只遏制不接触:澳大利亚当代的朝鲜政策

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY
Jack D. Butcher
{"title":"只遏制不接触:澳大利亚当代的朝鲜政策","authors":"Jack D. Butcher","doi":"10.1111/ajph.12891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Australia's interactions with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), henceforth known as North Korea, have ebbed and flowed throughout their seventy-five-year history. In times of détente on the Korean Peninsula, Australia actively engaged North Korea and sought to facilitate its integration into the international system. However, during the recent détente in 2018–2019, Canberra broke with tradition and watched on as Trump, Moon, and Kim sought to negotiate a deal towards Pyongyang's denuclearisation. Why has Australia not followed its security partners and engaged, despite being an Indo-Pacific middle power and an advocate for non-proliferation? Answers to this question remain unknown in the international relations literature. Therefore, I conducted process tracing and identified seven “critical junctures” in Australia's relationship with North Korea while analysing its responses using middle power theory. Australia's preference for non-engagement is due to a shift towards a “maximum pressure” policy reliant on sanctions, reducing incentives to engage. This stems from a normative objection to Pyongyang's violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and limited material capabilities to persuade North Korea to denuclearise unilaterally. I aim to give an up-to-date account of Australia-North Korea relations and draw attention to a neglected area in Australia's non-proliferation policy.</p>","PeriodicalId":45431,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Politics and History","volume":"70 3","pages":"379-401"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajph.12891","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"All Containment and No Engagement: Australia's Contemporary Policy towards the Democratic People's Republic of Korea\",\"authors\":\"Jack D. Butcher\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajph.12891\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Australia's interactions with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), henceforth known as North Korea, have ebbed and flowed throughout their seventy-five-year history. In times of détente on the Korean Peninsula, Australia actively engaged North Korea and sought to facilitate its integration into the international system. However, during the recent détente in 2018–2019, Canberra broke with tradition and watched on as Trump, Moon, and Kim sought to negotiate a deal towards Pyongyang's denuclearisation. Why has Australia not followed its security partners and engaged, despite being an Indo-Pacific middle power and an advocate for non-proliferation? Answers to this question remain unknown in the international relations literature. Therefore, I conducted process tracing and identified seven “critical junctures” in Australia's relationship with North Korea while analysing its responses using middle power theory. Australia's preference for non-engagement is due to a shift towards a “maximum pressure” policy reliant on sanctions, reducing incentives to engage. This stems from a normative objection to Pyongyang's violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and limited material capabilities to persuade North Korea to denuclearise unilaterally. I aim to give an up-to-date account of Australia-North Korea relations and draw attention to a neglected area in Australia's non-proliferation policy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Politics and History\",\"volume\":\"70 3\",\"pages\":\"379-401\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajph.12891\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Politics and History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajph.12891\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Politics and History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajph.12891","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

澳大利亚与朝鲜民主主义人民共和国(朝鲜)(以下简称北朝鲜)的交往在其七十五年的历史中起起伏伏。在朝鲜半岛局势缓和时期,澳大利亚积极与朝鲜接触,并努力促进朝鲜融入国际体系。然而,在最近2018-2019年的缓和时期,堪培拉打破了传统,眼睁睁地看着特朗普、文在寅和金正恩试图通过谈判达成平壤无核化的协议。尽管澳大利亚是印度洋-太平洋地区的中等强国,也是防扩散的倡导者,但为什么没有跟随其安全伙伴参与其中呢?国际关系文献中对这一问题的答案仍是未知数。因此,我进行了过程追踪,确定了澳大利亚与朝鲜关系中的七个 "关键时刻",同时运用中间力量理论分析了澳大利亚的反应。澳大利亚之所以倾向于不与朝鲜接触,是因为它转向了依赖制裁的 "最大压力 "政策,从而降低了与朝鲜接触的动机。这源于对平壤违反《不扩散核武器条约》(NPT)的规范性反对,以及说服朝鲜单方面无核化的物质能力有限。我旨在介绍澳朝关系的最新情况,并提请关注澳大利亚防扩散政策中一个被忽视的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
All Containment and No Engagement: Australia's Contemporary Policy towards the Democratic People's Republic of Korea

Australia's interactions with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), henceforth known as North Korea, have ebbed and flowed throughout their seventy-five-year history. In times of détente on the Korean Peninsula, Australia actively engaged North Korea and sought to facilitate its integration into the international system. However, during the recent détente in 2018–2019, Canberra broke with tradition and watched on as Trump, Moon, and Kim sought to negotiate a deal towards Pyongyang's denuclearisation. Why has Australia not followed its security partners and engaged, despite being an Indo-Pacific middle power and an advocate for non-proliferation? Answers to this question remain unknown in the international relations literature. Therefore, I conducted process tracing and identified seven “critical junctures” in Australia's relationship with North Korea while analysing its responses using middle power theory. Australia's preference for non-engagement is due to a shift towards a “maximum pressure” policy reliant on sanctions, reducing incentives to engage. This stems from a normative objection to Pyongyang's violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and limited material capabilities to persuade North Korea to denuclearise unilaterally. I aim to give an up-to-date account of Australia-North Korea relations and draw attention to a neglected area in Australia's non-proliferation policy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: The Australian Journal of Politics and History presents papers addressing significant problems of general interest to those working in the fields of history, political studies and international affairs. Articles explore the politics and history of Australia and modern Europe, intellectual history, political history, and the history of political thought. The journal also publishes articles in the fields of international politics, Australian foreign policy, and Australia relations with the countries of the Asia-Pacific region.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信