IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v65y2021i5p855-888.html

Joint Military Exercises and Crisis Dynamics on the Korean Peninsula

Author

Listed:
  • Jordan Bernhardt
  • Lauren Sukin

Abstract

A number of proposals for reducing tensions with North Korea have discussed alterations to the program of joint military exercises (JMEs) that South Korea holds. North Korea has also repeatedly called for a reduction or secession of JMEs. Would limiting or halting JMEs be a useful concession for securing a reduction of tensions on the peninsula? We argue that JMEs do not deter North Korea but, instead, provoke provocative rhetoric and actions, demonstrating that North Korea views JMEs as a serious threat to its security. In this paper, we establish a relationship between JMEs and North Korea’s actions. In response to a JME, North Korea can issue warnings or threats as well as take costly signals such as conducting missile or nuclear tests. Using new data on JMEs and North Korean behavior, we find that North Korea systematically responds with aggression to South Korean JMEs. Moreover, we find that the intensity of North Korea’s responses to JMEs is driven by the severity of the threat particular exercises pose, indicating that North Korea responds to JMEs as serious security threats.

Suggested Citation

  • Jordan Bernhardt & Lauren Sukin, 2021. "Joint Military Exercises and Crisis Dynamics on the Korean Peninsula," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 65(5), pages 855-888, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:65:y:2021:i:5:p:855-888
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002720972180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002720972180
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002720972180?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yongmin Chen & Jianpei Li & Jin Zhang, 2022. "Efficient Liability In Expert Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(4), pages 1717-1744, November.
    2. Nan Li, 2018. "A paradox of expert rights in abstract argumentation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 51(4), pages 737-752, December.
    3. Liu, Ting & Albert Ma, Ching-to & Mak, Henry Y., 2018. "Incentives for motivated experts in a partnership," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 296-313.
    4. Fearon, James D., 1995. "Rationalist explanations for war," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 379-414, July.
    5. Trager, Robert F., 2010. "Diplomatic Calculus in Anarchy: How Communication Matters," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(2), pages 347-368, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Yan & Zhang, Ruiqian & Lyu, Jiayi & Hou, Yuqi, 2024. "AI and Nuclear: A perfect intersection of danger and potential?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephane Wolton, 2024. "Decentralised information transmission in the shadow of conflict," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 36(1), pages 64-82, January.
    2. Brenton Kenkel, 2019. "The efficacy of cheap talk in collective action problems," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 31(3), pages 370-402, July.
    3. Peter Bils & William Spaniel, 2017. "Policy bargaining and militarized conflict," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(4), pages 647-678, October.
    4. Scott Wolford, 2020. "War and diplomacy on the world stage: Crisis bargaining before third parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 32(2), pages 235-261, April.
    5. Todd S. Sechser, 2011. "Militarized Compellent Threats, 1918–2001," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(4), pages 377-401, September.
    6. Indra de Soysa & John R. Oneal & Yong-Hee Park, 1997. "Testing Power-Transition Theory Using Alternative Measures of National Capabilities," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(4), pages 509-528, August.
    7. David H. Bearce & Eric O'N. Fisher, 2002. "Economic Geography, Trade, and War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 46(3), pages 365-393, June.
    8. Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, 2017. "Dangerous bargains with the devil? Incorporating new approaches in peace science for the study of war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(1), pages 98-116, January.
    9. Lala Muradova & Ross James Gildea, 2021. "Oil wealth and US public support for war," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 3-19, January.
    10. Aila M Matanock & Natalia Garbiras-Díaz, 2018. "Considering concessions: A survey experiment on the Colombian peace process," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(6), pages 637-655, November.
    11. Kevin T. Greene & Caroline Tornquist & Robbert Fokkink & Roy Lindelauf & V. S. Subrahmanian, 2021. "Understanding the timing of Chinese border incursions into India," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, December.
    12. Dominic Rohner & Mathias Thoenig & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2013. "War Signals: A Theory of Trade, Trust, and Conflict," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(3), pages 1114-1147.
    13. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/c8dmi8nm4pdjkuc9g8m2hh491 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Balafoutas, Loukas & Fornwagner, Helena & Kerschbamer, Rudolf & Sutter, Matthias & Tverdostup, Maryna, 2020. "Diagnostic Uncertainty and Insurance Coverage in Credence Goods Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 13848, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Mehrdad Vahabi, 2012. "Political Economy of Conflict Foreword," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 122(2), pages 153-169.
    16. Toke S. Aidt & Facundo Albornoz & Esther Hauk, 2019. "Foreign Influence and Domestic Policy: A Survey," Working Papers 1072, Barcelona School of Economics.
    17. Hannes Mueller & Christopher Rauh, 2024. "Building bridges to peace: a quantitative evaluation of power-sharing agreements," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 39(118), pages 411-467.
    18. Jong-Wha Lee & Ju Hyun Pyun, 2016. "Does Trade Integration Contribute to Peace?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 327-344, February.
    19. Natasa Bilkic & Thomas Gries, 2014. "Uncertainty and Conflict Decision," Working Papers CIE 78, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
    20. Chang, Yang-Ming & Sanders, Shane & Walia, Bhavneet, 2015. "The costs of conflict: A choice-theoretic, equilibrium analysis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 62-65.
    21. T. Clark Durant & Michael Weintraub, 2014. "How to make democracy self-enforcing after civil war: Enabling credible yet adaptable elite pacts," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(5), pages 521-540, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:65:y:2021:i:5:p:855-888. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.