Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||The North Korean nuclear crisis and the Six Party Talks :organising international security : hegemony, concert of powers, and collective security.|
|Abstract:||The end of the Cold war has brought with it the emergence of the new international security environment. State actors can no longer calculate their national interests as they did it before. Thus, it seems sensible to explore the question of how security is being organised in the post-Cold War era. In addition to a significant change in the structure of the international system, a new security concern has emerged. That is, as a result of the termination of two superpowers rivalry between the US and the former USSR, there has been an important change in global nuclear proliferation arena. For example, nuclear proliferation challenge which comes from „suspect states‟ such as Libya and North Korea has become a key issue in relation to nuclear proliferation. The North Korean nuclear crisis has gone through very different historical phases between 2001 and 2008. The first phase of the North Korean nuclear crisis saw the bilateral confrontation between the US and North Korea. The second phase demonstrated the multilateralisation of the North Korean nuclear issue through China‟s proactive engagement in the nuclear issue. The third phase could be distinguished by the United Nations‟ involvement in dealing with the North Korean case. Each phase of the North Korean nuclear crisis has revealed its unique characteristics regarding the notion of international security. Each phase has seen the operation of different security models: the first phase can be interpreted from the perspective of a hegemonic power structure; the second phase might be understood as the operation of a concert of powers; the third phase can be relevant to the notion of collective security. To sum up, the North Korean case can be regarded as a good example which describes how security is being organised in the post-Cold War era. In conclusion, it seems difficult to consider that security in the post Cold War era can be organised through a single way. Rather, it seems reasonable to take into account the mixture of divergent security models when managing security issues in the post-Cold War era.|
|Appears in Collections:||School of Geography, Politics and Sociology|
Files in This Item:
|Mun10.pdf||Thesis||1.49 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
|dspacelicence.pdf||Licence||43.82 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.