Tag: nuclear weapons

Considering that the Blue House cannot even get the remaining four THAAD launchers to the site at Seongju blockaded by protesters, could you imagine the size of the blockade that would happen to any location hosting tactical nuclear weapons?  However if the US and the ROK wanted to get China and North Korea’s attention reintroducing tactical nuclear weapons would be one way doing it:

The Blue House dismissed the possibility of bringing U.S. tactical nuclear weapons to South Korea after reports got out that Korean Defense Minister Song Young-moo mentioned the idea in a meeting with his counterparts in Washington.

“We have not discussed anything related to the tactical nuclear weapons in this administration,” said a senior government official of the Blue House. “The Korean government respects the international efforts on nonproliferation and its policies have been and will be in line with these efforts.  [Joong Ang Ilbo]

You can read more at the link.

South Korean civil defense: in nuclear attack, get down but keep your tummy off the ground (because the shaking will hurt your organs) pic.twitter.com/Ibv938ij1m

— Anna Fifield (@annafifield) August 23, 2017

Probably the most interesting thing to see if South Korea develops nuclear weapons is not North Korea’s reaction, but China’s:

No longer sure they can rely on the United States, an increasing number of South Korean lawmakers say their country should develop its own nuclear arsenal to deter an attack by Kim Jong Un, their belligerent neighbor to the north.

North Korea’s rapid missile advances, including successful tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in July and again on Friday, are reviving calls for South Korea to assert its “nuclear sovereignty.” South Koreans are wary of President Donald Trump’s isolationist rhetoric and his calls for Asian allies to shoulder more of the defense burdens borne by the U.S. military.

“Trump’s ‘America-first’ policy has triggered this kind of public sentiment,” said Moon Chung In, a top national security adviser to South Korean President Moon Jae In. Trump also has wavered on his commitment to defending South Korea, he said, including suggesting during the campaign that South Korea and Japan should develop their own nuclear arsenals.

While President Moon, a liberal who took office in May, does not support calls for South Korea to join the nuclear club, polls show that a majority of South Koreans surveyed favor the idea. Support bumps higher whenever North Korea conducts a nuclear or missile test and members of South Korea’s two major conservative parties are pressing Moon to at least explore the nuclear option of developing nuclear weapons.  [Kansas City Star]

You can read more at the link, but members of the ROK parliament has long discussed developing nuclear weapons and it has been a popular idea with the ROK public.  However, until the ROK President decides to pursue them this is just all noise for now.

This shouldn’t come as any surprise considering the main reason for the Kim regime’s pursuit of nuclear weapons is to prevent regime change:

North Korea will launch a nuclear strike at the heart of the United States if Americans attempt a regime change in Pyongyang, the North’s state news agency said Tuesday in denunciation of recent remarks by the Central Intelligence Agency director.

In a forum last week, Mike Pompeo, the chief of the U.S. intelligence agency, alluded to the possibility of a regime change in North Korea by saying that the most important thing the U.S. can do is “separate (nuclear) capacity and someone who might well have (nuclear) intent and break those two apart.”

“Should the U.S. dare to show even the slightest sign of attempt to remove our supreme leadership, we will strike a merciless blow at the heart of the U.S. with our powerful nuclear hammer, honed and hardened over time,” the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said, quoting a spokesman of the North Korean foreign ministry.

The report said Pompeo’s remarks “have gone over the line, and it has now become clear that the ultimate aim of the Trump administration … is the regime change.”  [Yonhap]

You can read more at the link.

This is another example of the momentum building towards a freeze deal with North Korea:

A pro-North Korean newspaper in Japan said Tuesday that President Moon Jae-in should not expect a positive response from Pyongyang to his latest reconciliatory proposal, as Seoul is still not giving up its submission to the United States.

The Chosun Sinbo also called on South Korea to end its joint annual military exercises with the U.S. if it hopes to prove its willingness to improve ties.

Moon unveiled a broad vision for bringing peace to the Korean Peninsula during his speech in Berlin last Thursday, two days after the North test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

“If the proposal is based on South Korea’s subversion to the U.S. and hostility toward the North, Seoul cannot expect Pyongyang’s positive response,” the newspaper said.

The paper serves as an unofficial mouthpiece for Pyongyang. North Korea’s state media has yet to unveil its official response to Moon’s proposal.  [Yonhap]

You can read more at the link, but calls from the North Korean media to end US-ROK military drills will be ceased upon by the freeze deal advocates as a sign that the Kim regime is acceptable to such a deal.  The Chinese and Russians have also come out in support of suspending US-ROK military drills in return for North Korea suspending their missile and nuclear programs.

John Wolfsthal a nuclear policy expert writes in Foreign Policy about how the United States needs to accept North Korea’s nuclear weapons program and learn to live it like we have China and other countries:

At the same time, we have to accept that the game has changed. The dangers of a military conflict between the United States and North Korea have global implications. This means the United States and North Korea must begin immediate talks to avoid such conflicts, and to communicate directly to North Korea’s leaders exactly what actions would require a direct U.S. military response. We have had to do this as other states gained nuclear capabilities, because failure to do so left too much to chance. This is no concession, but self-preservation.

This list is not exhaustive, but the president, his cabinet and advisors, and our leaders in Congress need to begin the long-overdue conversation about what North Korean actions we seek to prevent. Unlike Trump’s tweets, our conclusions need to be specific and we need to back them up, lest confidence in U.S. commitments — to deter our enemies and protect our allies — gets even weaker. [Foreign Policy]

You can read the rest at the link, but his recommendations include communicating to the Kim regime that proliferation will lead to a “direct response” whatever that means.  North Korea has already tried to proliferate nuclear technology to Syria and nothing happened to them then.  So would the US be willing to attack North Korea in future if it tries to proliferate again?  I am skeptical.  He also recommends that the US respond to proliferating missile technology.  They have already done this with little consequence as well.  He also thinks that North Korea needs to be engaged at the sub strategic level when they commit bad acts such as cyber attacks.

Only North Korea would feel that a nuclear attack is the correct response to joint military exercise https://t.co/V2ts5jC0qf

— NorthKoreaRealTime (@BuckTurgidson79) July 9, 2017

Another example of the advancements in North Korea’s nuclear program:

North Korea clearly has the ability to produce tritium internally, a basic element for making hydrogen bombs, although the country has yet to weaponize it, an American nuclear expert said Tuesday.

“The evidence is quite clear that North Korea is able to produce tritium, which is necessary for a hydrogen bomb to create fusion. So you need tritium when you are going to have hydrogen bombs,” Siegfried Hecker, a professor at Standford University, told a group of journalists here.  [Yonhap]

You can read more at the link.

This is easier said than done:

China and the United States agreed that efforts to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula should be “complete, verifiable and irreversible”, Chinese state media said on Saturday, reporting the results of high level talks in Washington this week.

“Both sides reaffirm that they will strive for the complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” a consensus document released by the official Xinhua news agency said.

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had said on Thursday that the United States pressed China to ramp up economic and political pressure on North Korea, during his meeting with top Chinese diplomats and defense chiefs.

China’s top diplomat Yang Jiechi and General Fang Fenghui met Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis during the talks. Yang later met with U.S. President Donald Trump in the White House, where they also discussed North Korea, Xinhua reported.

The consensus document also highlighted the need to fully and strictly hold to U.N. Security Council resolutions and push for dialogue and negotiation, which has long been China’s position on the issue.  [Reuters]

You can read more at the link.

It looks like the Moon administration is still pushing for Sunshine Policy 2.0 and a peace treaty with North Korea:

South Korea may consult with the United States about scaling back joint military exercises and deployment of American strategic weapons if North Korea suspends nuclear and missile activities, an adviser to President Moon Jae-in said Friday.

Moon Chung-in, a foreign affairs scholar and special presidential adviser, made the remark during a Wilson Center seminar in Washington, saying President Moon has proposed the idea.

“He proposed two things. One, if North Korea suspends its nuclear and missile activities, then we may consult with the United States to (on) scaling down ROK-US joint exercises and training. I think what he has in mind is we may scale down deployment of American strategic weapons over the Korean Peninsula,” the adviser said.

“Another one is linking North Korea’s denuclearization to creation of a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula,” he said.  (……..)

During the seminar, the adviser said that President Moon pursues “incremental, comprehensive and fundamental” denuclearization with North Korea, beginning with a freeze on its nuclear and missile programs and a verifiable dismantlement of its nuclear facilities and materials.  [Yonhap]

You can read more at the link, but here is my view on a freeze deal.  Any freeze deal should not include a peace treaty and only include the scaling down of US-ROK military exercises.  A peace treaty should only be offered in return for the complete dismantlement of their nuclear and ICBM programs which we know they will never do.

The freeze deal should then have strong language in it that any non-compliance by North Korea opens them to a kinetic strike to ensure compliance.  Including language that includes the use of force to ensure compliance gives the US world opinion on its side if it needs to strike North Korea.  It additionally puts pressure on China to ensure that Pyongyang is complying with the deal to avoid the use of force being used against North Korea.