Rewarding North Korea: Theoretical Perspectives on the 1994 Agreed Framework
- 1 January 2002
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Journal of Peace Research
- Vol. 39 (1) , 51-68
- https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343302039001003
Abstract
This article tests theoretical propositions of sanctions theory against a `crucial case study' of the US-DPRK Agreed Framework, which since 1994 has employed incentives to influence North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons program. By electing an incentives-based strategy, the Agreed Framework appears to invalidate the proposition that positive sanctions are unlikely to be employed between adversaries. However, the choice can be explained in part by the unique political and security environment on the Korean peninsula, by the absence of viable policy alternatives for the USA and its allies, and by the relatively low cost to the USA. The subsequent history of implementation, however, amply confirms a number of theoretical caveats and leaves in doubt the ultimate success of the Agreed Framework. The case illustrates how diplomatic and political pressures on both sender and recipient have altered the baseline of expectations away from a pragmatic and partial improvement in relations and toward the sweeping and more problematic goal of an `all or nothing' transformation of the adversarial relationship. Positive sanctions were caught between the perceived advantages of de-linking proliferation concerns from other contentious security issues and the domestic political advantages to the sender of greater linkage. The latter tendency is illustrated by the 1999 Perry plan, which abandoned `limited engagement' in favor of a `comprehensive and integrated approach'. While this policy shift may have bought time for administration policy, it did not resolve the contradictions inherent in a low-trust relationship. As it reassesses US policy towards the DPRK, the new US administration is likely to draw on the more skeptical view of positive incentives found in sanctions theory. The case of the Agreed Framework challenges several assumptions of sanctions theory, but it is too soon to claim that it invalidates them.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Mixing Carrots with Sticks: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Positive IncentivesJournal of Peace Research, 2001
- Policies toward North Korea: A time for new thinkingJournal of Contemporary China, 2000
- Lessons of the agreed framework for using engagement as a nonproliferation toolThe Nonproliferation Review, 1999
- The Korean peninsula energy development organization: Achievements and challengesThe Nonproliferation Review, 1999
- How to think about Korean unificationOrbis, 1998
- Explaining North Korea's Negotiated Cooperation with the U.S.Asian Survey, 1997
- Sanctioning MadnessForeign Affairs, 1997
- The Role of Rewards in Conflictual International InteractionsJournal of Conflict Resolution, 1996
- The Value of Economic Incentives in International PoliticsJournal of Peace Research, 1995
- On the Meaning of NonviolenceJournal of Peace Research, 1965