness. Even so, the regional integration, consistently promoted by the EU as an integral part of its Asian policy, still requires systematic evaluation. This paper thus examines how and under which conditions regional integration can make a contribution to the transformation of the current crisis. In answering this question, it concludes that a long-term model-setting effect is hard to disregard, in spite of the mixed view of substantial compulsory and social learning effects. The underlying reasons are the ontological-seeking activities of North Korea, along with regional and global actors’ reservations about the contributions of the EU as a key security provider in Asian affairs and in its promotion of the regional integration scheme.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Previous negotiations to shutdown the Yongbyon nuclear reactor in return for energy aid is an example in case (Maass 2012, p. 310).

  2. This is well demonstrated by the North Korean spokesman comments following the Bush administration’s strategy of naming North Korea a member of the Axis of Evil. As the spokesman commented that “the DPRK-US relations are still characterized by distrust and misunderstandings and they have grown stronger since the emergence of the new administration in the US.” (Korean Central News Agency, May 22, 2001)

  3. See Council of the European Union (ed.), Presidency conclusions of the Brussels European Council (December 12–13, 2003), Brussels, February 5, 2004, 5381/04, p. 22.

  4. This attempt gained further momentum when South Korea’s “sunshine diplomacy” under the Kim Dae-Jung administration aimed for peace and co-prosperity on the Korean peninsula, to which the EU has also lent its direct and indirect support (Interview an EEAS analyst, 2013, personal communication).

  5. A retired Lieutenant General in Korea argues that China tends to show more interest in the North Korean issues not so much because of the regional security issue but rather because of nuclear waste disposal issues (Interview a KIDA director, 2014, personal communication).

  6. This includes the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, plus the EU and regional states (both Koreas, Japan and Australia) (Bluth 2011: 157).

References

  • ARF (1995) Chairman’s Statement of the 2nd Meeting of the ASEAN Regional Forum. Brunei Darussalam, 1 August 1995

  • ARF (2004) ARF Statement on Non-Proliferation. Jakarta, 2 July 2004

  • ARF (2012) Chairman’s Statement of the 19th ASEAN Regional Forum Phnom Penh. Cambodia, 12 July 2012

  • ASEAN+3 (APT) (2004) Chairman’s Statement of the 8th ASEAN +3 Summit Vientiane. 29 November 2004

  • ASEM (2000) Chairman’s Statement. Asia-Europe Meeting, 20–21 October 2000

  • ASEM (2006) Chairman’s Statement of the Sixth Asia Europe Meeting, Helsinki, 10–11 September 2006

  • Berkofsky A (2003) EU’s policy towards the DPRK: engagement of standstill?. EIAS publications BP 03/01

  • Bersick S (2014) Europe’s role in Asia: distant but involved. In: Shambaugh D, Yahuda M (eds) International relations of Asia, 2nd edn. Rowman & Littlefield, New York, pp. 115–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Bluth C (2011) Crisis on the Korean peninsula. Potomac Books, Washington D. C

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridges B (2008) The European Union and the Korean conundrum. In: Balme R, Bridges B (eds) Europe-Asia relations: building Multilateralisms. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, pp. 213–232

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Buzan B, Waever O, Wilde JD (1998) Security: a new framework for analysis. Lynn Rienner, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Cha VD (2009) Powerplay origins of the US alliance system in Asia. Int Secur 343:158–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission E (1994) Towards a New Asia Strategy. Com (94) 314 final, 13 July 1994

  • Commission E (2001) Europe and Asia: a strategic framework for enhanced partnership. COM 2001, 469 final, 4 September 2001

  • Council of the European Union (2003) Presidency conclusions of the Brussels European Council (December 12–13, 2003), Brussels, February 5, 2004, 5381/04

  • Council of the European Union (ed) (2004) Presidency conclusions of the Brussels European Council (December 12–13, 2003), Brussels, February 5, 2004, 5381/04

  • Council of the European Union (2013) “Joint Declaration in commemoration of the 50th Anniversary of Diplomatic Relations between the European Union and the Republic of Korea”. Brussels, 8 November 2013 15875/13 (OR. en) PRESSE 462

  • Cumings B (2007) Creating Korean insecurity: the US role. In: Hazel S (ed) Reconstituting Korean security. United Nations University Press, New York, pp. 21–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Diez T, Tocci N (eds) (2009) Cyprus: a conflict at the crossroads. Manchester University Press, Manchester

  • Diez T, Albert M, Stetter S (2006) The European Union and border conflicts: the power of integration. Int Organ 603:563–593

  • Dorussen H (2001) Mixing carrots with sticks: evaluating the effectiveness of positive incentives. J Peace Res 382:251–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank R (2006) The political economy of sanctions against North Korea. Asian Perspect 303:5–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Forster A (2000) Evaluating the EU-ASEM relationship: a negotiated order approach. J Eur Public Policy 75:787–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrett G, Weingast BR (1993) Ideas, interests, and institutions: constructing the European Community’s internal market. In: Goldstein J, Keohane RO (eds) Ideas & foreign policy: an analytical framework. Cornell University Press, New York, pp. 173–206

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens A (1991) Modernity and self-identity. Polity Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas EB (1958) The uniting of Europe. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill C (2001) The EU’s capacity for conflict prevention. Eur Foreign Aff Rev 63:315–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes C (2009) “super-sizing” the DPRK threat: Japan’s evolving military posture and North Korea. Asian Surv 492:291–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hund M (2012) Manifestation of collective identities in southeast and East Asia? AV Akademikerverlag, Saarbrücken

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim SS (2001) North Korea in 2000 surviving through high hopes of summit diplomacy. Asian Surv 411:12–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim YS (2006) A study on Kaesung industrial complex effects on south-north military tension reduction. N Korean Stud Rev 102:113–148 (in Korean)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim SH (2008) Regionalism and multilateral alliance: an analysis on their possible coexistence in East Asia. Korean J Int Stud 484:7–34 (in Korean)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim YJ, Park IW (2004) Moderates alliance: trilateral policy coordination for North Korea’s nuclear crisis. Korean J Int Stud 444:197–216 (in Korean)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinnval C (2004) Globalization and religious nationalism: self, identity, and the search for ontological security. Pol Psychol 255:741–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korean Central News Agency, May 22, 2001 (in Korean)

  • Lee KS (2000) Improvement measure for Humanitarin aid to North Korea. Research Series 00–32 Korea Institute for National Unification, Seoul (in Korean)

  • Lee MS (2007) Helsinki process, model for northeast Asian region. Munwha Daily News Paper, 22 June 2007 (in Korean)

  • Lee DR (2010) China’s policy and influence on the North Korea nuclear issue: denuclearization and/or stabilization of the Korean peninsula? Korean J Def Anal 222:163–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee M (2012) A step as normative power: the EU’s human rights policy towards North Korea. Asia Europe Journal 101:41–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee M, Kim Y (2011) The relationship between local governments in South Korea and China: a step toward regional integration. Issues Stud 473:177–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy JS (1994) Learning and foreign policy: sweeping a conceptual minefield. Int Organ 482:279–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maass M (2012) North Korea’s Instrumentalization of diplomacy: passing through the “danger zone” of its nuclear weapons program. Korean J Def Anal 243:303–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Manners I (2002) Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms? J Common Mark Stud 40(2):235–258

  • Mitzen J (2006a) Anchoring Europe’s civilizing identity: hibits, capabilities and ontological security. J Eur Public Pol 132:270–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitzen J (2006b) Ontological security in world politics: state identity and the security dilemma. Eur J Int Relat 126:341–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moravscik A (1993) Preferences and power in the European Community: a liberal Intergovernmentalist approach. J Common Mark Stud 314:473–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinones CK (2007) Korean peninsula energy Developmnet organization (KEDO): a bridge too far? In: Joo SH, Kwak TH (eds) Norht Korea’s second nuclear crisis and northeast Asian security. Ashgate, Aldershot, p. 173

    Google Scholar 

  • Snyder S (2014) The Korean peninsula and northeast Asian stability. In: Shambaugh D, Yahuda M (eds) International relations of Asia, 2nd edn. Rowman & Littlefield, New York, pp. 293–315

    Google Scholar 

  • Stumbaum MBU (2009) The European Union and China: decision-making in EU foreign and security policy towards the People’s republic of China. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rozman G (2011) Strategic thinking about the Korean nuclear crisis. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weber K (2013) The ASEAN regional forum and the EU’s role in promoting security in the Asia-Pacific. In: Christiansen T, Kirchner E, Murray P (eds) The Palgrave handbook of EU-Asia relations. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, pp. 344–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiessala G (2002) The European Union and Asian countries. Sheffield University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Weissmann M (2012) The east Asian peace: conflict prevention and informal peacebuilding. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yeo LH (2007) The inter-regional dimension of EU-Asia relations. In: Anderson PJ, Wiessala G (eds) The European Union and Asia: reflections and Re-orientations. Rodopi, Amsterdam, pp. 173–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeo LH (2013) Can the EU be a serious security actor in Asia? Asia Europe Journal 11:465–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moosung Lee.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, M. The EU, regional cooperation, and the North Korean nuclear crisis. Asia Eur J 14, 401–415 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-016-0457-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-016-0457-y

Keywords

Navigation