Issue 147

Dawn of a new nuclear world? - Daniel Budden Comments

23rd October 2006

Amid the fog shrouding the resurgent nuclear debate, one beam of rationality shines through: North Korea's nuclear capability does not mean that South Korea, Japan or even the United States and Europe are under threat of nuclear attack from Kim Jong-il.

This is because they have not developed weapons small enough to be delivered by missile, leaving dropping one from an aeroplane as the only option, which would be impossible under the intense international security North Korea now finds itself under.

Even if a pre-emptive attack were plausible, Kim Jong-il could count on a devastating nuclear response from the US and others, that would cripple his nation. Despite his clear disregard for the well being of his populace, it is unlikely Jong-il would accept this, especially considering that the driving force behind his nuclear programme itself is to establish his nation as a powerful world force, not as a ruined wasteland.

But it's not business as usual on the international scene. The nuclear test carried out on 9 October (with more due to follow) have dramatically altered the complex power relations in the Far East, straining relations between China and her ally. It may result in a renewed arms race. On the plus side however, China's surprisingly open and co-operative stance on the matter is a significant boost to peaceful international relations, particulary for those who may have seen China as a latent threat.

However the most positive byproduct of the situation has been to put nuclear weapons firmly back on the agenda where it belongs. Those of us who are anti-nuclear are criticised for living in a dream world. But the argument that supports nuclear proliferation in order to promote a healthier balance of power is just as far detached from reality.

Granted, there is some logic to the idea of a set of rational states with equal military capabilities enjoying a nervous peace, but what the boffins call 'non-state actors' constitutes just one proverbial spanner in the works.

Kim Jong-il may understand the threat of devastating retaliation, but a suicide bomber pulls the rug out from under the feet of this logic. Terrorist attacks kill innocent people, and the less secure the world's combined nuclear arsenal becomes, the greater the chance of a terrorist attack using the most indiscriminate weapon of all.

Daniel Budden