Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Applying Game Theory to Better Understand Will or Will Not, Did or Did Not Sanctions Work
to Change North Korea Policy
Ara Rosenhsylop
Independent Research GT
May 22, 2018
Abstract
Game theory is the study of players interacting with each other and making decisions.
Game theory can be applied to geopolitical situations to understand why nations make decisions
and can be used to predict future decisions. This reseach focused on modeling the decisions that
the U.S., North Korea, and China make in response to snother nation's decisions. The research
was a collection of meta-analysis and interviews with experts in the field. The research found
that properly implemented sanctions targeting the leadership will eventually work. This
conclusion was backed up by North Korea's recent willingness to come to the negotiating table
Introduction
Game theory is used in several academic fields including economics, social science,
political science, and geopolitics. One of the most tense and threatening geopolitical situations in
the world today is North Korea’s determination to continue its illegal nuclear weapons program.
The current U.S. and U.N. strategy to curb North Korea's nuclear weapons program is to instill
increasingly stringent sanctions on North Korea and to continue joint military exercises between
U.S. and South Korean forces, but these attempts have resulted in inadequate policy change from
Pyongyang. Tension between the U.S. and North Korea dramatically increased throughout 2017
due to increased rhetoric and saber rattling from both governments. The tension between the two
nations subsided in December and early January after peace talks between North and South
Korea resulted in North Korean inclusion in the 2018 Pyeongchang Olympics. “China provides
North Korea with most of its food and energy supplies and accounts for more than 90 percent of
North Korea’s total trade volume” (Eleanor, Albert) causing many experts and the White House
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 2
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
to believe that China’s influence is the only way to curb North Korea’s nuclear weapons
program.
Game theory is used to model how different agents (players) will interact with each other
in a strategic situation. Historically most sanctions have failed to meet their stated goals, usually
the threat of sanctions are enough to enforce international law. Most of the time the party
targeted with sanctions will either make the desired change in response to a threat of sanctions,
make changes within a couple of years after sanctions are implemented, or never submit to the
demands of the sender country. Occasionally heavy, long term sanctions that last a decade or
more can result in behavioral change from a regime, most notably the agreement between Iran
and the U.S. and its allies to eliminate Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for economic
assistance to rebuild their economy after almost a decade of crippling economic sanctions. Game
theory can be used to model the effectiveness of each possible decision each player can make,
and how well that decision will impact other players. If this model is used, then each country will
have a better understanding of what other countries most effective decisions are, and how best
that player can maximize the payoff and minimize the cost of different strategies.
Review of Literature
collective decision-making”. Game theory can also be defined as the “formal study of decision-
making where several players must make choices that potentially affect the interests of the other
players” (Turocy, Theodore L., and Bernhard von Stengel). Game theory essentially is studying
the interactions between two or more players that make rational strategic decisions that impact
the other players. Chiaka Drakes wrote a doctoral research paper about mathematical models and
defined it as a “process starting with the creation of a mathematical framework to describe a real-
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 3
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
world problem, followed by the solution and refinement of the mathematical problem and a
return to the real-world problem in order to explain or make predictions” (Drakes 194). Game
theory is used to model how rational agents act in the world when they are in a continuous state
of interaction (Farooqui and Niazi), and this is very clear when looking at how nations use
economic sanctions as a tool of statecraft. Ahmadian, Peyman, and Emad Rabiei use game
theory to develop a mathematical model in order to create a more effective strategy for countries
attempting to use long term economic sanctions to achieve policy change in a target country. It is
important in game theory to understand what each players goals and payoffs are.
The first, and most ambiguous player is “China [which] has regarded stability on the
Korean peninsula as its primary interest. Its support for North Korea ensures a buffer between
China and the democratic South, which is home to around twenty-nine thousand U.S. troops and
marines. “While the Chinese certainly would prefer that North Korea not have nuclear weapons,
their greatest fear is regime collapse,” writes Jennifer Lind, a professor at Dartmouth University”
(Eleanor). China’s policy to keep North Korea on life support and at the same time support U.S.
efforts to denuclearize North Korea can seem counterproductive. The U.S. on the other hand has
three primary goals. The first goal is to keep the peace on the Korean peninsula such that “the
United States wants to assure that, whatever happens internally in North Korea, the artillery
Pyongyang has emplaced within range of Seoul is never fired in anger” (Sigal). The second goal
is that “it wants to stop North Korea from acquiring nuclear arms” (Sigal). Third is that “United
States support for Korean reunification is firm, reflecting the strong U.S. interest in seeing a
united Korea that is free, democratic and led by [South Korea]” (Rever). Overall U.S. interests
focus primarily on keeping the peace and reunification. Kim Jong-Un’s belief that nuclear
weapons are essential to his regime’s survival has placed him in direct odds with one of his only
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 4
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
allies and primary foe. “Recent informal track two level talks with North Korean officials in
Europe suggest that Pyongyang is single-mindedly focused on continuing with its missile and
reunification, but under the North Korean regime rather than a South Korean government. One
Sanctions are just one area of foreign policy that can be modeled using game theory, and
it is an easy one to look at because there are usually only two players each with a limited number
of strategies. In the past economic sanctions have infrequently resulted in the desired policy
change, but that does not mean there was no benefit from the economic sanctions. Benefits from
economic sanctions include taking the moral high ground, punishing the target nation, changing
the target nation’s policy, or signaling that the sender nation is willing to take action. Two main
reasons why the success rate of economic sanctions is so low is because threats of economic
sanctions are usually enough to keep nations in compliance with international laws, and this is
rarely counted as a successful sanction attempt. The other reason for the low success rate is that
moral high-ground and punishment are not usually considered successes if the target nation does
not make the desired policy change (Lacy and Niou). Most successful sanction attempts happen
within one or two years of implementation due to the target nation underestimating the sanctions
impact or to the target nation not believing that the sender nation would act on their threat of
sanctions. Occasionally long term sanctions can affect desired policy such as when “Iran and six
world powers known as the P5+1 (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and
the United States) reached a historic nuclear deal on July 14, 2015 that limited Iran's nuclear
program and enhanced monitoring in exchange for relief from nuclear sanctions” (Davenport,
Kelsey). This happened after almost a decade of crippling economic sanctions led many young
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 5
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
Iranian citizens to protest their government’s policy. Sanctions on North Korea “have exacted a
heavy toll [on] the North Korean economy, experts say their effectiveness has been undermined
by the failure of some countries to enforce them and the willingness of some companies to flout
them” (Council on Foreign Relations). North Korea’s ability to evade sanctions has been a large
factor in the ineffectiveness sanctions have had on curbing the North Korean nuclear program.
The U.S. is trying to solve this issue by “imposing its largest package of sanctions to pressure
North Korea to give up its nuclear and missile programs” (Holland 1). The sanctions not only
target more aspects of the North Korean economy, but also specific Chinese firms that continue
to do business with North Korea. Sanctions are not the only strategy open to the U.S. and a much
The Trump administration has repeatedly brought up the possibility of some sort of
military action focusing on the idea of “A "bloody nose" attack [which] refers to a limited
military strike against the North's nuclear weapons sites that allegedly would not result in large-
scale death and destruction” (Al Jazeera). Many experts agree that military action from either
side will be met with extreme retaliation and expand a small scale action into a major conflict
almost instantly. One expert told Time magazine that “Military options against the North’s
nuclear arsenal suffer from two problems: they might not succeed, and Pyongyang has
devastating retaliatory options” he pointed out that Kim Jong-Un would not sit back and let his
country get bombed. He would respond by hitting targets in the south forcing U.S. forces to also
target North Korean retaliatory capability, and thus widening the war before it begins
Monterey, in December wrote a hypothetical scenario for how a possible war with North Korea
could start and the catastrophic damage that would ensue. He discussed how North Korea’s
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 6
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
missiles could inflict devastating damage to South Korea, Japan, and even the U.S. Most experts
are in overwhelming agreement that a military action will result in widespread death and
destruction. There are alternatives to fighting North Korea one of which is going through China.
China has almost an exclusive relationship with North Korea and represents more than
90% of North Korea’s trade and is essentially North Korea’s only ally. Dr. Victor Cha is a
leading expert on North Korea and was a director for Asian affairs at the National Security
Council. He lays out a three-step plan to pressure China into denuclearizing North Korea, “First,
Washington should make clear to Beijing that it will not re-enter a negotiation as long as China
insists on maintaining at least 80% to 85% of North Korea’s trade. Second, the U.S. should get
China to step up and pay directly for the denuclearization of North Korea… Lastly, China must
clamp down on domestic Chinese entities doing business with North Korea.” (Cha). The U.S. has
started to target foreign firms trading with North Korea by placing “new sanctions on ten
Russian and Chinese firms as well as six individuals that it accuses of aiding North Korea’s
nuclear weapons program, pilling more pressure on the Kim Jong Un regime” (Campbell).
Cooperating with China is another way to facilitate China’s motivation to remove North Korea’s
nuclear weapons program. The most effective “step that would truly demonstrate mutual resolve
against the Kim regime’s pursuit of a nuclear arsenal is for the United States and China [would
be] to cooperatively enforce sanctions against North Korea through a combined maritime
interdiction operation” (Rauch). This would help to reduce North Korea’s ability to illegally
Negotiations can also be conducted directly with Kim Jong-Un. In early April “President
Donald Trump said on Monday he planned to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong Un next
month or in early June and hoped the discussions would ultimately lead to an end of the North’s
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 7
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
nuclear weapons program” (Holland 2). This is an unprecedented move as Kim Jong-Un has not
spoken with any U.S. presidents during his time as leader. A North Korean allied news sources
discussed the potential upcoming meeting, and “The column painted the best outcome in terms of
a “win-win strategy”—not a usual North Korean formulation. The column did not rule out
having denuclearization on the agenda, though it used a tortured construction to make the point,
noting that it would be “extremely foolish” for the President to think that in the talks he could
seek “only” Korea’s denuclearization” (Carlin). A major reason for the lack of negotiation
between the U.S. and North Korea has been the extreme mistrust they have for each other to
uphold deals. In 1994 an agreement was reached between the North Korean government and the
U.S., “the agreement targeted many of the issues that the two sides continue to grapple with – but
it soon ran into problems, and ultimately broke down in 2002” (Ryan). The article discusses how
U.S. failure to uphold parts of the deal and North Korea’s secret development of nuclear
weapons caused the deal to fall apart. This led to deep mistrust from either side to stick to any
further deals that might come from negotiations. A proposal from “China has called on the U.S.
to halt them to start talks with North Korea, part of its “suspension-for-suspension” proposal that
would also require Kim to freeze nuclear and missile tests. The U.S. rejects this outright”
(Tweed). The primary reason for the rejection is that the U.S. does not equate the legal military
exercises it conducts with its allies and North Korea’s illegal nuclear weapons program. The
policy the Obama administration practiced throughout his term in office is known as strategic
patience.
threats rather than offering a new direction and bolsters his belief that acting deliberately now
could stave off worse threats later” (Ratnam). This was coupled with “efforts to cut Pyongyang’s
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 8
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
access to hard currency and smuggled weapons technology. The sanctions expand the list of
banned arms and dual-use goods, and they require states to inspect all cargo transiting their
territory to or from North Korea by sea, air or land” (Wall Street Journal). U.S. policy was also
updated to “mandate that all ships from North Korea be inspected. Previously, only ships
suspected of carrying sanctioned goods were searched” (Putz). This will ideally reduce the
number of smuggled goods reaching North Korea and increase the effectiveness of already
extreme sanctions. One of the issues with “strategic patience [is that it] tends to support the
status quo rather than encourage change...The U.S. should launch a two-track approach, with one
track focusing on regional security and the other on North Korean issues” (Goodby). Strategic
patience was not supported by effective sanctions, and ultimately made very little progress at
Data Collection
Rationale
The research question: “How can game theory be used to analyze how different players
will react to implementing sanctions?”, and the hypothesis: Game theory can be used to predict
how different players react to different strategies other players use. The data collection
comparing how effective sanctions are according to game theory and how effective sanctions
have been in real world scenarios. The data will be a meta-analysis of various sources that
discuss sanctions in the context of game theory and of real world sanctions. The data collection
involved using sources to answer different questions regarding the effectiveness of sanctions and
other related foreign policy a better idea can be formed about how game theory and foreign
Do sanctions YES, heavy, NO, YES, they do NO, when the YES, but not
work? targeted, autocratic work to bring two nations very often
enforced, and regimes can the target have reached and not
long lasting shrug off nation to the the point of really when
sanctions will most negotiating implementing dealing with
eventually sanctions table but do sanctions, the North Korea
bring someone and shift the not usually chances of the
to the burden to result in all of sanctions
negotiating the the desired having any
table. population. policy change. effect is low.
Applicable to YES, the YES, YES, despite NO, the article YES,
North Korea? entire thing is Provides a taking about specifically sanctioning
about the most possible Russia many discusses how North Korea
recent alternative key points nations get to is still
sanctions on to the also apply to the important
North Korea unsuccessfu China and implementatio because it
l sanctions. North Korea n of sanctions, punishes bad
and not where behavior,
to go after and slows
sanctions have the progress
been North Korea
implemented. makes in
technology
Will YES, if you NO, the YES, targeted YES, but only YES, but
sanctions follow the math does sanctions will if the target only as a
work at all? four pillars to not support work on those country tried way to
successful effective things. to call a bluff backup
sanctions it sanctions that was in threats.
will work that changes reality no a
eventually. the targets bluff.
behavior.
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 11
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
Analysis
The focus of this research was finding various experts views on economic sanctions, and
the reasons they hold these views. The two sources that focused on the math and game theory
aspect of sanctions agreed that historically and mathematically sanctions are not an effective way
of curtailing a regime’s behavior. The two sources produced by foreign policy experts agree that
sanctions do work but are only effective when implemented to impact specific aspects of the
target nation's economy, and when they are implemented harshly and over time to allow the
sanctions to affect the target country's behavior. Dean Lacy and Emerson M. S. Niou explained
why historical examples of failed sanctions significantly outnumber the instances of sanctions
having the intended effect on the target nation. They explained that the threat of sanctions are
very effective at deterring most nations from violating international laws. They also explain that
nations continue meaningless sanctions to score political points at home, to prevent a dangerous
precedent of hostile rogue states from establishing, and to put power behind future threats of
sanctions. The experts in the Wilson Center interview discussed smart sanctions (targeting
specific aspects of the target nation's economy or individuals) and explained how smart sanctions
are able to maximize the effects of the sanctions on the people responsible for behavioral change
and reduce the effect on people unrelated to the issue that would normally be affected under
The most surprising part about the information gathered is the divide between game
theory experts and foreign policy experts on whether sanctions are an effective tool to curb
unwanted behavior from other countries. One issue that might contribute to the divide is that the
sources focused on game theory were written before the effectiveness of smart sanctions was
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 12
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
established, such as the sanctions against Iran and Russia that have changed how sanctions are
used by the U.S. The results from the data show that game theory can and is applied to deciding
how nations will respond to international laws, and how the international community will
respond to nations violating these laws. The situation in North Korea is beyond the point of
deciding if sanctions will be used but is perfect for deciding how sanctions will be used. The
article written, detailing the most recent North Korea sanctions is supported by the foreign policy
experts from the Wilson Center that stress the importance of smart sanctions to reduce the
the data collection process would be the addition of more interviews with experts in the field that
are capable of answering specific questions so that the researcher can analyze a more specific
data set.
The ways in which game theory models are used in the decision-making process and
using mathematical models to make optimal policy decisions are invaluable to the people that
make foreign policy decisions. The take away information is that the sanctions on North Korea
are very unlikely to change North Korea’s overall behavior and continued nuclear development,
but smart sanctions targeted at specific aspects of North Korea’s economy, Chinese business, and
closing loopholes could force North Korea to the negotiating table or reduce the amount of
Conclusions
Negotiations with North Korea have for a long time been nearly impossible. The U.S. has
leadership believes that its nuclear weapons are critical to its survival. The only way negotiations
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 13
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
can happen is if the U.S. lowered the requirements for having negotiations, or North Korea
Rabiei, E., & Ahmadian, P. (2014). The Effects of Economic Sanctions on Target Countries over
Time through Mathematical Models and Decision Making. The Open Access Journal of
Resistive Economics (OAJRE), 2(4), 3rd ser., 53-63. Retrieved April 12, 1018, from
http://oajre.ir/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/31.pdf
Campbell, K. (2017, March 25). Trump's New Wrinkle Brings Promise and Risk. Retrieved
April 16, 2018, from https://www.scribd.com/article/342952742/Trump-S-New-Wrinkle-
Brings-Promise-And-Risk
Campbell, C. (2017, August 23). North Korea: U.S. Sanctions Chinese and Russian Firms.
Retrieved April 16, 2018, from http://time.com/4911882/north-korea-u-s-secondary-
sanctions-china-russia-treasury/
Cha, V. (2017, March 25). China Needs to Get Serious. Retrieved April 16, 2018, from
https://www.scribd.com/article/342952717/China-Needs-To-Get-Serious
Davenport, K. (2018, April 24). Fact Sheets & Briefs. Retrieved March 27, 2018, from
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheet/Timeline-of-Nuclear-Diplomacy-With-Iran
Leon, S. (2011, December 19). DPRK Briefing Book : U.S. Interests And Goals On The Korean
Peninsula. Retrieved April 15, 2018, from
https://nautilus.org/publications/books/dprkbb/uspolicy/dprk-briefing-book-u-s-interests-
and-goals-on-the-korean-peninsula/
Drakes, C. I. (2014). Mathematical modelling from novice to expert. Ottawa: Library and
Archives Canada = Bibliothèque et Archives Canada.
Albert, E. (2018, March 28). Understanding the China-North Korea Relationship. Retrieved
April 14, 2018, from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-north-korea-relationship
Niazi, M. A., & Farooqui, A. D. (2016, April 13). Game theory models for communication
between agents: A review. Retrieved April 9, 2018, from
https://www.bing.com/cr?IG=E7A597A161CC4CAD88063F623BF5EE59&CID=3F118
AE246AB69DC112C810147046820&rd=1&h=lImM6MmozwTehDbnuP_UBcUBUYk
NZ7xLbpgp3nll0qQ&v=1&r=https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.01636&p=DevEx.LB.1,5501.1
“Game Theory / Formal Models.” A Political Science Guide, User’s Guide to Political Science, 3
Aug. 2017, politicalscienceguide.com/research/methods-and-analysis/game-theory-and-
modelling/.
Goodby, James E., and Donald Gross. Strategic Patience Has Become Strategic Passivity.
Brookings, 28 July 2016, www.brookings.edu/articles/strategic-patience-has-become-
strategic-passivity/.
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 15
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
Haye, Robert M. “Cooperative Game Theoretic Models for Decision-Making in Contexts of
Library Cooperation.” Vol. 51, no. 3, 2003, pp. 441–461.,
pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c93f/ed9e405588cd689e63bc96c7a668207bd8ed.pdf.
Department of Information Studies.
Hill, Chris. “Avoiding the Temptation to Do Nothing.” North Korea: 6 Experts on How We Can
Solve the Problem, Time, time.com/north-korea-opinion/.
Holland 2, Steve. “Trump Says Will Meet with North Korean Leader in May or Early
June.”Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 9 Apr. 2018, www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-
missiles-usa-trump/trump-says-will-meet-with-north-korean-leader-in-may-or-early-june-
idUSKBN1HG2GN.
Holland 1, Steve. “U.S. Imposes More North Korea Sanctions, Trump Warns of 'Phase
Two'.”Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 24 Feb. 2018, www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-
missiles-trump/u-s-imposes-more-north-korea-sanctions-trump-warns-of-phase-two-
idUSKCN1G71RD.
"Iran nuclear deal." Nature, vol. 503, no. 7477, 2013, p. 442. Science In Context,
http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A354088091/GPS?u=glen20233&sid=GPS&xid=82c
2e17d. Accessed 3 Apr. 2018.
Lacy, D., & Niou, E. M. (2004). A Theory of Economic Sanctions and Issue Linkage: The Roles
of Preferences, Information, and Threats. The Journal of Politics, 66(1), 25-42.
doi:10.1046/j.1468-2508.2004.00140.x
Lee, Jongsoo, et al. “Reading North Korean Intent: The Importance of What Is and Is Not Said |
38 North: Informed Analysis of North Korea.” 38 North, 3 Apr. 2018,
www.38north.org/2018/04/rcarlin040318/.
Lewis, Jeffrey. “Perspective | This Is How Nuclear War with North Korea Would Unfold.” The
Washington Post, WP Company, 8 Dec. 2017, www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/this-is-
how-nuclear-war-with-north-korea-would-unfold/2017/12/08/4e298a28-db07-11e7-a841-
2066faf731ef_story.html?utm_term=.2fd52d3df94c.
Nilsson-Wright, Dr John. “North Korea Crisis: What Does Kim Jong-Un Really Want?” BBC
News, BBC, 13 Aug. 2017, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40913650.
“North Korea's Sanctions Loophole.” The Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones & Company, 28 Feb.
2016, www.wsj.com/articles/north-koreas-sanctions-loophole-1456697024.
“North Korea: US Planning 'Bloody Nose' First Strike.” USA News | Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, 6
Feb. 2018, www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/02/north-korea-planning-bloody-nose-strike-
180206210238738.html.
APPLYING GAME THEORY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WILL OR Rosenhyslop 16
WILL NOT DID OR DID NOT SANCTIONS WORK TO CHANGE
NORTH KOREA POLICY
Putz, Catherine. “New Sanctions on North Korea Target Loopholes and Elites.” The Diplomat,
The Diplomat, 3 Mar. 2016, thediplomat.com/2016/03/new-sanctions-on-north-korea-
target-loopholes-and-elites/.
Ratnam, Gopal. “White House Unveils Call for 'Strategic Patience'.” Foreign Policy, Foreign
Policy, 6 Feb. 2015, foreignpolicy.com/2015/02/05/white-house-to-unveil-call-for-
strategic-patience-russia-ukraine-syria-iraq-china-asia/.
Revere, Evans J.R. “Korean Reunification and U.S. Interests: Preparing for One
Korea.”Brookings, Brookings, 10 May 2017, www.brookings.edu/on-the-record/korean-
reunification-and-u-s-interests-preparing-for-one-korea/
Rauch, Donald. “The US and Chinese Navies Have Already Fought Piracy Together - Now They
Can Rein in North Korea.” Foreign Policy, Foreign Policy, 5 Mar. 2018,
foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/01/the-chinese-navy-can-give-north-korean-sanctions-bite/.
Ryan, Maria. Why the US's 1994 Deal with North Korea Failed – and What Trump Can Learn
from It. The Conversation, 20 Apr. 2018, theconversation.com/why-the-uss-1994-deal-
with-north-korea-failed-and-what-trump-can-learn-from-it-80578.
Sherman, Wendy, and Evans Revere. “Why We’Ve Fallen Short and Why That’s No Longer an
Option .” North Korea: 6 Experts on How We Can Solve the Problem, Time,
time.com/north-korea-opinion/.
Treverton, Gregory F. “The Dangers of a Preemptive Strike.” North Korea: 6 Experts on How
We Can Solve the Problem, Time, time.com/north-korea-opinion/.
Turocy, Theodore L., and Bernhard von Stengel. “Game Theory.” CDAM Research Report LSE-
CDAM-2001-09, 8 Oct. 2001, pp. 1–34., Centre for Discrete and Applicable
Mathematics.
“US Slams China with Sanctions in North Korea Crackdown.” South China Morning Post, South
China Morning Post, 25 Jan. 2018,
www.scmp.com/news/asia/diplomacy/article/2130446/us-slaps-china-sanctions-amid-
north-korea-nuclear-crackdown.
“What to Know About the Sanctions on North Korea.” Council on Foreign Relations, Council on
Foreign Relations, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-know-about-sanctions-north-korea.