U.S.-ROK Nuclear Relations(1956-2006): A Case Study On Alliance Contradiction

The basic research path of this article is from case analysis to theoretical summarization. The case is U.S.-ROK nuclear relations. The theory is alliance contradiction. U.S.-ROK nuclear relations is a dramatic and distinct part of U.S.-ROK alliance relations, so this article hopes to distill some characteristics of alliance contradiction from the features of U.S.-ROK nuclear relations.The researches on U.S.-ROK nuclear relations include its contents and influences. Its contents show that America protected and restrained South Korea, which manifests contradiction and congruence of alliance functions. On one hand, the functions of alliance are contradictory and inconsistent. On the other hand, the functions of alliance are coherent, which means America wants to achieve regional security of Korean peninsula through this alliance structure.The influences of U.S.-ROK nuclear relations show that American nuclear protection on South Korea is an important factor of North Korea's nuclear development. After the mid-1970s, due to balance the negative impact of USFK's Withdrawal, respond to the perceived North Korea's aggressiveness, and eliminate South Korea's nuclear motivation, American forces in South Korea strengthened the posture of nuclear threat, which had an important stimulating impact on the start-up of the North Korea nuclear programs. After cold war, America's extended nuclear deterrence in South Korea is also one of the factors of driving North Korea's nuclear development. To make sure that South Korea will not develop nuclear weapons, America will provide nuclear protection clearly. This is the important factor of stopping South Korea's future nuclear development, and is also the important factor of stopping North Korea's future nuclear abandonment. The influences of U.S.-ROK nuclear relations show the complexity and contradiction of alliance influences. The effort that give ally more security leads to adversary's more insecurity, and in the end it circularly leads to ally's new insecurity.The researches on U.S.-ROK nuclear relations provide some important enlightenment for theoretical researches on alliance contradiction. The contents of U.S.-ROK nuclear relations can be summarized as the contradiction of alliance functions. The author holds that, before 1945, the contradiction of alliance function is not obvious, and alliances basically are military groups against external threats. After 1945, the contradiction of alliance function is clear, and the restrictive function begins to become an important function. The author holds that the changes of international power structure, the changes of controlling costs, and the enhancement of interdependence are the reasons that lead to the changes of alliance contradiction. The theory of alliance function contradiction can help us understand some phenomena, such as the existence and development of NATO, the strengthening of U.S.-Japan alliance function, and alliance's efforts on nonproliferation.The influences of U.S.-ROK nuclear relations can be summarized as the contradiction of alliance influence. Based on studies of the influences of U.S.-ROK nuclear relations and U.S.-ROK alliance, this article puts forward two moving paths of alliance complex influences: one is "alliance security-adversary insecurity-alliance insecurity" path; the other is "adversary security-alliance insecurity-adversary insecurity" path. The security dilemmas that have been caused by NATO's enlargement and U.S.-Japan alliance strengthening can be explained by the first path. The fact that U.S.-U.S.S.R. detente couldn't last in 1970s' can be explained by the second path. Moreover, based on U.S.-ROK-DPRK security interaction, this article brings forward the contradiction circulation model of alliance influence. U.S.-Europe security interaction with Soviet Union in cold war and NATO's enlargement and Russia's reactions after cold war, can be explained by this contradiction circulation model.This article also puts forward the concept and the acting factors of alliance stable state to evaluate the extent of alliance contradiction. Alliance stable state can be divided as alliance harmony, alliance fluctuation and alliance crisis. Common interests and interdependence are the decisive factors of alliance stable state. Institutional arrangements in alliance restrict transition between different states. Ally's recent behaviors are an important index of weighing alliance stable state. This article uses the weighing indexes of alliance stable state to evaluate the contradiction extent of U.S.-ROK, U.S.-Britain, U.S.-France, U.S.-Germany and U.S.-Japan alliance.Alliance contradiction theory has some important illumination on the solving of North Korea's nuclear issue. America should recognize that, its behaviors that made South Korea feel secure made North Korea feel insecure strongly. Only recognizing its historical responsibility could America sincerely promote the solving of North Korea' nuclear issue. North Korea should understand that America's behaviors weren't necessarily against it sometimes, but appeased South Korea. This understanding can help North Korea enhance its security confidence. South Korea should recognize that, when America tries to solve security problems though U.S.-DPRK reconciliation, it has to overcome the fear of abandonment.Alliance contradiction theory has some enlightenment on China's future alliance strategy. In the future, China may gradually use alliance strategy to deal with peripheral issues. Open alliance strategy may induce target countries' dissatisfaction. Obscure and informal alliance strategy that strengthens internal management function may weaken some potential adversary countries' suspicions and worries. Of course, more emphasis on internal function easily leads to the decline of alliance cohesion. Therefore, using alliance strategy needs high diplomatic skills to balance alliance's external and internal functions. In this way can alliance strategy contribute a lot for China's peaceful development.