The aim of this thesis was to study Sweden’s relations with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) from the Korean War to this day. To do so, the focus was put on Sweden’s different motives during that time resulting in the identification of two phases. The first, characterized by an economical interest and the second, by a diplomatic and humanitarian one. Moreover, a non-governmental perspective was presented with the Swedish NGO Institute for Security & Development Policy (ISDP) in focus. This perspective showed the importance of non-governmental actors’ engagement with the DPRK. Finally, the international relations’ theory of neoliberalism was used as a theoretical framework for the thesis. The conclusion is that neoliberalism is correct at explaining the engagement of Sweden towards the DPRK. As one of the western countries with the best relations with the DPRK, we conclude that Sweden has an important role to play in facilitating the dialogue between the international community and the DPRK.

The aim of this thesis was to analyze and discuss how and why the traditional agenda setting process, as it is presented by Kingdon through the concepts of problems, politics and policy, can be seen in a new light of social media (tweets) and the concept of identity, by studying the case of American president Donald Trump and investigate his use of Twitter for agenda setting in the ongoing North Korean nuclear crisis. This thesis used a case study method to study the material of 28 tweets made by Trump about North Korea. The analysis revealed that Kingdon’s traditional agenda setting theory was useful for understanding the material, however an addition of looking at the concept of identity creation which is important within social media and International Relations (IR). The concept of identity helped to understand Trump’s agenda setting in a new light, where identity creation helped to discover an ‘us-and-them’ dynamic.

For all their efforts to avoid a nuclear North Korea, the Clinton and Bush administrations failed to achieve this goal, the most important policy objective of the United States in its relations with North Korea for decades, mainly because of inconsistencies in U.S. policy. This dissertation seeks to explain why both administrations ultimately failed to prevent North Korea from going nuclear. It finds the origins of this failure in the implementation of different U.S. policy options toward North Korea during the Clinton and Bush administrations. To explain the lack of policy consistency, the dissertation investigates how the relations between the executive and the legislative branches and, more specifically, different government types—unified government and divided government—have affected U.S. policy toward North Korea. It particularly emphasizes the role of Congress and partisan politics in the making of U.S. policy toward North Korea. This study finds that divided government played a pivotal role. Partisan politics are also central to the explanation: politics did not stop at the water’s edge. A divided U.S. government produced more status quo policies toward North Korea than a unified U.S. government, while a unified government produced more active policies than a divided government. Moreover, a unified government with a Republican President produced more aggressive policies toward North Korea, whereas a unified government with a Democratic President produced more conciliatory policies. This study concludes that the different government types and intensified partisan politics were the main causes of the inconsistencies in the United States’ North Korea policy that led to a nuclear North Korea.

This paper analyzes the the past and current security landscape in Northeast Asia with particular emphasis on the Korean Peninsula and the United States' involvement there. The paper assess policy successes and failures and presents several new policy options. The proposals include economic and diplomatic solutions to encourage the normalization of relations on the Korean Peninsula.

The development of nuclear weapons and their proliferation: A comparison of Iran and North Korea Master Thesis Author: Martin Marek Supervisor: PhDr. Vít Střítecký, M.Phil., Ph.D. Year: 2016 Abstract The text deals with nuclear proliferation in the cases of Iran and North Korea. The motives of nuclear ambitions are examined using models of Scott D. Sagan and other selected theoretical concepts. Gradual analysis of exposed states in the perspective of historical development, national security, domestic politics and norms forms the basis for understanding the perception of nuclear weapons by these states and approach to them as to a mean to accomplish certain objectives. Subsequent comparison reveals both similarities and difference between examined states in the perspective of motives of nuclear proliferation and shows explanatory potential of each model, which is various, in given cases. The effort of ensuring national security seems to be the strongest motive in both examined cases. It is followed by domestic influences, whereas norms stand rather for additional factor. Nevertheless, variety in explanatory power of the models is apparent in the cases of Iran and North Korea, notably in relation with their limitations. Other factors, such as regime type or parallel development of other type of weapons of...

No description available.

The linguistic situation on the Korean peninsula is one ripe for research. For the past 70 years the two halves of the peninsula have been isolated from one another, thus creating two very different environments for development and change within the Korean language. It is hypothesized that due to conflict, divide, and social turmoil on the peninsula, the Korean language will have undergone a period of change in the last 70 years. This particular investigation looks at North and South Korean monophthong systems for evidence of a phonological shift. Studies of North Korea's language planning (Yong, 2001; Kumatani, 1990) will be incorporated to provide a background for lexical change in the country, which may also have contributed to phonological change. This study was carried out with the expectation that, due to the turmoil following the Korean War, both standard dialects would display some signs of phonetic shift.In order to track the changes to the monophthong systems over the last 70 years, a total of 7156 samples of the Korean language's eight monophthongs were collected from both North and South Korean films from the 1950s, 1980s, and 2010s. The vowels' F1 and F2 formants were measured using the computer program Praat. The data was then separated by vowel and run through statistical analyses. The results of a mixed methods ANOVA determined which vowels had shown significant variance between decades; the estimated means were then determined for each formant. Based on the statistical analysis, the North Korean vowels /a/, /Λ/, and /u/ have shifted significantly since the 1950s, while the rest of the North Korean monophthong system has not changed significantly. Most of the shifting occurred in the period after the 1980s. In the South, all vowels have shown significant variance for the variable of decade in F1, F2, or both formants. South Korea's results also indicate separate shifts between the 1950s and 1980s, and between the 1980s and 2010s. If the results of this study could be successfully replicated with the languages of other countries thrown into post-WWII turmoil, this study could prove that WWII left a lasting effect on the languages of the world as well. Even if there are not far-reaching implications, the study still demonstrates strong evidence that linguistic change has occurred in both the northern and southern halves of the Korean peninsula since it was split into two separate countries.

Thesis explores the relationship between insecurity experienced by a State and the creation of a nuclear weapons program, and concludes that with an increase in insecurity, there is an increase in the likelihood that a State will start a nuclear weapons program. The word insecurity is defined in the Merriam Webster Dictionary as "not adequately guarded or safe," and this insecurity can come from threats or aggressive action taken by a State or a group of States. This positive relationship will be explored by looking at Pakistan, North Korea, and South Africa as case studies. The main theory that will be explored is the security dilemma that was first proposed as a theory of international Relations by John H. Herz in his book Political Realism and Political Idealism, and further explored by Herbert Butterfield in History and Human Relations. The main argument in this theory is that States will escalate a conflict among one another if they experience insecurity even if they do not wish to actually go to war but are not willing to communicate and work out their differences diplomatically. Throughout this study, there is a clear connection between these two factors and the security dilemma is a factor in all three case studies. The main conclusion of the paper is that more emphasis should be put on preventing countries from resorting to nuclear weapons programs and creating an environment where diplomacy is used instead of the threat of force, which is a large factor in these countries starting their nuclear weapons programs.

No description available.

No description available.