Is There A Win-Win Scenario for the Key Actors Concerned with the DPRK? – A Korea Strategic Outcomes Virtual Think Tank Report

[Q1] Is there a win-win scenario for all of the key actors (DPRK, ROK, US, China, Russia)? If so, what might this look like?

Authors | Editors: Kuznar, L. (NSI, Inc.); Popp, G. (NSI, Inc.)

Summary Response

This report summarizes the input of thirty-three insightful responses from the Korea Strategic Outcomes Virtual Think Tank (ViTTa) expert contributors. While this summary response presents an overview of the key expert contributor insights, the summary alone cannot fully convey the fine detail of the contributor inputs provided, each of which is worth reading in its entirety. For this report, the expert contributors consider the possibility of a win-win scenario for the key actors involved with the DPRK. This summary details the various perspectives that emerge.

Bottom Line Up Front

Several contributors note that while Japan is not listed as a “key actor” in the question, it is certainly a key actor in relation to the Korean Peninsula and Asia Pacific region and should be considered as such in this assessment.

Twenty-one of the thirty-four contributors (about 62%) do not believe that a win-win scenario exists for all of the key actors. These contributors generally assess that the current interests of the key actors involved, particularly the US vs. DPRK vs. China and Russia, are irreconcilable (i.e., the DPRK considers its nuclear capability as indispensable, while the US insists on final, fully verified denuclearization [FFVD]. China and Russia want to see US influence in the region diminished, while the US, obviously, does not).

Eight of the thirty-four contributors (about 23%) believe that a win-win scenario for all of the key actors may be possible, at least in the short-term, but doubt that such a scenario could actually be achieved over the long-term. These contributors generally highlight a misalignment of long-term interests among the key actors and an overall lack of trust in the DPRK to fulfill any agreements it makes as the key barriers to a win-win scenario for all of the key actors.

Five of the thirty-four contributors (about 15%) believe that a win-win scenario for all of the key actors is possible without much qualification. These contributors acknowledge the differences in interests amongst the key actors, but generally assess that there is room for negotiation in pursuit of a win-win outcome.

Subject Matter Expert Contributors

Dr. Bruce Bennett, RAND; Dean Cheng, Heritage Foundation; Dr. Richard Cronin, Stimson Center; Debra Decker, Stimson Center; Abraham Denmark, Wilson Center; Ken Gause, CNA; Dr. James Hoare, Chatham House; Dr. David Hunter-Chester, Training and Doctrine Command G-2; Dr. Maorong Jiang, Creighton University; Dr. Jeffrey Knopf, Middlebury Institute of International Studies; Matt Korda, NATO; Dr. Gregory Kulacki, Union of Concerned Scientists; Inhyok Kwon, RAND; Group Captain (Indian Air Force ret) Ajey Lele, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses; Dr. Rod Lyon, Australian Strategic Policy Institute; Dr. Patrick McEachern, Wilson Center; Dr. Rupal Mehta, University of Nebraska, Lincoln; Dr. Andrew O’Neil, Griffith University; Ankit Panda, The Diplomat; Ariel F.W. Petrovics, University of California, Davis; Dr. James Platte, United States Air Force Center for Strategic Deterrence Studies; Dr. John Plumb, RAND; Joshua Pollack, Middlebury Institute of International Studies; Anthony Rinna, Sino-NK; Dr. Todd C. Robinson, Air Command and Staff College; Dr. Gary Samore, Harvard University; Dr. Jaganath Sankaran, University of Maryland; Dr. Sheila Smith, Council on Foreign Relations; Brig Gen Rob Spalding, United States Air Force; Yun Sun, Stimson Center; Dr. Michael Swaine, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Dr. William Tow, Australian National University; Dr. Steve Tsang, University of London; Dr. Miles Yu, United States Naval Academy

Download Publication