IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Rogue proliferator? North Korea's nuclear fuel cycle & its relationship to regime perpetuation

  • Habib, Benjamin
Registered author(s):

    North Korea is unlikely to relinquish its nuclear program because of its importance to the perpetuation of the Kim regime. This conclusion arises from the observation that the nuclear program has been a long-term project spanning several decades, culminating in denuclearisation negotiations, which have followed a cyclical pattern in which the North has provoked crises to extract concessions and gain leverage vis-a-vis regional states. It is clear that the nuclear program has great intrinsic value to Pyongyang. First, this paper argues that the sunk costs of previous investment in the nuclear program, as evidenced by the infrastructure for the country's nuclear fuel cycle, create forward momentum favouring continuation of the nuclear program. Second, it argues that the nuclear program solidifies Kim regime rule as an institutional buttress, as a prop for the domestic economy, and as a vehicle for ideological legitimation. The paper is a unique contribution, which explicitly links the Kim regime's proliferation calculus to the economic and bureaucratic imperatives of regime perpetuation, as well as the sunk cost of previous investment in the nuclear program. It provides a coherent explanation for North Korea's consistent unreliability in negotiations, and offers insights into future prospects of the denuclearisation process.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Policy.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2010)
    Issue (Month): 6 (June)
    Pages: 2826-2834

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:6:p:2826-2834
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:38:y:2010:i:6:p:2826-2834. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.