{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015466015466015465, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006512006512006512, 'mean_word_length': 5.160401002506266, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Japanese Occupation of Borneo, 1941–1945

the role of theory in understanding US–North Korea relations. The study does a good job of taking the reader through the events from 1993 to 2007 and assessing the strengths and weaknesses of each theory in its ability to mitigate the security dilemma. A particularly important issue raised in this book is the use of a deterrence strategy for non-proliferation goals. If states build nuclear weapons for security reasons, deterrence threats will be counter-productive in convincing the target state to forgo nuclear weapons. A central question here is whether any of these theories provides policy guidance for leaders on either side to help reduce the tensions present in a security dilemma that might ultimately lead to solving the dispute. The question remains, however, whether North Korea was ever willing to give up its nuclear ambitions. Would there have been any possible actions that would have succeeded in convincing or coercing Pyongyang to relinquish its nuclear program? This remains a hotly debated topic, increasingly, but the evidence appears to indicate that North Korea has long been determined to acquire a nuclear weapon and there was little the United States or South Korea could have done to alter Pyongyang’s nuclear calculus. This book provides helpful theoretical grounding to think through the many issues present in this debate. There was one curious omission in the theoretical framework of the book. The author chose two strands of realism and constructivism through which to examine the dynamics of a security dilemma in US–North Korea relations. Why not include liberal internationalism? Institutions, non-proliferation regimes and international law are important elements of liberal internationalism that are part of the discussion. US and South Korean officials worked hard to embed North Korea in non-proliferation agreements and regimes, including the NPT and bilateral North–South agreements along with multilateral dialogue through the Six Party Talks. The inclusion of liberal internationalism could have provided fertile ground for analysis. Tan’s analysis and use of these theories to examine US–North Korea relations and the nuclear weapons problem is interesting and well argued. This is a valuable study and a helpful addition to the literature. Tan’s book is highly recommended for those who study North Korea and seek a solid application of theory to these issues.