이 연구는 정치리더십을 상황진단, 정책처방, 지지동원의 세 단계로 정리한 터커의 이론을 활용해 김정일, 김정은의 정치리더십과 북한 핵정책의 변화를 분석했다. 김정일은 1·2차 북핵 위기, 1·2차 핵실험의 정치적 상황에서 선군정치, 선군경제건설노선, 핵보유 공식화의 정책을 처방하고, 선군 법제화, 경제조치, 선전선동전략으로 지지를 동원하고자 했다. 한편 김정은은 2.29합의, 3~6차 핵실험, 정상회담, 신냉전 구도의 정치적 상황에서 경제핵무력건설병진노선, 핵무력 완성, 경제건설총력집중노선의 정책을 처방하고 육성 신년사, 핵 법제화, 선전선동전략으로 구성원들의 지지동원을 도모했다. 두 정치리더십은 핵 외교협상, 국가전략, 지지동원 수단의 공통점이 있지만, 정치환경의 변화, 핵의 가치인식, 정책 지지동원을 위한 법제화의 목적에서는 차이를 보인다. 정치리더십에 따른 핵정책의 변화 측면에서, 대내적으로 김정일은 선군정치, 선군경제건설노선으로 국방공업, 과학기술을 강조하며 핵개발을 본격화했다. 반면 김정은은 경제핵병진노선을 중심으로 핵을 완성하고 경제건설총력집중노선으로 전환했다. 대외적으로 김정일은 핵을 매개로 다자협상을 이어가며 외교적 주도권 확보를 위해 핵실험을 강행했지만, 김정은은 핵을 고도화하며 외교보다 정치·군사적 가치에 중점을 두었다. 종합해 볼 때 강경하고 외교적 가치에 무게를 둔 김정일과 달리 공세적이고 정치·군사적 가치에 중점을 둔 김정은의 정치리더십은 향후 북한 핵정책에 큰 영향을 줄 것으로 보인다.
This study analyzed the changes in the political leadership of Kim Jong-il and Kim Jong-un, and North Korea"s nuclear policy using Tucker"s theory, which categorizes political leadership in three stages: situation diagnosis, policy prescription, and support mobilization. In the political situation of the first and second North Korean nuclear crises and the first and second nuclear tests, Kim Jong-il prescribed Military-First Politics, Military-First Economic Construction Strategy, and Formalization of nuclear possession, and sought to mobilize public support through taking legislation of Military-First Idea, economic measures, and propaganda-agitation strategy. Meanwhile, Kim Jong-un prescribed policies such as Economy-Nuclear Parallel Policy, nuclear force completion, and All-out Concentration Policy for Economic Building in the political situation of the February 29 Agreement, the third to sixth nuclear tests, summit talks, and a new Cold War structure. And Kim Jong-un tried to mobilize support through New Year"s speech, nuclear legislation, and propaganda-agitation strategy. The two political leaderships have something in common in nuclear diplomatic negotiations, national strategy, and means of mobilizing support, but differ in the changes of the political environment, the perception of the value of nuclear weapons, and the purpose of legislation for mobilizing policy support. In terms of changes in nuclear policy following political leadership, internally, Kim Jong-il started North Korea"s nuclear development in earnest, emphasizing defense industry and scientific technology through Military-First Politics and Military-First Economic Construction Strategy. On the other hand, internally, Kim Jong-un completed nuclear force through Economy-Nuclear Parallel Policy, and switched to All-out Concentration Policy for Economic Building. Externally, Kim Jong-il continued multilateral nuclear negotiations, and conducted nuclear tests to take the diplomatic initiative, but Kim Jong-un advanced North Korea"s nuclear force, and placed more weight on its political and military values than its diplomatic values. In sum, unlike Kim Jong-il, who was hard-line and focused on the diplomatic values of nuclear weapons, Kim Jong-un"s political leadership, which is aggressive and focuses on its political and military values, is expected to have a great influence on North Korea"s nuclear policy in the future.