Constructivism; North Korea, USA, and Nuclear Weapons

By; Eva Kroh

Emerging from the fall of the USSR in the 1990s, the social theory of constructivism explores how states interact with each other in relation to each actor's own interest. At its core, constructivists examine the social interactions with other actors and how this forms an identity of the actor or state. Contrary to other dominant international theories, like realism, which heavily rely on the principle of dominance, constructivists fundamentally believe in the principle of identity to explain each actor's behavior. In addition, constructivists maintain that agency influences and shapes international structure. A constructivist approaches international policy with a mindset of ‘logical appropriateness.’ Unlike liberalism or realism, constructivism does not fixate on material need, but rather the social aspects of foreign affairs. Overall, constructivism emphasizes the importance of identity and the roles in which individuals have on state politics, in context and relation to each actor’s own interest. An example of this theory at play is the nuclear weapon tensions between the United States and North Korea.  

Constructivists fixate on how actors define national interest, threats to the national interests, and  relationships with other states. According to the U.S Department of State, defines national interest as “Peace and prosperity on the Korean Peninsula is the ultimate goal for the United States in its relationship with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).” Constructivism can be viewed more as an approach to international affairs rather than a theory. In this scenario the United States approaches its relationship with North Korea with “diplomacy and stern deterrence” as explained to Congress by President Biden.  A constructivist would also prioritize defining the threats to the national interest. Nuclear missile technology held by North Korea was defined by the U.S Department of State as a threat to the United States interest of ‘peace and prosperity’. An example of  the state defending their interest is through Executive Order 13810. Which was issued after North Korea’s September 2017 nuclear and intercontinental ballistic missile tests. Additionally, Constructivists aim to define relationships between states on an identity level. As states' identities change, this can influence the state's interests. The Biden administration has not been able to clearly establish what the current relationship between North Korea and the United States, after the Trump administration.  Secretary of State Blinken said on ABC News "We are waiting to see if Pyongyang actually wants to engage… The ball is in their court.” For a little over a year North Korea has been silent. Which has been hard to define what the interstate relationship will look like for the reminder of Biden's term. Vox news Alex Ward recalls that “One potential reason is that the North Korean regime isn’t a Biden fan” due to the fact that Biden had previously “ trashed his personal diplomacy with Trump, which may have cooled any ideas in Pyongyang about interacting with the US right now.” 

Another aspect of constructivism is the belief that interest and identities are strongly linked and those identities are shaped by interactions with other states. Alexander Wendt (1995) explains in Constructing International Politics that “500 British nuclear weapons are less threatening to the United States than five North Korean nuclear weapons.” Wendt is suggesting that without giving social context to this situation that the United Kingdom would pose a far more imminent threat to the United States due to their geographic location, as well as their greater volume of hard military power, and abundance of nuclear weapons. However, when social context is factored in, actors were aware of the non-threatening and secure nature of the nuclear weapons. Backed by years of alliance and prosperity between the United States and the United Kingdom it further demonstrates that Constructivists go beyond the material reality by including the effect of ideas and beliefs on world politics. 

Lastly, constructivism focuses on the reliances of social and international norms to prevent state action. An example of a social norm relating to the case study of North Korea is Resolution 2371 passed by the United Nation Security Council, after the two ICBM tests in North Korea. Essentially setting a global social norm e prohibiting the  purchase of North Korea’s main exports such as iron, coal, lead, and seafood. This constrained the states ability to further their technology as the country struggled economically as the United States estimated that the Resolution would prevent $1 billion dollars each year in the countries revenue. The United States then continued to follow the social norm of reprimanding North Korea for missile testing through the North Korea Sanctions and Policy Enhancement Act of 2016. 

In conclusion, constructivism can be viewed as an approach to international politics. Its backbone of the identity principle rather than dominance, allows for constructivists to view change of a state's interests over an extended period of time. Which is currently being awaited on by the Biden administration to see what North Korea Possible new approach to forgien affairs will be with the United States. Constructivists believe that observation of individual agency is a way to explain how the world is socially constructed.


Citations: 


The CatalystNorth Korea, USa, USA, Nuclear Weapons, Constructivism