Kang Seung-woo is the Business Desk editor at The Korea Times. Prior to this position, he covered politics, national affairs, finance and sports.
South Korea faces growing calls to acquire nuclear weapons
An F-15K fires two joint direct attack munition (JDAM) bombs against a virtual target at the Jikdo shooting field in the West Sea, Tuesday. Courtesy of Joint Chiefs of Staff
By Kang Seung-woo
Growing threat from North Korea, Ukraine war makes some South Koreans rethink nuclear-free policy
By Kang Seung-woo
South Korea is facing growing calls to acquire nuclear weapons irrespective of ideological dogma. Such calls are being fueled by North Korea's growing nuclear menace and misgivings about the U.S.' extended deterrence if Pyongyang decides to attack its southern neighbor.
“There has been a nuclear taboo ― a normative inhibition against the first use of nuclear weapons ― but Russia is about to break it in its war against Ukraine, thereby stoking concerns among countries, (including South Korea) that do not have their own nuclear weapons,” said Go Myong-hyun, a senior fellow of the Asan Institute for Policy Studies.
Go added that, despite Russia's threat to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine, the United States and NATO were poised to respond to it with conventional weapons, with many South Koreans fearful of Washington's possible half-hearted response to North Korea's potential nuclear attack against the South.
Cheong Seong-chang, the director of the Center for North Korean Studies at the Sejong Institute, also said that the growing interest in the development of a domestic nuclear weapons program comes as the U.S.' steadfast nuclear retaliation, in the case of North Korea using nuclear weapons against South Korea, appears uncertain.
“Even though the allies held an Extended Deterrence Strategy and Consultation Group (EDSCG) meeting in September, for the first time in nearly five years, they failed to reach an agreement on the U.S.' immediate and automatic retaliation in response to a North Korean nuclear attack against the South,” Cheong said.
The EDSCG, a high-level consultative mechanism to achieve North Korean denuclearization through steadfast deterrence, was held in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 16, but its joint statement merely stipulated that North Korea would face an “overwhelming and decisive” response in the event of a nuclear attack.
“North Korea has made significant progress in the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the U.S. mainland, so it seems that our trust in the U.S. nuclear umbrella, aimed at ensuring deterrence against nuclear threats, has been eroded,” Cheong said.
According to a recent poll by the Institute for Peace and Unification Studies at Seoul National University, more than half of South Koreans, or 55.5 percent, supported the development of a domestic nuclear weapons program, with 92.5 percent of 1,200 respondents believing that North Korea will not abandon its nuclear program.
In that respect, calls for an independent nuclear arsenal have been reignited amid an accelerated buildup of North Korea's nuclear weapons.
“Ukraine was the world's third-largest nuclear power, but it disarmed its nuclear weapons following security assurances from the U.S., Britain and Russia and as a result, Ukraine is now facing Russia's nuclear attack,” Daegu Mayor Hong Joon-pyo said on Facebook, Wednesday,
An Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missile is fired during a joint military drill between South Korea and the United States at an undisclosed location in South Korea, Wednesday. Courtesy of Joint Chiefs of Staff
In 2017, Hong, who was the leader of the Liberty Korea Party, the predecessor of the current ruling People Power Party, claimed that South Korea should acquire nuclear weapons if it is to negotiate with North Korea on an equal footing.
“Amid the U.S. and British struggle to effectively deal with Russia's nuclear aggression, if North Korea uses nuclear weapons against us, while declaring its attacks against the U.S. and Japan, could they retaliate against the North with nuclear arsenals?” Hong added.
He added, “It is time for a full review of our nuclear strategy against North Korea's nuclear weapons.”
Former Korea Foundation President Lee Geun, a professor at Seoul National University's Graduate School of International Studies, recently presented a similar view.
“Now, we need to acknowledge the irreversibility of North Korea's nuclear weapons policy and think about our nuclear power strategy in preparation for this,” he said on Facebook.
Referring to President Yoon Suk-yeol's remarks in his speech marking Armed Forces Day, Saturday, that North Korea's nuclear weapons development defies the international nonproliferation treaty, Lee also said, “Such a political statement sounds unrealistic and is just empty rhetoric.”
Until now, any mention of acquiring nuclear weapons has been considered taboo within the South Korean government, given that it would result in significant costs while bringing about limited benefits for the country.
Go said developing a South Korean nuclear weapons program would result in an “invisible” high opportunity cost beyond punitive measures meted out by the international community.
“Many believe that South Korea's acquisition of nuclear weapons could lead to the international community placing sanctions on the nation, but as we witnessed in India's case, it would barely impose any punitive measures on us in consideration of the country's role and status in the international community,” he said.
“Rather, the move would undermine South Korea's alliance with the U.S., because the alliance is based on Washington's provision of its nuclear umbrella in a way, but South Korea's development of independent nuclear weapons could break up the alliance and that is why we have yet to be enthusiastic about acquiring nuclear weapons.”
Go added, “What would China prefer, between a nuclear-armed South Korea and a South Korea without its alliance with the U.S., given that Beijing is already surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons?”
In that sense, Go believes that the reintroduction of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons to the Korean Peninsula is a better option. The U.S. removed tactical nuclear weapons from South Korea in 1991.
“The return of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons will ensure a stable South Korea-U.S. alliance, while strengthening their response to North Korea's nuclear threats,” he said.
In a new development, South Korea and the U.S. fired four surface-to-surface missiles into the East Sea on Wednesday morning in response to North Korea's intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) launch.
The two sides each launched two Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) missiles, which precisely hit mock targets and demonstrated the allies' deterrence capability, according to the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS).
Meanwhile, the South Korean military fired one Hyunmoo-2 ballistic missile, but it fell inside the base where it was launched after an abnormal flight.