Multilateral Arms Control and the Challenge of North Korea
Author(s)
Moon, Chung-in
Abstract
This discussion suggests several interesting implications for the future of multilateral arms control regime: (1) U.S. hegemony vs. autonomy and independence of international organizations including multilateral arms control regimes: American unilateralism and weakened autonomy and independence of multilateral arms control regimes pose a major challenge. (2) Bilateralism vs. multilateralism- debates on white cat, black cat: North Korea claims that American nuclear threats are real and present, but multilateral arms control regime such as IAEA cannot do anything. The only way to settle the current standoff is either through bilateral negotiations or through resort to military deterrence. Even if parties concerned opt for multilateral modality, it should be outside the United Nations. This trend raises a fundamental question of the legitimacy and viability of IAEA. (3) Distrust and weakened legitimacy: The North Korean case clearly shows that international organizations including the United Nations have limited effectiveness in dealing with arms control including proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The weak question the trust and legitimacy of multilateral arms control regime. (4) Neutrality and impartiality of multilateral arms control regimes: Are they feasible? The Iraqi case has brought about profound impacts on the legitimacy of the United Nations. Inspect, disarm, and destroy? Prospects for resolving the North Korean nuclear through the United Nations become dimmer.
