On March 12, the U.S. Institute of Peace’s (USIP) Center for Conflict Management and the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs co-convened a closed briefing on the Seoul Nuclear Security Summit for senior diplomats of countries whose head of state will be participating in the summit. Ambassadors, Deputy Chiefs of Mission, and Heads of Political Section from over 30 embassies participated in the briefing.

March 15, 2012

On March 12, the U.S. Institute of Peace’s (USIP) Center for Conflict Management and the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs co-convened a closed briefing on the Seoul Nuclear Security Summit for senior diplomats of countries whose head of state will be participating in the summit. Ambassadors, Deputy Chiefs of Mission, and Heads of Political Section from over 30 embassies participated in the briefing. The summit will be the largest of its kind in the security field that focuses on international cooperative measures to protect nuclear materials and facilities from terrorist groups.

This closed briefing was the final activity of the USIP-initiated Seoul Nuclear Security Summit Study Group (SNS3G). Launched in fall 2010, SNS3G builds on the key findings of the USIP-facilitated Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, which was directed by Paul Hughes. USIP placed early emphasis on the need for comprehensive preparations for the Seoul Nuclear Security Summit at the Institute’s 4th U.S.-South Korea-Japan Trilateral Dialogue in Northeast Asia Track 1.5 conference, which was convened in Seoul in January 2011. SNS3G’s key objective has been to work with U.S. and South Korean officials and technical experts to help ensure that the March 26-27 summit in Seoul leads to concrete progress in improving nuclear security. Speakers included Matthew Bunn (Harvard University), Michelle Cann (Partnership for Global Security), Kelsey Davenport (Arms Control Association), and Abiodun Williams (USIP). The experts highlighted the need for and specific ways to bolster nuclear security and prevent nuclear terrorism. John Park (USIP), who directs the Institute’s Korea Working Group, moderated the session.

During March 20-22, USIP’s Academy will be launching a new course titled “China's Nuclear Posture, North Korea's Nuclear Challenge, and U.S. National Security” that explores nuclear security and other nuclear-related issues in Northeast Asia. For more information regarding registration, click here.


Related Publications

 70 Years After the Geneva Conference: Why is the Korean Peninsula No Closer to Peace?

70 Years After the Geneva Conference: Why is the Korean Peninsula No Closer to Peace?

Monday, July 22, 2024

July marks the anniversary of the 1953 armistice agreement that ended the Korean War and the 1954 Geneva Conference, convened to resolve the issues that the war could not. In the seven decades since, efforts to achieve peace on the Korean Peninsula have been limited and flawed. Today, the security situation in the region is arguably more precarious than ever, with a nuclear armed-North Korea and dysfunctional great power relations. Recent foreign policy shifts in North Korea do not augur well for peace in the near term. Thus, even moving the needle toward peace will likely require Washington to undertake bold initiatives.

Type: Question and Answer

Mediation, Negotiation & DialoguePeace Processes

Amid a Changing Global Order, NATO Looks East

Amid a Changing Global Order, NATO Looks East

Tuesday, April 23, 2024

As NATO celebrates its 75th anniversary this year, the Euro-Atlantic security alliance continues to deepen its engagement with Australia, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand, collectively known as the IP4. NATO has collaborated with these countries since the early 2000s, but Russia’s war against Ukraine, security challenges posed by China and renewed strategic competition have led to increased engagement. As the war in Ukraine grinds on and U.S.-China competition shows no sign of abating, the United States has much to gain from collaboration between its allies and partners in the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

It’s Time to Resolve the Korean War

It’s Time to Resolve the Korean War

Monday, April 1, 2024

The greatest challenge to peaceful coexistence between North Korea and the United States is the technical state of war between the two countries. The United States and the Soviet Union may have been at ideological loggerheads, used proxies in regional conflicts and come close to direct superpower blows — but they were not in a state of war. Resolution of the Korean War should be set as a stated U.S. policy objective. This is a necessary Step Zero on the road to peaceful coexistence with North Korea today and could reduce the risk of deliberate or accidental conflict, nuclear or otherwise.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

Report of the Expert Study Group on NATO and Indo-Pacific Partners

Report of the Expert Study Group on NATO and Indo-Pacific Partners

Monday, February 19, 2024

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and its four partner countries in the Indo-Pacific—Australia, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and New Zealand—have entered a period of increased engagement. This engagement is taking shape in the context of the war waged by the Russian Federation (Russia) against Ukraine, NATO’s growing awareness of the security challenges posed by the People’s Republic of China (China), and important structural changes in the international system, including the return of strategic competition between the United States and China and Russia. It is occurring not only in bilateral NATO-partner relations but also between NATO and these Indo-Pacific countries as a group.

Type: Report

Conflict Analysis & PreventionCivilian-Military RelationsGlobal PolicyMediation, Negotiation & Dialogue

View All Publications