Background and Options for Nuclear Arms Control on the Korean Peninsula
ResearchPublished 1992
ResearchPublished 1992
The threat posed by North Korea's nuclear weapons development program could significantly increase tensions in Northeast Asia. This Note presents four options for achieving a nuclear-free Korea. The option of unilaterally withdrawing any U.S. nuclear weapons stationed in South Korea in order to induce North Korea to abandon the development of its own nuclear weapons was realized as a consequence of President Bush's worldwide unilateral withdrawal of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in late 1990. This preempted another option linking the withdrawal of any U.S. nuclear weapons with North Korean implementation of international inspections of its nuclear facilities. The option of inducing North Korea to forgo nuclear weapons in return for improved economic and political relations with the international community is currently being pursued, but North Korea has been slow to respond, and the threat of economic and political sanctions against the North is being seriously considered. A fourth option, to attack suspected North Korean nuclear weapons facilities, is considered to be highly dangerous and of questionable value.
This publication is part of the RAND note series. The note was a product of RAND from 1979 to 1993 that reported miscellaneous outputs of sponsored research for general distribution.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.