As North Korea continues their nuclear buildup and their rocket program which can hit East Asian and American cities, American allies in the region are considering going nuclear themselves. Two of the most prominent nations considering the nuclear option include Japan (which hasn't had the best experience with uranium) and South Korea (of which 60% of the population favors a nuclear program.)
In South Korea, President Moon Jae-In has often expressed that a South Korean nuclear program would only make things worse with both the North and with the United States, and for the most part, he's following precedent; until recently, only a small fringe called for armament. But that's not to say that the country would be completely closed to the option. “If the U.N. Security Council can’t rein in North Korea with its sanctions, we will have no option but to withdraw from the Nonproliferation Treaty,” said conservative politician Won Yoo-Chul.
But perhaps the most alarming nation considering nuclear bombs is Japan. Japan, the only country to have been attacked by a nuclear device, already has sworn off nuclear bombs, singing multiple Non-Proliferation Treaties. It's already assumed that Article 9 of the Japanese constitution is extended to nuclear bombs, but under the already hawkish Shinzo Abe, that might change. Shigeru Ishiba, the Defense Minister who could challenge Abe, has openly challenged the lack of debate regarding the issue. Even Mr. Abe himself has expressed sentiments towards the North mirroring his American counterpart.
Normally I'd be against peace through force of arms, but now, I'm not so sure. In a nuclear war against North Korea, it wouldn't be San Fransisco or Washington D.C. that would be on the first line of targets for the north-it would be Seoul, Osaka, or Tokyo, larger cities with larger populations. Given Mr Trump's isolationist message on the campaign trail, perhaps this isn't the most criticism-worthy option.
7 comments:
This situation seems very similar to the events leading to World War II we learned about last year in AP U.S. History with Hitler. In the past, the alliance chose to appease Hitler and do very little to oppose him other than light admonishing. Just as before, with North Korea it is a matter of finding the balance between appeasement and confrontation, between appearing weak and appearing hostile. If we appear weak, North Korea will continue taking advantage of other countries with hostile threats. Alternatively, if we oppose them too strongly, it will pave the road for bad international relations, and an uneasy Cold War like tension that could lead to war.
Finding this middle ground will be no walk in the park, and President Trump might have to reconsider his approach towards North Korea. I believe that Japan and South Korea should in fact build up a strictly defensive arsenal and maybe sign a treaty that confirms the restricted defensive use of nuclear weapons. That way, North Korea might discontinue their boasting of nuclear power.
Granger, if you have the time, could you clarify what your argument was in your last paragraph? I could not understand it clearly, but I would guess that you believe President Trump should take a less isolationist stance.
The North Korean nuclear threat will only be mitigated if China lessens or cuts aid and funding to North Korea. As of right now, the United States can't really touch North Korea other than the current embargos and restrictions already in place, so in order for a message to get across to the Koreans, the US would have to get China's attention. If Trump told Xi something like, "Look, either you cut your funding to North Korea or we give Taiwan the bomb," that would definitely get a reaction out of China. Maybe not as extreme as that, but anything can happen with Trump as president.
Hey, Arthur-glad to clarify. I believe that given the fact that the President has expressed an isolationist stance in terms of foreign policy (putting the stability of the East Asian region) I would encourage discussion towards a Japanese or South Korean Nuclear Program. A Japanese or South Korea Nuclear stockpile might serve to deter a nuclear ambitious Pyongyang, and with Trump clearly proving an unreliable ally, the writing is on the wall for Tokyo and Seoul to pick up the slack.
I think that North Korea poses a great threat to Japan and South Korea, as they are all in the same vicinity, and North Korea has already fired missiles close to the two countries. Therefore, I think that building nuclear weapons, would make Japan and South Korea safer and more protected and would also assuage the people's fears. North Korea will probably think more carefully about threatening or attacking either country if they have a strong defense. Hopefully, North Korea will realize that their provoking actions aren't just going to be tolerated without consequences.
I think it is potentially more dangerous to push China, which is undoubtedly more advanced, powerful, and less reliant on other countries than North Korea. Without making China do something, however, we are also hopeless. Thus, the only other option is for Japan and South Korea to make preparations. We cannot criticize them because we cannot protect them, and the rest of the world should have an understanding that those weapons will not be used against them. I'm not sure if a GBI or THAAD system is reliable enough, but those should also be leveraged against North Korea.
On one hand, the stockpiling of nuclear weapons by South Korea and Japan can serve as a deterrent towards North Korea and their nuclear arsenal. On the other hand, these weapons could contribute to the inevitability of a nuclear war that could wipe out the planet. Having visited both Nagasaki and Hiroshima, I have seen the devastation and tragedy that these weapons are capable of, and the potential danger they could cause for the entirety of the world. While I understand and support the arguments which call for more nuclear weapons to be built, I cannot support this idea, as they will never bring peace; only death and sadness.
If it is true that our allies in the East cannot rely on US assistance, then their decision to stockpile nuclear arms to deter an attack from North Korea is a reasonable one in my opinion. Whether or not this strategy would work, however, is questionable as the US has the most nuclear arms in the world, second only to Russia, and North Korea is still directing threats at us. I disagree with Sean's point that the addition of more nuclear weapons might contribute to a nuclear war, because if in the worst case scenario, a nuclear war breaks out, the extra nuclear weapons that South Korea and Japan will have will not make much of a difference, as there are already enough nuclear weapons in the world to end it and a few added warheads won't change that fact.
Post a Comment