The United States (US) Secretary of State Mr Rex Tillerson has just concluded his first East Asia trip with visits to Japan, South Korea and China. Today, the major security challenge which the new Trump administration faces, apart from the Islamic terrorism, is brazen approach of North Korea.
North Korea’s defiance has culminated in a seismic wave of around 4.2 in the Richter scale, but its politico-strategic ramifications are beyond calculation. The episode has provided sufficient fodder for the strategic community to interpret vividly the nomenclature of clandestine proliferation, possible actions and reactions of the stakeholders, and the current state of the global nuclear order. However, it should be understood that Pyongyang’s case is not a single phenomenon.
Whether to risk a status quo environment- an appetite for it or an aversion to it- is a meaningful way to explain crisis decision-making since it links the strategic and the psychological conceptions of choice. It portrays leaders as calculating goal-seekers while allowing them to have different personal decision-making styles.
The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), otherwise known to the world as North Korea has indicated its willingness to go to the fifth round of the six-party multilateral nuclear talks in Beijing in November 2005 as it had promised. However, the green signal came with a accusation that the United States has been using words and deeds contrary to the joint statement issued in September this year.
North Korea announced in February 2005 that it had nuclear weapons, and as per reports Pyongyang has already amassed enough fissile material to make six to eight bombs. Now with satellite reports giving indications, few analysts feel that North Korean preparation is on to test the device in the immediate future.