The Role of Japan's Ballistic Missile Defense
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Political Science Department -- Theses, Dissertations, and Student Scholarship Political Science, Department of 5-2013 DETERRING THE DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA: THE ROLE OF JAPAN’S BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE Jonathan Trexel University of Nebraska-Lincoln Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/poliscitheses Part of the Asian Studies Commons, and the International Relations Commons Trexel, Jonathan, "DETERRING THE DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA: THE ROLE OF JAPAN’S BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE" (2013). Political Science Department -- Theses, Dissertations, and Student Scholarship. 28. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/poliscitheses/28 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Department -- Theses, Dissertations, and Student Scholarship by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. DETERRING THE DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA: THE ROLE OF JAPAN’S BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE by Jonathan Trexel A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Political Science Under the Supervision of Professor Ross Miller Lincoln, Nebraska May, 2013 DETERRING THE DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA: THE ROLE OF JAPAN’S BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE Jonathan Trexel, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2013 Advisor: Ross Miller This dissertation explores the role of Japan’s ballistic missile defense (BMD) program and its deterrent effect upon North Korean behavior. A mixed-methods approach is employed to analyze the topic. Empirical quantitative data included tabulated monthly cooperative-conflictual behavioral interaction between Japan and North Korea spanning a 22-year timeframe (1990-2011). In addition, a strategic profile developed from deterrence theory provided essential qualitative background to compliment the quantitative analysis. Japan’s BMD program was divided into four periods reflecting decision points or phases of program development. Results indicated varied BMD deterrence effectiveness, with two periods indicating Japan’s BMD program strengthened deterrence, one period indicating it undermined deterrence, and one period it had no effect. iii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Joe and Darlene Trexel. Neither one of them ever enrolled in a college or university, but my Mom always encouraged me to pursue higher education. When I was younger my Dad told me to strive to be a lifelong learner. Hopefully, completion of my dissertation reflects well on both of their expectations. Without a doubt, though, I still have a great deal to learn. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation would not have been possible without the support and direction of Dr. Ross Miller. Through many meetings, discussions, emails, phone calls, and edits spanning nearly two years, Dr. Miller shaped the course of the research and challenged me to improve or look at the material from other perspectives. He is not only wise and a very hard worker but also an excellent mentor. There were other UNL faculty, too, who were instrumental in helping me learn along the way, prepare me for conducting dissertation research, and actually writing and editing the manuscript. First, in addition to Dr. Miller, my dissertation committee included: Dr. Patrice McMahon and Dr. Nam Kyu Kim (Department of Political Science); and, Dr. Lloyd Ambrosius (Department of History). I am very grateful to their willingness to take on the task of serving on my committee, reviewing and editing the material, and sharing with me their insights, experiences, and expertise. Second, I wish to thank others with whom I took courses and from whom I learned a great deal, or faculty who reviewed my work and gave great advice, including: Dr. Kevin Smith; Dr. Bill Avery; Dr. John Comer; Dr. Elizabeth Theiss-Morse; Dr. David Forsythe; Dr. Jeff Spinner-Halev; Dr. David Rapkin; and, Dr. Jean Cahan. I am especially grateful to Dr. Theiss-Morse who offered me the graduate teaching assistantship for the entire time I either took classes or served as undergraduate advisor, and to Dr. Smith who was instrumental in helping me receive much-needed scholarships. I could not have started or continued doctoral work without them and I will always be grateful. I am grateful for my bosses and managers of Science Applications International Corporation, especially Mr. Mike McDermott, for allowing me to adjust my work hours v and get this done, and Mr. Jason Meyer, for his gracious support. To my government bosses, Mr. Mark Barnett and Mr. Pat Mckenna, I am deeply indebted and appreciative. The dataset was provided by Dr. Doug Bond and Virtual Research Associates, Inc.; Dr. Bond provided exceptional support and social science guidance in the development of the dataset and its application. I am also appreciative for the patient assistance of Matthew Morehouse and Robert Palmer for helping an old guy like me improve my statistical analysis skills, and for Helen Sexton for much needed administrative support over the years. Completing the dissertation properly could not have been done without the careful attention to detail and frequent guidance from Eva Bachman in Graduate Studies. Lastly, I wish to thank my family for their encouragement and willingness to tolerate my frustrations, absences from family events, and repeated demands for time alone to read, think, or type. To Juanita—my wife, friend, and marriage partner of nearly 30 years—I wish to express my deepest gratitude and thankfulness for her willingness to follow me down this educational path and her understanding these past several months. I also want to thank my kids—Mary, Rachel, Joshua, Johanna, Jim, and Nikki—for putting up with me, and carrying on without me when you needed to. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables and Figures……………………………………………...………..………vii Chapter One: Introduction…………………………………………......………………….1 Chapter Two: History……………………………………………………………………28 Chapter Three: Literature Review………………………………….……………………71 Chapter Four: Research Design……………………………………...…………………121 Chapter Five: Strategic Profile – Part I…………………………………………………157 Chapter Six: Strategic Profile – Part II…………………………………………………195 Chapter Seven: Quantitative Analysis……………………………….…………………247 Chapter Eight: Conclusions…………………………………………….………………302 Appendix 1: Methodology Historical Background.…………………...………..………334 Appendix 2: Integration of Missile Defense-Deterrence Theoretic Arguments………..336 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………...…….354 vii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Tables Table 1: Arguments……………………………………………………………………..118 Table 2: Summary of Missile Defense-Deterrence Arguments………………..……….128 Table 3: Positive/Cooperative North Korean Behavior toward Japan, January 1990—December 2011……………………………………………..….274 Table 4: Negative/Conflictual North Korean Behavior toward Japan, January 1990—December 2011…………………………………………..…….277 Table 5: Tests for Autocorrelation among Model Variables……………..…………….290 Table 6: R2 Values for all Models…………………………………………………..…..295 Table 7: Distributions of Data with BMD Terms by Time Period………………..……298 Table 8: Goldstein Conflictual-Cooperation Event Scale…………………...………….301 Table 9: Overview of Theoretic Arguments and BMD Periods…………………..……351 Figures Figure 1: North Korean Medium and Long-Range Missiles……………………..……….5 Figure 2: North Korean Ballistic Missile Ranges……………………………………...….7 Figure 3: Dataset Sample…………………………………………………………....….257 Figure 4: Japan’s BMD Program, J-NK Interaction, and other Key Events……............262 Figure 5: Traditional General Deterrence vs. Goldstein Scale……………………...….324 1 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION The threat from North Korea is daunting: there are large numbers of offensive ballistic missiles; possible possession of missile-capable nuclear weapons; and, a propensity for risky behavior such as export of nuclear and missile technology. In Northeast Asia, North Korea’s large stockpile of missiles can, in a matter of minutes, endanger military, civil, and economic targets in neighboring countries like Japan. But while North Korean possession of ballistic missiles provides it cover for a wide variety of coercive behavior short of war, Japanese possession of missile defenses could offset the North Korean ballistic missile advantage and, in part, deter North Korea’s coercive behavior. The key question, then, is Does Japan’s BMD deter North Korea’s behavior? Or, does Japan’s BMD undermine it? Are these deterrence effects seen in any specific periods of Japan’s BMD program? As a way to familiarize the reader with the research undertaken to address this question, this introductory chapter is outlined as follows. First, a brief review of the research findings will be presented. These findings are a short summary of those provided later in the dissertation. Second, a short section of background material is provided briefly describing the setting, including the nature of the North Korean threat as well as Japan’s BMD program. Third, theoretic ideas will be described along with key gaps. Fourth, the dissertation’s subsequent chapters will be summarized. Lastly, some closing thoughts will be providing as a segue to Chapter Two: History. General Findings The mixed-methods research and analysis explored the