Aims to uncover the inherent logic of the politics of the Korean peninsula. The authors look at the implications of a nuclear North Korea for East Asia and US homeland security, assessing historical US policy, and provide a framework for constructive policy that should be followed by the United States, Japan, and South Korea.

Introduction: The Debate over North Korea Victor Cha: Weak but Still Threatening David Kang: Threatening, but Deterrence Works Response: Why we must pursue "hawk engagement" (Cha) Response: Why are we so afraid of engagement? (Kang) Crisis Redux: The 2003 Nuclear Crisis Beyond Hyperbole, Toward a Strategy

This timely and important book is free of much of the hyperbole that has fettered a more concise course of action for dealing with North Korea. The book not only fills the current scholarly and policy gap with a clear-cut analysis of the policy challenges facing the United States and its allies, but also offers a thorough and provocative assessment for what policies to pursue. Korea Times [Nuclear North Korea] aims to shed fresh light on two of our biggest areas of ignorance: what motivates Pyongyang's extreme hostility to the outside world, and how best to part it from its claimed nuclear 'deterrent'... Msssrs Cha and Kang debate tough versus tender engagement in alternating chapters. Economist Nuclear North Korea provides a penetrating analysis of what is probably the world's most dangerous trouble spot. -- Gordon G. Chang Asian Review of Books Victor Cha and David Kang have joined forces to bring us a remarkable and sound presentation of two different strategies on how to deal with a nuclear North Korea. One of the most valuable aspects of their book lies in its composition- a running dialogue and critique of each other's strategy, presented in alternating chapters and culminating in a combined effort in the last two chapters of the book. The refreshing and honest internal evaluation that accompanies solid academic writing makes this work stand out. -- Charles L. Pritchard Survival While both authors believe that engagement represents the only rational policy for the United States, they arrive at this conclusion along very different paths. In individually authored alternating chapters Cha and Kang offer differing assessments of the threat posed by the DPRK and the extent to which Pyongyang can be induced to join respectable international society. In the process, they explicitly take issue with each other and engage in something of a public debate on the merits, requirements, and prospects of engagement. -- Robert M. Hathaway World Policy Journal [T]his book is required reading for anyone who wants a deeper appreciation of what is surely one of the most pressing issues in the post-September 11 world. -- Nicholas Khoo International Affairs It is a slow and thoughtful read, navigating past the existing U.S. policymaking, the current media hyperboles, and the politically motivated punditry. -- Bill Drucker Korean Quarterly Their book is important. Dealing with North Korea will be one of the central challenges for the U.S. in the coming years. -- Nicholas Kristof New York Review of Books Victor D. Cha and David C. Kang take a step away from emotion-laden debates about North Korea to offer a cool-headed, reasoned, and rational debate on the nature of the North Korean threat and the best policies for dealing with it. Journal of Asian Studies Cha and Kang wrestle with that policy context in their crisp, smart book. -- Michael O'Hanlon Chronicle of Higher Education This book is good and extraordinary. It is a delight to read. -- Ruediger Frank Pacific Affairs

Coming to the issues from different perspectives, the authors together have written an essential work of clear-eyed reflection and authoritative analysis. They refute a number of misconceptions and challenge faulty thinking that surrounds the discussion of North Korea, most important, the idea that North Korea is an irrational nation. Cha and Kang contend that however provocative, even deplorable, the North's behavior may at times be, it is not incomprehensible or incoherent.