The Korea Times close
National
  • Politics
  • Foreign Affairs
  • Multicultural Community
  • Defense
  • Environment & Animals
  • Law & Crime
  • Society
  • Health & Science
Business
  • Tech
  • Bio
  • Companies
Finance
  • Companies
  • Economy
  • Markets
  • Cryptocurrency
Opinion
  • Editorial
  • Columns
  • Thoughts of the Times
  • Cartoon
  • Today in History
  • Blogs
  • Tribune Service
  • Blondie & Garfield
  • Letter to President
  • Letter to the Editor
Lifestyle
  • Travel & Food
  • Trends
  • People & Events
  • Books
  • Around Town
  • Fortune Telling
Entertainment
& Arts
  • K-pop
  • Films
  • Shows & Dramas
  • Music
  • Theater & Others
Sports
World
  • SCMP
  • Asia
Video
  • Culture
  • People
  • News
Photos
  • Photo News
  • Darkroom
  • The Korea Times
  • search
  • Site Map
  • E-paper
  • Subscribe
  • Register
  • LogIn
search close
  • The Korea Times
  • search
  • Site Map
  • E-paper
  • Subscribe
  • Register
  • LogIn
search close
Opinion
  • Editorial
  • Columns
  • Thoughts of the Times
  • Cartoon
  • Today in History
  • Blogs
  • Tribune Service
  • Blondie & Garfield
  • Letter to President
  • Letter to the Editor
Mon, August 8, 2022 | 01:39
Guest Column
Global nuclear disarmament: Don't abandon the dream
Posted : 2019-11-06 17:30
Updated : 2019-11-07 12:47
Print Preview
Font Size Up
Font Size Down
By Gareth Evans

With North Korean negotiations going nowhere fast, talk about a South Korean "bomb" growing, all the nuclear-armed states modernizing and expanding their arsenals, and existing U.S.-Russia arms control agreements falling apart, achieving global nuclear disarmament looks ever more like an impossible dream.

But we abandon that dream at our peril. The risk of catastrophic misuse of nuclear weapons, deliberately or ― more likely ― by accident or miscalculation, is as grave and immediate as it has ever been. Climate change is also an existential risk to life on this planet as we know it, but nuclear weapons can kill us a lot faster than CO2.

To recapture the commitment of policymakers, campaigners for nuclear disarmament need to do four things: utilize the power of emotion; utilize the power of reason; unite around a common, realistic disarmament agenda that does not make the best the enemy of the good; and, above all, stay optimistic.

As to emotion, it is important not to underestimate the extent to which, in real world government nuclear decision-making, the sheer indiscriminate inhumanity of any nuclear weapons use already plays a part.

Even the most hard-headed policymakers have to take seriously the profound normative taboo which still exists internationally against any deliberate, aggressive use of nuclear weapons, at least in circumstances where the very survival of a state is not at imminent risk.

Bottom-up civic pressure is a necessary part of most major political change, and the Hiroshima message will always have raw power. But community voices alone are unlikely to move the hard-heads, many of whom quite unashamedly argue that the sheer awfulness of nuclear weapons is what makes them so effective as a deterrent.

What they need to be persuaded about are the strategic arguments against nuclear weapons ― that their benefits are negligible, and far outweighed by the risks involved. It is not hard to make such a rational case.

In terms of deterring war between the major powers, of course "mutually assured destruction" encouraged a degree of caution in how the Soviet Union and U.S. approached each other. But no evidence has ever emerged that either side wanted at any stage to cold-bloodedly initiate a war and was deterred only by the existence of the other side's nuclear arsenal.

As to nuclear weapons deterring large-scale conventional attacks, there are many cases where non-nuclear powers have either directly attacked nuclear powers, or have not been deterred by the prospect of their intervention: Think of Korea, Vietnam, the Falklands, Afghanistan and the first Gulf war for a start.

As to the apparent belief of some smaller states ― like North Korea ― that a handful of nuclear weapons is their ultimate guarantor against external regime-change-motivated intervention, that is just not well-founded.

Possession of nuclear weapons that it would be manifestly suicidal for a state to use are not a credible deterrent, nor are weapons not supported by infrastructure (for example, missile submarines) that would give them a reasonable prospect of surviving to mount a retaliatory attack. The DPRK knows that nuclear homicide ― against the ROK, Japan or the United States ― means national suicide.

In pursuing both disarmament and non-proliferation ― and indeed in many other policy contexts ― it is critically important to learn the art of compromise. Never make the best the enemy of the good. And that means being particularly careful about how we articulate the "global zero" objective.

However emotionally appealing, the Nuclear Weapons Prohibition Treaty recently negotiated through the U.N. is manifestly not going to get a buy-in from nuclear armed and umbrella states, now or perhaps ever.

Nuclear weapons elimination is only ever going to be achievable on an incremental basis, building into the process a series of way-stations. Such a credible way forward was mapped by the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (ICNND), which I co-chaired in 2009 with former Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi.

We urged that initial efforts focus not on elimination but on a "minimization" agenda, summarizable as the "4 Ds": Getting a universal buy-in to No First Use (Doctrine), which is already supported at least by China and India; giving that credibility by taking weapons off high-alert (Dealerting); drastically reducing the number of those actively deployed (Deployment); and reducing overall numbers to around 2,000, down from the 15,000+ now in existence (Decreased numbers).

A world with very low numbers of nuclear weapons, with very few physically deployed, practically none of them on high-alert launch status and every nuclear-armed state visibly committed to never being the first to use nuclear weapons would still be very far from being perfect. But it would be a much safer world than the one we live in now.

While the present environment for good policymaking on nuclear disarmament as on much else, is desolate, it is important to keep things in perspective. Wheels do turn and political leaders do change. Optimism is self-reinforcing in the same way that pessimism is self-defeating. So it is up to those of us who hope for a nuclear weapon-free world to believe in it, and get out there and work for it.

Gareth Evans is chair of the Asia-Pacific Leadership Network for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament (APLN). He is a former Australian foreign minister. He concurrently serves as the chancellor of the Australian National University, and a co-chair of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament.



 
LG
  • Citizens excited about refurbished Gwanghwamun Square
  • The fate of Sontag Hotel
  • DSME hit with $970-million lawsuit from Japanese oil company
  • [INTERVIEW] 'Taiwan is part of China,' says Chinese ambassador
  • Hyundai aims to develop own automotive semiconductors
  • Gov't considers slashing tariffs on imported produce ahead of Chuseok
  • KAI, Hanwha, SK, Hyundai Rotem contribute to Danuri project
  • 'Gov't should help manufacturers digitize fast to overcome global supply chain risks'
  • Woori Bank to invest $7.7 million in 10 promising startups
  • Envoy wary of creating Asian version of NATO
  • Interactive News
  • With tough love,
  • 'Santa dogs' help rebuild burnt forests in Andong
  • 'Santa dogs' help rebuild burnt forests in Andong
    • Brad Pitt to visit Korea to promote new film 'Bullet Train' Brad Pitt to visit Korea to promote new film 'Bullet Train'
    • [INTERVIEW] Jung Woo-sung was initially hesitant to take on role in 'Hunt' [INTERVIEW] Jung Woo-sung was initially hesitant to take on role in 'Hunt'
    • Hallyu research should be conducted beyond Korean perspective: scholars Hallyu research should be conducted beyond Korean perspective: scholars
    • 'The Red Sleeve' director debuts new thriller 'The Red Sleeve' director debuts new thriller
    • 'Baby Shark' feature film to premiere on Paramount+ next year 'Baby Shark' feature film to premiere on Paramount+ next year
    DARKROOM
    • Ice is melting, land is burning

      Ice is melting, land is burning

    • Tottenham 6-3 Team K League

      Tottenham 6-3 Team K League

    • Afghanistan earthquake killed more than 1,000

      Afghanistan earthquake killed more than 1,000

    • Divided America reacts to overturn of Roe vs. Wade

      Divided America reacts to overturn of Roe vs. Wade

    • Namaste: Yogis to celebrate International Yoga Day

      Namaste: Yogis to celebrate International Yoga Day

    The Korea Times
    CEO & Publisher : Oh Young-jin
    Digital News Email : webmaster@koreatimes.co.kr
    Tel : 02-724-2114
    Online newspaper registration No : 서울,아52844
    Date of registration : 2020.02.05
    Masthead : The Korea Times
    Copyright © koreatimes.co.kr. All rights reserved.
    • About Us
    • Introduction
    • History
    • Location
    • Media Kit
    • Contact Us
    • Products & Service
    • Subscribe
    • E-paper
    • Mobile Service
    • RSS Service
    • Content Sales
    • Policy
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Service
    • 고충처리인
    • Youth Protection Policy
    • Code of Ethics
    • Copyright Policy
    • Family Site
    • Hankook Ilbo
    • Dongwha Group