In this case, assumed North Korean aggression has arisen in response to economic sanctions placed on the country by the United States and other South Korean allies. This leads to the second step of the conflict, the identification of the sources and causes of the conflict, which are the political and economic disparity that exists between the two Koreas and can be traced back to the middle of the twentieth century and the spread of Communism -- and the West's attempt to stop it. This hints at the answer to the third step in the process, identifying the needs and aspirations on both sides: the North wants increased economic assistance and to be considered more of a powerhouse in global politics, while the South wants a less aggressive neighbor. This actually makes the conflict in many ways a cooperative one, as determined in the fourth step, though it could be made competitive if all hope of an end to North Korean aggression is lost.
Unfortunately, there is very little trust between the two countries, so there is little to label and diagnose in step five, but there are many impediments to a settlement that can be examined in step six. A history of serious grievances on both sides and years of propaganda regarding the evils of the Western world in North Korea are two major impediments to an effective end of the conflict and agreement for mutual benefice. The seventh step, the identification of negotiation styles, is difficult to complete with North Korea's history of simply stonewalling.
Step eight, the analysis of power, is...
North Korea has a fairly strong military might, and its nuclear capabilities -- the exact extent of which is unknown, at least to the public -- make it an especially dangerous force in the country and provide North Korea with its power in the conflict. South Korea has even stronger military allies, however, and is also far more economically secure and politically free than North Korea, which are definite advantages in the conflict. The best alternative to a negotiated agreement in this case would be the continued political and economic separation of the two countries, but on a more complete and absolute basis. Severing all ties between the two nations will make enforcing existing separations far simpler and more efficient. There are several different dispute resolution processes that could be employed here, but the most effective -- if the parties are willing to meet under these conditions -- are mediated talks, not with any binding or discretionary power on the part of the mediator (which would almost certainly inflame the conflict, especially in the short-term and quite probably in the long-term as well) but rather to allow both sides to see the other side of the issue.
Conclusion
Given the complexity and the long-running nature of this conflict, it is unlikely that any resolution will be reached any time soon. Applying the steps of the conflict diagnosis process, however, can put the conflict into sharp focus and possibly lead to solutions that have not been thought of as yet.
