North Korea’s Foreign Policy: The Kim Jong-un Regime in a Hostile World
from Asia Program
from Asia Program

North Korea’s Foreign Policy: The Kim Jong-un Regime in a Hostile World

In North Korea’s Foreign Policy: The Kim Jong-un Regime in a Hostile World, CFR’s Scott A. Snyder and University of British Columbia’s Kyung-Ae Park offer a robust examination of North Korean foreign policy under Kim Jong-un, including its domestic drivers, summitry diplomacy, and nuclear program.

March 21, 2023 1:13 pm (EST)

Teaching Notes

Summary

Since Kim Jong-un’s assumption of power in December 2011, North Korea has undergone expanded nuclear development, political isolation, and economic stagnation. Kim’s early prioritization of simultaneous economic and military development, known as the byungjin policy, highlighted his goal of transforming North Korea’s domestic economic circumstances and strengthening its position in the world as a nuclear state. The central dilemma shaping Kim Jong-un’s foreign policy throughout his first decade in power revolves around ensuring North Korea’s prosperity and security while sustaining the political isolation and control necessary for regime survival.

More From Our Experts

To evaluate North Korea’s foreign policy under Kim, North Korea’s Foreign Policy: The Kim Jong-un Regime in a Hostile World examines the impact of domestic factors that have influenced the formation and implementation of Kim’s foreign policy, Kim’s distinctive use of summitry and effectiveness of such meetings as an instrument by which to attain foreign policy goals, and the impact of international responses to North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities on North Korea’s foreign policy.

More on:

North Korea

Kim Jong-un

Foreign Policy

This book is suitable for the following disciplines in undergraduate and graduate courses:

  • International Relations
  • East Asian Studies and History
  • Contemporary East Asian Foreign Relations
  • Asian Security

 

Discussion and Essay Questions

Courses on International Relations

  1. What is the impact of North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons on its global stature and image?
  2. How do states use summitry as a tool of diplomacy?
  3. How have international sanctions influenced the goals and methods of North Korea’s foreign policy?
  4. What are some lessons that can be drawn from UN responses to North Korean nuclear and missile development?
More From Our Experts

 

Courses on East Asian Studies and History

  1. How does the byungjin policy fit into the history of North Korean politics?
  2. How has North Korean engagement with other states both in East Asia and with the international community evolved throughout the past decades?
  3. Historically, what have been factors shaping North Korea’s bilateral relations with China and Russia?
  4. What are the predominant patterns that have characterized North Korea’s foreign policy?

 

Courses on Contemporary East Asian Foreign Relations

  1. What lessons can be drawn from North Korea’s recent summit diplomacy with South Korea, the United States, China, and Russia?
  2. Given North Korea’s nuclear and economic strategies, what can we project about diplomacy and deterrence in East Asia?
  3. What are some lessons that the leaders of East Asian countries and the United States can learn by studying North Korea’s history of nuclear development and diplomacy?
  4. What are the implications of the intensifying U.S.-China strategic competition on regional dynamics in East Asia and North Korea’s foreign relations?

More on:

North Korea

Kim Jong-un

Foreign Policy

 

Courses on Asian Security

  1. How do North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs exacerbate the security dilemma facing U.S. allies in the region?
  2. What is the future of the U.S. nuclear umbrella and extended deterrence in East Asia given North Korea’s advancing capabilities?
  3. What role do North Korean cyber activities play in regional security dynamics and response options by the United States and UN?
  4. What can be expected of the alliance dynamics in East Asia in light of advancements in North Korean nuclear and missile capabilities and trilateral U.S.-South Korea-Japan responses?

 

Further Projects

Op-Ed

  1. Write a 700-word opinion piece on how the United States should reshape its North Korea policy based on lessons learned from the 2018–19 summitry period.
  2. Write a 700-word opinion piece on how South Korea, the United States, and the United Nations should address the human rights violations in North Korea or North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.

 

Analytical Essay

  1. How did Kim Jong-un consolidate his power between 2012 and2017? Compared to his predecessors, what are the different economic and military approaches Kim adopted and why?
  2. What led Kim to initiate summits with different leaders in 2018 and 2019? What was his objective, and what lessons were learned from the summitry?
  3. What are some of the tools and channels North Korea has used to engage with the international community? Which have generated the greatest benefits for North Korea?

 

Speechwriting

  1. You are the personal speechwriter for Chairman Kim Jong-un in North Korea. As the new year approaches, he plans to deliver a speech for the general public on live television. Kim would like to touch on issues such as economic reform, military strength, and its relations with neighboring countries and the United States. Based on what you have learned from the book, draft a speech for Chairman Kim. Considering recent regional developments surrounding North Korea, how would you frame and discuss each topic? What would you prioritize, and what messages would you convey in the speech?

 

Policy Memo

  1. You are the U.S. Ambassador to South Korea. You receive a memo through back channels that North Korea has indicated its desire to re-engage with the United States through a presidential summit. Kim Jong-un has requested a bilateral summit with President Biden in one month. Write a policy memo for President Biden assessing North Korea’s negotiation style, tactics, and strategies. Make a careful analysis of the recent summits and give President Biden your policy recommendations on how to approach the negotiation with North Korea.

 

Negotiation

  1. Divide the students into four teams: the United States, South Korea, North Korea, and China. Ask the teams to negotiate the following topics: sanctions, nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, cyber theft, and human rights violations.

 

Press Briefing

  1. You are invited to Pyongyang as a journalist to attend an exclusive press briefing with Kim Jong-un. You will be interviewing Kim for sixty minutes, covering topics ranging from the domestic human rights situation to North Korea’s foreign policy. Prepare opening remarks and several questions for the interview.

 

Supplementary Materials

Bechtol, Burce. Red Rogue: The Persistent Challenge of North Korea. Dulles, VA: Potomac Books, 2007.

Becker, Jasper. Rogue Regime: Kim Jong Il and the Looming Threat of North Korea. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Cha, Victor and Kang, David C. Nuclear North Korea: A Debate on Engagement Strategies. New York: Columbia University Press, 2018.

Cumings, Bruce. Koreas Place in the Sun: A Modern History. W.W. Norton & Company, 2005.

Eberstadt, Nicholas. The North Korean Economy: Between Crisis and Catastrophe. Edison, N.J.: Transaction Books, 2007.

Fahy, Sandra. Dying for Rights: Putting North Korea’s Human Rights Abuses on the Record. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.

Fifield, Anna. The Great Successor: The Divinely Perfect Destiny of Brilliant Comrade Kim Jong Un. New York: PublicAffaris, 2019

Grzelczyk, Virginie. North Korea’s New Diplomacy: Challenging Political Isolation in the 21st Century. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.

Haggard, Stephan and Noland, Marcus. Famine in North Korea: Markets, Aids, and Reform. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.

Kim, Byung-Yeon. Unveiling the North Korean Economy: Collapse and Transition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Kim, Sung-Chull and Cohen, Michael D. North Korea and Nuclear Weapons: Entering the New Era of Deterrence. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2017.

King, Robert R and Shin, Gi-Wook. The North Korean Conundrum: Balancing Human Rights and Nuclear Security. Stanford: Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, 2022.

Lankov, Andrei. North of the DMZ: Essays on Daily Life in North Korea. Jefferson, N.C.: McFarland and Co., 2007.

Mallory, King. North Korean Sanctions Evasion Techniques. Rand Corporation, 2021.

Martin, Bradley K. Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader: North Korea and the Kim Dynasty. New York: Thomas Dune Books, 2006.

Natsios, Andrew S. The Great North Korean Famine: Famine, Politics, and Foreign Policy. Washington, D.C.: The United States Institute of Peace Press, 2001.

Pak, Jung H. Becoming Kim Jong Un: A Former CIA Officer’s Insights into North Korea’s Enigmatic Young Dictator. New York: Ballantine Books, 2020.

Snyder, Scott. Negotiating on the Edge: North Korean Negotiating Behavior. Washington D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1999.

Suh, Dae-Sook. Kim Il Sung: The North Korean Leader. New York: Columbia University Press, 1988.

White, Geoff. The Lazarus Heist: From Hollywood to High Finance: Inside North Korea’s Global Cyber Warfare. London: Penguin UK, 2022.

Download the Teaching Notes (PDF)

Visit the Book Page

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Ukraine

Putin’s war in Ukraine is not just about territory—it’s a calculated move rooted in history to reclaim Russia's global influence and potentially redraw Europe’s borders. To safeguard European security, the West needs to revive its proven strategy: build a strong deterrent while pursuing dialogue to ensure long-term stability.

Iran

The United States joined Israel’s bombing campaign of Iran’s nuclear program. A clear picture of the damage inside Iran—and the state of its nuclear strength—is still unfolding.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Sign up to receive CFR President Mike Froman’s analysis on the most important foreign policy story of the week, delivered to your inbox every Friday afternoon. Subscribe to The World This Week. In the Middle East, Israel and Iran are engaged in what could be the most consequential conflict in the region since the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. CFR’s experts continue to cover all aspects of the evolving conflict on CFR.org. While the situation evolves, including the potential for direct U.S. involvement, it is worth touching on another recent development in the region which could have far-reaching consequences: the diffusion of cutting-edge U.S. artificial intelligence (AI) technology to leading Gulf powers. The defining feature of President Donald Trump’s foreign policy is his willingness to question and, in many cases, reject the prevailing consensus on matters ranging from European security to trade. His approach to AI policy is no exception. Less than six months into his second term, Trump is set to fundamentally rewrite the United States’ international AI strategy in ways that could influence the balance of global power for decades to come. In February, at the Artificial Intelligence Action Summit in Paris, Vice President JD Vance delivered a rousing speech at the Grand Palais, and made it clear that the Trump administration planned to abandon the Biden administration’s safety-centric approach to AI governance in favor of a laissez-faire regulatory regime. “The AI future is not going to be won by hand-wringing about safety,” Vance said. “It will be won by building—from reliable power plants to the manufacturing facilities that can produce the chips of the future.” And as Trump’s AI czar David Sacks put it, “Washington wants to control things, the bureaucracy wants to control things. That’s not a winning formula for technology development. We’ve got to let the private sector cook.” The accelerationist thrust of Vance and Sacks’s remarks is manifesting on a global scale. Last month, during Trump’s tour of the Middle East, the United States announced a series of deals to permit the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia to import huge quantities (potentially over one million units) of advanced AI chips to be housed in massive new data centers that will serve U.S. and Gulf AI firms that are training and operating cutting-edge models. These imports were made possible by the Trump administration’s decision to scrap a Biden administration executive order that capped chip exports to geopolitical swing states in the Gulf and beyond, and which represents the most significant proliferation of AI capabilities outside the United States and China to date. The recipe for building and operating cutting-edge AI models has a few key raw ingredients: training data, algorithms (the governing logic of AI models like ChatGPT), advanced chips like Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) or Tensor Processing Units (TPUs)—and massive, power-hungry data centers filled with advanced chips.  Today, the United States maintains a monopoly of only one of these inputs: advanced semiconductors, and more specifically, the design of advanced semiconductors—a field in which U.S. tech giants like Nvidia and AMD, remain far ahead of their global competitors. To weaponize this chokepoint, the first Trump administration and the Biden administration placed a series of ever-stricter export controls on the sale of advanced U.S.-designed AI chips to countries of concern, including China.  The semiconductor export control regime culminated in the final days of the Biden administration with the rollout of the Framework for Artificial Intelligence Diffusion, more commonly known as the AI diffusion rule—a comprehensive global framework for limiting the proliferation of advanced semiconductors. The rule sorted the world into three camps. Tier 1 countries, including core U.S. allies such as Australia, Japan, and the United Kingdom, were exempt from restrictions, whereas tier 3 countries, such as Russia, China, and Iran, were subject to the extremely stringent controls. The core controversy of the diffusion rule stemmed from the tier 2 bucket, which included some 150 countries including India, Mexico, Israel, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Many tier 2 states, particularly Gulf powers with deep economic and military ties to the United States, were furious.  The rule wasn’t just a matter of how many chips could be imported and by whom. It refashioned how the United States could steer the distribution of computing resources, including the regulation and real-time monitoring of their deployment abroad and the terms by which the technologies can be shared with third parties. Proponents of the restrictions pointed to the need to limit geopolitical swing states’ access to leading AI capabilities and to prevent Chinese, Russian, and other adversarial actors from accessing powerful AI chips by contracting cloud service providers in these swing states.  However, critics of the rule, including leading AI model developers and cloud service providers, claimed that the constraints would stifle U.S. innovation and incentivize tier 2 countries to adopt Chinese AI infrastructure. Moreover, critics argued that with domestic capital expenditures on AI development and infrastructure running into the hundreds of billions of dollars in 2025 alone, fresh capital and scale-up opportunities in the Gulf and beyond represented the most viable option for expanding the U.S. AI ecosystem. This hypothesis is about to be tested in real time. In May, the Trump administration killed the diffusion rule, days before it would have been set into motion, in part to facilitate the export of these cutting-edge chips abroad to the Gulf powers. This represents a fundamental pivot for AI policy, but potentially also in the logic of U.S. grand strategy vis-à-vis China. The most recent era of great power competition, the Cold War, was fundamentally bipolar and the United States leaned heavily on the principle of non-proliferation, particularly in the nuclear domain, to limit the possibility of new entrants. We are now playing by a new set of rules where the diffusion of U.S. technology—and an effort to box out Chinese technology—is of paramount importance. Perhaps maintaining and expanding the United States’ global market share in key AI chokepoint technologies will deny China the scale it needs to outcompete the United States—but it also introduces the risk of U.S. chips falling into the wrong hands via transhipment, smuggling, and other means, or being co-opted by authoritarian regimes for malign purposes.  Such risks are not illusory: there is already ample evidence of Chinese firms using shell entities to access leading-edge U.S. chips through cloud service providers in Southeast Asia. And Chinese firms, including Huawei, were important vendors for leading Gulf AI firms, including the UAE’s G-42, until the U.S. government forced the firm to divest its Chinese hardware as a condition for receiving a strategic investment from Microsoft in 2024. In the United States, the ability to build new data centers is severely constrained by complex permitting processes and limited capacity to bring new power to the grid. What the Gulf countries lack in terms of semiconductor prowess and AI talent, they make up for with abundant capital, energy, and accommodating regulations. The Gulf countries are well-positioned for massive AI infrastructure buildouts. The question is simply, using whose technology—American or Chinese—and on what terms? In Saudi Arabia and the UAE, it will be American technology for now. The question remains whether the diffusion of the most powerful dual-use technologies of our day will bind foreign users to the United States and what impact it will have on the global balance of power.  We welcome your feedback on this column. Let me know what foreign policy issues you’d like me to address next by replying to [email protected].