Assessing North Korean nuclear intentions and capacities: a new approach.(Essay)

This article develops a novel assessment of the nuclear program of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Using a theory-driven approach rooted in comparative foreign policy analysis, the article undermines two common assumptions about the DPRK nuclear threat: first, that the North Korean leadership's nuclear intentions are a measured response to the external environment and, second, that the DPRK has developed enough technical capacity to go nuclear whenever it pleases. In place of these assumptions, the article puts forth the general theoretical hypotheses that (1) the decision to go nuclear is rarely if ever based on typical cost-benefit analysis, and instead reflects deep-seated national identity conceptions, and (2) the capacity to go nuclear depends not only on raw levels of industrialization and nuclear technology, but also on the state's organizational acumen. Applied to the case of the DPRK, these hypotheses suggest that it has long been strongly committed to the goal of acquiring an operational nuclear deterrent, but also that it has been finding it very difficult to successfully implement that wish. The article also demonstrates that these hypotheses are supported by the meager evidence available on this case.

KEYWORDS: comparative foreign policy, DPRK (North Korea), national identity conceptions, neopatrimonialism, nuclear proliferation, regime type and state structure, sultanistic regimes, threat assessment

**********

What are the strategic intentions and technical capacities of the nuclear program of the Democratic People s Republic of Korea (DPRK), commonly known as North Korea? Notwithstanding the strident debates over how to deal with the DPRK nuclear issue, no one should claim actually to know the answers to these basic questions. But the cloud of ignorance that hangs over the DPRK nuclear debate contains a silver lining. The absence of solid information about the case actually can free us to take a fresh look at the theoretical assumptions that usually remain implicit in proliferation threat assessments. The result of this fresh look is an alternative assessment of the DPRK nuclear program that defies the standard formulas. The principal goal of this article is not to declare that its assessment is necessarily correct, but rather to forestall premature cognitive closure in our evaluations of a case that is, after all, the hardest of hard intelligence targets. (1) Moreover, the return to theoretical basics promises to improve our understanding not only of this case, but also of the more general phenomenon of nuclear proliferation. For the sad truth is that even for countries about which plentiful information has been available, the record of strategic threat assessment is abysmal. (2)

The article proceeds as follows. It begins with a brief review of the literature on DPRK strategic intentions and capacities. It finds that even the best, most theoretically self-conscious work on the case applies questionable assumptions about the general dynamics of nuclear proliferation. If we apply different assumptions, different conclusions emerge about the DPRK's likely nuclear behavior. First, the literature typically assumes that the DPRK's nuclear drive is a measured response to the unfriendly post--Cold War external environment. The main dissenters from this assumption argue that the DPRK is uniquely irrational. But in fact, the basic choice to go or not to go nuclear is a revolutionary one that rarely if ever lends itself to standard cost-benefit calculation. The nuclear ambitions of any state are thus better understood as the product of emotions--and, in particular, of the fear and pride that grips "oppositional nationalists." The article provides evidence that the DPRK leadership is and has long been oppositional nationalist and, in consequence, that its desire for the bomb is not a post--Cold War phenomenon but in fact dates back many decades. Second, the literature typically assumes that a heavily industrialized state like the DPRK should be capable of exploiting any nuclear technology it is able to acquire. Yet there is in fact much room for doubt here. The DPRK fits snugly into a class of regimes that from a neo-Weberian perspective can be labeled "neopatrimonial" or even "sultanistic." The comparative politics literature indicates that even when such regimes gain access to the latest technology, their management pathologies are often so pronounced that their industrial research and development projects routinely run aground. The article provides preliminary evidence that the DPRK may indeed not be up to the nuclear research and development challenge. Finally, the conclusion returns to the theme of needing to be ready for any surprises that the DPRK may still have in store.

Existing Perspectives on the DPRK Nuclear Program

While the assessment of states' nuclear intentions and capacities is always difficult, the closed nature of the DPRK makes assessment particularly challenging. There is simply very little material for the typical journalistic/area studies "ground-up" approach to work with. Thus, not surprisingly, conclusions about the level and nature of the threat vary widely from analyst to analyst) Some of these analyses are more convincing than others, but they all share the fatal flaw of trying to apply inductive reasoning to a country that keeps almost everything secret.