International Area Studies Review
[ Article ]
International Area Studies Review - Vol. 28, No. 4, pp.361-382
ISSN: 2233-8659 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.69473/iasr.2025.28.4.361

Strategy Optimization of Peripheral Nuclear States: Hybrid Modality Deterrence in Confronting Regional and Extra-Regional Threats

Jeong-Ho Lee*
Research Professor, North Korea Archive Center, Research Institute of Korean Studies, Korea University, Republic of Korea

Correspondence to: *Email: :jeongho_lee24@korea.ac.kr

Abstract

Peripheral nuclear states face distinct strategic and technological constraints when compared to the established nuclear powers. North Korea illustrates how such states can simultaneously adopt different nuclear postures towards distinct adversaries, calibrated to their respective threat profiles, through what may be described as a Hybrid Modality Deterrence model. Within this model, two posture types can be identified. The first, Systematic Central-Escalation, is directed against South Korea and relies on centralized command and calibrated escalation, including the option of first-use, to compensate for conventional inferiority. The second, Limited Retaliatory Response, is employed against the United States, whereby Pyongyang leverages Guam as a strategic hostage in the absence of reliable mainland strike capability. Taken together, these postures constitute a flexible and adaptive deterrent framework that may also provide useful insights for analyzing the nuclear behavior of other peripheral states.

Keywords:

North Korea’s nuclear strategy, Asymmetric deterrence theory, Hybrid modality deterrence, Systematic central-escalation, Limited retaliatory response

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to express sincere gratitude to the editor-in-chief for facilitating a smooth publication process and to the anonymous reviewers whose constructive feedback greatly enriched this research. In line with the highest ethical standards, the author declares that this article makes minimal use of empirical data from the author’s PhD thesis submitted to King’s College London. The author affirms that all research ideas, theoretical development, data collection, analysis, and interpretation presented in this article are entirely original. The author also acknowledges the use of the generative AI tool ChatGPT (OpenAI, GPT-5) solely for refining English expressions.

AI Acknowledgment

Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies were not used in any way to prepare, write, or complete essential authoring tasks in this manuscript.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

  • Alexander, B., & Millar, A. (2005). Tactical nuclear weapons: Emergent threats in an evolving security environment. Potomac Books.
  • Arreguín-Toft, I. (2001). How the weak win wars: A theory of asymmetric conflict. International Security, 26(1), 93–128. [https://doi.org/10.1162/016228801753212868]
  • Baliga, S., & Sjöström, T. (2008). Strategic ambiguity and arms proliferation. Journal of Political Economy, 116(6), 1023–1057. [https://doi.org/10.1086/595016]
  • Beres, L. R. (2005). Israel and Samson: Biblical lessons for Israeli strategy in the nuclear age. Israel Affairs, 11(3), 491–503. [https://doi.org/10.1080/13537120500122545]
  • Cho, Y. N. (2022, September 9). Jungguk Sijinping Sig-ui Jeongchi Byeonhwa Bunseok-gwa—“Gwollyeok Jipjunghyeong” Gwonwijuui-ui Deungjang [Analysis of political changes during Xi Jinping’s era in China—Emergence of ‘Concentrated Power’ authoritarianism]. Gukje Jiyuk Yeongu, 32(2), 41–69. [https://doi.org/10.56115/RIAS.2023.06.32.2.41]
  • Choson Sinbo. (2022, September 9). Choego Inminhoeui je 14gi je 7cha Hoeui-eseo Hasin Kim Jong Un Wonsunim-ui Sijeong Yeonseol [Kim Jong Un’s policy speech at the 14th supreme people’s assembly 7th session]. Choson Sinbo. https://chosonsinbo.com/2022/09/09-81/
  • Constant, J. N. (1981). Fundamentals of strategic weapons: Offense and defense systems. Springer Science & Business Media. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-0649-6]
  • Defense Intelligence Agency. (2021). North Korea military power 61. https://www.dia.mil/Portals/110/Documents/News/North_Korea_Military_Power.pdf
  • Frasca Caccia, A. (2021). The twofold meaning of brinkmanship: Explaining strategic ambiguity in Russia’s nuclear policy. International and Political Studies, 34. [https://doi.org/10.18524/2707-5206.2021.34.229976]
  • Goldberg, G. (2006). The growing militarization of the Israeli political system. Israel Affairs, 12(3), 377–394. [https://doi.org/10.1080/13537120600744594]
  • Ha, Y. S. (1978). Nuclearization of small states and world order: The case of Korea. Asian Survey, 18(11), 1134–1151. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2643297]
  • Haider, M. (2015, March 9). Test launch of Shaheen-III ballistic missile successful: ISPR. Dawn. https://www.dawn.com/news/1168421
  • Helen, R., Stambaugh, A., Bae, G., & Knight, M. (2025, January 6). Blinken warns Russia is close to sharing advanced satellite technology with North Korea. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/01/06/asia/blinken-russia-satellite-technology-north-korea-intl-hnk/index.html
  • Kamath, P. (2011). Make no first use of nuclear weapons: The first step towards global nuclear disarmament. IUP Journal of International Relations, 5(1), 7–17.
  • Karasova, T., & Khlebnikova, L. (2024). The day after: Israel’s approaches to the military operation in Gaza. Pathways to Peace and Security, 1(66), 46–68. [https://doi.org/10.20542/2307-1494-2024-1-46-68]
  • KCNA. (2013, April 1). Law on consolidating position of nuclear weapons state adopted. http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2013/201304/news01/20130401-25ee.html
  • KCNA. (2022, September 9). Joseonminjujuuiinmingonghwagug choegoinminhoeui beoblyeong [Law on DPRK’s policy on nuclear forces promulgated]. http://www.kcna.co.jp/calendar/2022/09/09-09/2022-0909-002.html
  • Khan, I. (2007). Pakistan’s post September 11 2001 Afghan policy shift: Impact on Pak—India—Afghan geopolitics. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 42(5), 461–475. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0021909607081127]
  • Kim, H. J. (2017). Bukhan jeonlyaggun “hwaseong-12 4ballo gwam powisagyeog geomto” [North Korea’s strategic force ‘considering siege firing Guam with four Hwasong-12s’]. VOA. https://www.voakorea.com/a/3979707.html
  • Kim, S. S., & Cohen, M. D. (2017). North Korea and nuclear weapons: Entering the new era of deterrence. Georgetown University Press.
  • Kristensen, H. M., & Norris, R. S. (2014). Israeli nuclear weapons, 2014. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 70(6), 97–115. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340214555409]
  • Kristensen, H. M., & Norris, R. S. (2018). North Korean nuclear capabilities, 2018. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 74(1), 41–51. [https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2017.1413062]
  • Kwok, M. I. (2016, July 1). Buk maeche, gwam migungiji musudan misail gonggyeog yeongsang gonggae [North Korean media releases video of Musudan missile attacking US bases in Guam]. Yonhap. https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20160701199200014
  • Lee, C., & Kim, S. (2017, August 9). (4th LD) N. Korea threatens missile strike near Guam, warns of all-out war. Yonhap News Agency. https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20170809001054315
  • Lee, J. H. (2023). North Korea’s nuclear strategy pre-and-post-2016: Pyongyang’s evolving nuclear posture and its motivation for strategy transition [Doctoral dissertation]. King’s College London.
  • Lee, J. H. (2024). North Korea’s evolving perception of China: From Kim Jong il to Kim Jong un and the evolution of Pyongyang’s nuclear strategy. Korea Observer—Institute of Korean Studies, 55(2), 191–218. [https://doi.org/10.29152/KOIKS.2024.55.2.191]
  • Lee, J. H. (2025). The Byungjin (dual progression) and the logic of authoritarian survival: Kim Jong Un’s pursuit of legitimacy through nuclear prowess. Journal of International and Area Studies, 32(1), 109–131. [https://doi.org/10.23071/jias.2025.32.1.109]
  • Levy, Y. (2020). Israel: A politically monitored military in a militarized society. In W. R. Thompson & H. B. Nassif (Eds.), Oxford research encyclopedia of politics. Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1895]
  • Mack, A. (1975). Why big nations lose small wars: The politics of asymmetric conflict. World Politics, 27(2), 175–200. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2009880]
  • Narang, V. (2015). Nuclear strategies of emerging nuclear powers: North Korea and Iran. Washington Quarterly, 38(1), 73–91. [https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2015.1038175]
  • Office of the President. (2023, July 18). US-ROK joint press release on nuclear consultative group. Office of the President of the ROK. https://eng.president.go.kr/briefing/wvKplxPk
  • Oh, B. R. (2016). Bungnamgwangyewa Haekmunje [North–South relations and the nuclear issue]. Pyongyang Publishing House.
  • Paritzky, E. J. (2003). Removing opacity: Putting Israel’s nuclear capability under the LAMP. International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, 16(3), 389–408. [https://doi.org/10.1080/713830444]
  • Preston, T. (1997). ‘From lambs to lions’: Nuclear proliferation’s grand reshuffling of interstate security relationships. Cooperation and Conflict, 32(1), 79–117. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836797032001003]
  • Schelling, T. C. (1960). The strategy of conflict. Harvard University Press.
  • Schelling, T. C. (1966). Arms and influence. Yale University Press. [https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt5vm52s]
  • Sunawar, L. (2015). Pakistan as a frontline state in the war against terrorism: Cost and benefit analysis. Political Studies, 22, 43–62.
  • United States Institute of Peace (USIP). (2023). Timeline of Iran-Saudi relations. The Iran Primer. https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2016/jan/06/timeline-iran-saudi-relations
  • Vahdat, A. (2024). Iran’s supreme leader hints at retaliation after missile strike. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/iran-israel-missile-strike-khamenei-2bce5479abfdac5fd953d5547d04941c