By Oh Young-jin
Is South Korea still under the protection of the U.S. nuclear umbrella?
The concept is outdated because of the end of the cold war and needs an urgent update or should be thrown out.
It originated from the U.S.-U.S.S.R. confrontation when the two superpowers developed, produced and possessed so many nuclear weapons that they could annihilate the world many times over.
So the theory goes, if either nation started a nuclear attack, both of them, as well as the rest of the world, would end up in ruins. That was so-called MAD or mutually assured destruction.
The South has given up its nuclear weapons development by and large in return a security guarantee by the U.S.
Now, the situation has changed. First, the Soviet Union no longer exists but a new nuclear threat is emerging in North Korea, an impoverished pariah state that can’t feed its own population without outside help but is determined to develop its own nuclear arsenal.
It has now conducted four nuclear tests, which peaked with the Jan. 6 test that it claims involves the detonation of a thermonuclear device or H-bomb. It’s anybody’s guess how large a nuclear arsenal it has. Of course, it has withdrawn from all international obligations regarding nuclear development and proliferation. Its stated goal is joining the U.S. and China as a nuclear state.
The South feels insecure because of the nuclear threat by the North and, more importantly, the lack of a counterpunch it pack have to prevent the North from using nuclear weapons against it.
Thereby, the next question for the South is whether the U.S. nuclear umbrella is good enough to cope with this fast-changing status. Obviously, it’s not.
Above all, the umbrella is a deterrent. To borrow a metaphor, the umbrella was not made for a new purpose ― the North, a rogue state led by an unpredictable 32-year-old dictator. More importantly, it has never been used so its effectiveness is still in question.
First, would the U.S. act in kind, if the North attacked the South with its nukes? In the era of MAD, a nuclear war would have meant a world war and the Americans would have been the first targets of the Soviets.
Against the North, a small country with a population of 20 million, the U.S. would be bound to think twice, especially when it is incomparably stronger in conventional weaponry and few of its people would get killed.
A blood stain is still on its collective conscience as the only country that has ever used nuclear devices against humans, Hiroshima and Nagasaki during its war with Japan in the Second World War. From the U.S. perspective, it is no 9/11 or even the attack on the Pearl Harbor. This alone means a great reduction in the credibility of the U.S.-extended deterrence. So the even money is that the U.S. may play its role of a fair umpire, breaking the two Koreas apart from each other.
It can’t be ruled out that the North would be more willing to use nukes than the Soviets. The North has little to lose with some even thinking back to the old theory of its implosion. Compare it to a suicide bomber.
On the contrary, the ruling elites of the North may prove to be as “hedonistic” as those in the West and have a strong wish to die of old age. In this case, they would more likely use their nukes as a tool to maintain their dynasty and extol the neighboring countries for pocket money.
As a matter of fact, the North declared after the blast last month that it would do its obligations as a nuclear state such as nonproliferation of related technologies.
The problem is that the South can’t continue to entrust its fate to the whim of others.
One interesting twist is that the North is devoting itself to perfecting technologies for delivery systems, increasing the range of its rockets and miniaturizing nuclear payloads. Reports have it that it is preparing another launch in a matter of weeks, if not days.
Theoretically, the North’s anxiety can provide a missing link to refurbish the old U.S. nuclear umbrella since these nuclear-tipped missiles could threaten the U.S. mainland. Washington would take it as an excuse to put teeth back to it.
But the reason for the umbrella overhaul is not just for the reversion to the balance of power in the peninsula but should lie in forcing Pyongyang to overspend itself on these weapons until it collapses.
Oh Young-jin is The Korea Times’ chief editorial writer and can be contacted at foolsdie5@ktimes.com. A related editorial, entitled “Going nuclear,” can be found online and on the Wednesday paper.