Session: Plenary Session IV
Date/Time: April 24, 2019 / 15:15-16:45
Choi Kang, The Asan Institute for Policy Studies
Evans J.R. Revere, Albright Stonebridge Group
Yamaguchi Noboru, International University of Japan
Yao Yunzhu, Academy of Military Sciences, People’s Liberation Army
Since the recent U.S.-DPRK summit in Hanoi, it has become clear that the U.S. pursues a “big deal” approach, under which it would only accept “complete, verified, and irreversible denuclearization (CVID)” from North Korea. North Korea, however, maintains its preference for incremental and conditional denuclearization, deeming it as “the most realistic method for denuclearization.” The significant gap between the U.S. and North Korean positions on denuclearization is not likely to be bridged anytime soon and the negotiations for denuclearization are expected to drag on for a much longer period. Would the U.S. approach of “all-or-nothing” CVID, combined with the “maximum pressure” campaign, be a more effective strategy to achieve denuclearization? Or, considering the current impasse in denuclearization negotiations, should the possibility of “peaceful co-existence” with nuclear North Korea be given greater attention?