Consider all deterrence options

By Shim Jae-yun

North Korea infuriated many people here when it fired a ballistic missile into the sea off Sokcho, Gangwon Province on Nov. 2. People seemed to have been upset because the North apparently attempted to maximize the effect of the missile launch despite the grieving mood in the South just following the Itaewon tragedy, which claimed the lives of 158 people mostly in their 20s and 30s. In addition, the launch, part of multiple firings, was the first infiltration into the South's Northern Limit Line since the Korean War.

North Korea has already institutionalized the possible uses of nuclear weapons, clarifying its will to mobilize such deadly weapons against South Korea. Pyongyang has been gearing up endeavors to build up its nuclear prowess, launching ballistic missiles 30 times this year alone, escalating security tension on the peninsula.

Against this backdrop, voices are calling for the need to equip South Korea with nuclear weapons. So far, the issue of the possible nuclear armament of South Korea has largely been avoided and disregarded as “nonsensical” amid opposition from major countries such as the United States. But the security situation surrounding the Korean Peninsula has changed amid the increasing necessity to adopt totally different approaches with regard to the North Korean missile and nuclear threats.

Diverse signs are indicating North Korea will carry out its seventh nuclear test soon. Such a move by the North is expected to prompt the need for debates over potential nuclear equipment for the South. Intelligence authorities share the notion that the North's future nuclear test will focus on tactical nuclear weapons. This will pose a grave threat to Seoul as such weapons will cover most areas of the South and become a game changer.

South Korea has already become an apparent target of the North's nuclear attacks since the North has continued to strengthen its nuclear capabilities. President Yoon Suk-yeol and U.S. President Joe Biden held their summit on Sunday in Phnom Penh and agreed to strengthen their deterrence against the North's missile and nuclear threats. Yet, disappointingly for Yoon, Chinese President Xi Jinping showed a lukewarm attitude toward the North Korean nuclear problem, despite Yoon's request for China's more active and constructive role during their crucial summit Tuesday.

This and other things show that it is too risky for South Korea's security to totally rely on the deterrence provided by the United States. Some experts cite the need to deploy U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea and share such weapons as seen in the case of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member nations. Such devices, however, besides the complicated technical problems, cannot be a feasible solution for the nation, as Seoul is deprived of a right to use nuclear weapons in contingency.

Given this, it is time to kick off discussions with regard to South Korea's need to equip itself with nuclear weapons, instead of depending on nuclear umbrellas offered by the U.S. According to a surveys conducted by the Asan Institute for Policy Studies on 1,000 people in March, 70 percent of the respondents supported the potential nuclear armament of South Korea.

The survey also revealed that 65 percent of those surveyed backed the idea of nuclear mobilization despite possible retaliation from the international community including China and Russia. Though the U.S. has vowed to deter the North's possible offensives, it does not necessarily mean the U.S. will rush to protect the South even at the cost of its national interests.

As in the previous administration, the Biden government has also been adopting policies focused on maximizing U.S. interests even beyond the value of the alliance. For starters, the U.S. recently implemented the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), in which Korean-made electric vehicles (EVs) and batteries are not eligible for a consumer tax credit of up to $7,500, catching many Koreans off guard despite their expectations of the alliance.

The Asan Institute and Land Research in April 2012 said that North Korea already possessed 50 nuclear warheads and will have about 200 by 2027. This assessment means that security on the peninsula has already become an uneven playing field, requiring fresh approaches for solutions. It is therefore not appropriate to stick to denuclearization as a target in negotiations with North Korea.

In a nutshell, we need to adopt new approaches to tackle North Korea's nuclear ambitions and escalating threats. We should put all nuclear deterrence options on the table and draw up plans from short, medium and long-term perspectives to safeguard South Korea under any circumstances. Denuclearization has already become a seemingly “unachievable” goal at least for a while. The next plan should be aimed at realizing “complete” nuclear deterrence on the Korean Peninsula.