Will South Korea Build Nuclear Weapons?
South Korea’s President Mentions the Possible Nuclearization of His Country – South Korea’s President Yoon Suk Yeol suggested Last week, a conference of press reported that South Korea may develop its own. nuclear weapon. In the past, there has been a constant debate. South Korea It lasts approximately one year. potential nuclearization.
[embedded content]Subscribe to Our YouTube Channel Here. 19FortyFive publishes original videos every day.)
However, this has been largely limited to voices outside of the government. think-tanks And academia.
This is why it is so surprising that the president has not yet received this message.
Indeed, it speaks to just how threatening North Korea’s nuclear weapons are perceived in South Korea – and how unhelpful China has been in restraining Pyongyang – that no less than its president is now discussing this.
Argument for South Korean Nuclear Weapons
I have written about this elsewhereThe short version of South Korea’s argument for nuclear weapons stems from the fact that US extended deterrence is less credible than South Korea’s claim for nukes. In 2017, North Korea was able to strike the United States continentally with a nuke weapon. The North Koreans almost certainly built the intercontinental ballistic weapon to strike the US homeland.ICBM).
North Korean supreme Leader Kim Jong Un His cronies and he are not insane or crazy. It is highly unlikely that they will launch a strike against the US and its allies. This would be entrain massive US retaliationThe Kim regime was overthrown and the country is in chaos. Instead, the purpose of North Korea’s nuclear ICBMs is to push the Americans and South Koreans apart. Ukraine Here’s an example of how North Korea could use strategic nuclear threats in order to limit or decrease American assistance to South Korea during times of crisis.
Of course, Ukraine is not an ally of the United States. South Korea is. However, the analogy is roughly correct. Russian President Vladimir Putin Since the beginning of his war, Putin has made indirect nuclear threats against the West in order to limit its support to Ukraine. It doesn’t matter if Putin was lying or not. probably was). It was only the uncertainty that he created in Western capitals that mattered.
We know that Russia’s nuclear threats stopped the West from creating a no-fly zone above Ukraine in March. Kiev had been asking for this. (And NATO hasn’t done that. We also know that NATO member countries have not been willing to transfer too many weapons, and their most advanced weapons to Ukraine out of fear of being compared to Putin. Finally, Russia’s nuclear status has provoked great debate over just how far the Ukrainians should push for final victory. Specifically, if Kiev tries to take Crimea – which Putin snatched back in 2014 – would that be a bridge too far?
In short, while NATO Although Ukraine has not abandoned Ukraine out of fear of Russian nuclear arms, its commitments, transfers and zeal have been thwarted by them. Similar fears exist for South Korea: would their nuclear ICBMs, in a spiraling conflict with North Korea, force the US to act? ‘slow-roll’ For fear of North Korea’s retaliation, assistance is available.
It is almost certain that the answer is yes. In a nuclearized world, it is almost impossible to imagine that the US alliance commitment towards South Korea would be as easy as in a normal environment. A course of action that might result in a nuclear attack on US cities will not be approved by any US president.
This new reality, since North Korea’s successful 2017 ICBM test, is only just sinking in. It seemed like Moon Jae In, the South’s former President, and Donald Trump would make a deal with North Korea for a few years. This was. always pretty far-fetchedIt was not, but it was obvious that a South Korean nuclear dispute was possible after the structure collapsed by 2020.
America’s Response
The South Korean debate about nuclearization is now at an all-time high. South Korea public Opinion is supportive. It is gaining support from nongovernmental organizations. The country’s main conservative party has said South Korea should withdraw from the Non-Proliferation Treaty if North Korea Tests a seventh nuclear weapon. Now, the South Korean president has also broached this issue.
The Americans are the biggest obstacle. The US is South Korea’s only treaty ally and its core foreign relationship. Without American defense guarantees, South Korea’s defense spending would double or triple. The South Korean government has always respected American preferences.
Indeed, American response was to play down Yoon’s comments.
However, I don’t think this position will be sustainable in the long-term or even the medium term. The North Korean nuclear threat will not go away. There is no denuclearization deal to be had with them – Trump and Moon’s failure proved that – and China This will not make things easier. The North Korean missile and nuclear threat will only get worse as the regime continues to test more. They are unlikely to stop. The less US alliance guarantees are credible, the more North Korea can endanger US cities with large-scale destruction.
This problem is not new. America’s European allies faced it during the Cold War because the USSR could strike the US homeland, and a variety of responses, including nuclear sharing and indigenous nuclearization, were tried with reasonable success. The US has also managed to adapt to nuclearization by Pakistani, Indian, and Israeli nuclearizations without any major crisis.
South Korean nuclearization does not have to lead to an alliance breakup unless the US insists.
Expert Biography Dr. Robert E. Kelly@Robert_E_Kelly; RoberEdwinKelly.com) is a professor in the Department of Political Science at Pusan National University and 19FortyFive Contributing Editor.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
