Tag: nuclear weapons

Doug Bandow writes that it is time for the U.S. to give up its policy of denuclearizing North Korea:

After three decades of insisting that the DPRK can never be allowed to possess nuclear weapons, Washington must confront the failure of U.S. policy. American policymakers should consider accepting North Korea as a nuclear state and treating it as a normal country.

It no longer makes sense to talk of preventing the North from developing nuclear weapons. It already has them. There is great uncertainty as to how many nuclear weapons the Kim regime has or could potentially make—around sixty is a common estimate. However, that could be just the start. The Rand Corporation and Asan Institute figure Pyongyang could possess some two hundred by just 2027, a scant six years away. That would give it more nuclear weapons than currently possessed by India, Israel, and Pakistan. (………..)

Most realistic would be a focus on arms control, with the hope of developing a relationship that might lead to denuclearization. Even such a more limited objective would be advanced by developing a broader and more normal relationship. Meaning diplomatic ties—officials contacts are especially important with potentially dangerous adversaries—cultural exchanges, and economic ties.

The National Interest

You can read more at the link, but I agree with Bandow that denuclearization is now a fantasy. What is more realistic is negotiating away North Korea’s ICBM program, capping their number of nuclear weapons, and stopping nuclear proliferation. Without ICBMs their nukes cannot threaten the United States and it is in the US’s interest that North Korea not sell nuclear technology abroad like they have done in the past.

Anyone with any measure of intelligence on defense issues on the Korean peninsula could of told Bob Woodward that a nuclear strike on North Korea is not feasible:

Although Bob Woodward’s latest book, “Rage,” disclosed last month that the Donald Trump administration had reviewed firing scores of nuclear weapons at North Korea in 2017, experts said Wednesday that such an attack would not be an easy option to implement due to various reasons including possible escalation involving other countries.

In the book, based on interviews with Trump, the writer said the United States studied “OPLAN 5027” for regime change in North Korea ― the U.S. response to an attack that could include the use of 80 nuclear weapons. OPLAN 5027 refers to a joint South Korea-U.S. military operation plan to respond to a North Korean invasion.

Experts on Korean Peninsula issues saw a low chance of the plan ever being carried out, because of concerns that a U.S. nuclear strike against Pyongyang could lead to accidental escalation in the region.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link about the issues a nuclear strike on North Korea would cause.

This just confirms what I have been saying for years, the Kim regime is never going to give up their nuclear weapons:

North Korea is believed to have up to 60 nuclear bombs and the world’s third-largest stockpile of chemical weapons totaling up to 5,000 tons, the U.S. Army has said.

The U.S. Department of the Army headquarters made the assessment in its report, titled “North Korean tactics,” which was published last month, saying Pyongyang is unlikely to give up these weapons to ensure the regime’s survival.

“Estimates for North Korean nuclear weapons range from 20-60 bombs, with the capability to produce 6 new devices each year,” the U.S. military said, noting that some reports state that the regime could obtain as many as 100 by the end of this year.

“North Korea sought nuclear weapons because its leaders thought the threat of a nuclear attack would prevent other countries from contemplating a regime change,” according to the report, which also pointed out that leader Kim Jong-un witnessed the case of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi and “does not want something similar to happen in North Korea.”

Yonhap

You can read more at the link.

According to analysts this move may be to send a message to North Korea:

The Pentagon confirmed Tuesday it has deployed a new low-yield nuclear warhead on at least one strategic submarine, citing the need to deter potential adversaries, which could include North Korea. 

John Rood, U.S. under secretary of defense for policy, said in a statement that the W76-2 low-yield warhead had been fielded on the U.S. Navy’s submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM). 

The move appeared to be reciprocal, according to Rood, who said it was “to address the conclusion that potential adversaries, like Russia, believe that employment of low-yield nuclear weapons will give them an advantage over the United States and its allies and partners.”  (……)

But Kristensen assessed that despite the focus on deploying the weapon to deter Russia, “it is much more likely that the new low-yield weapon is intended to facilitate first-use of nuclear weapons against North Korea or Iran.” 

Joong Ang Ilbo

You can read more at the link, but the low yield nukes are supposed to have about a third of the power of the nuclear bombs dropped on Japan during World War II.

Anyone closely following North Korea knows they are not going to give up their nuclear weapons. The below article explains some of the reasons why:

“There seems to be a very subtle debate going on,” said Town, citing articles in North Korean press “that are really questioning the value of why are we giving away our nuclear deterrent, why are we working with these capitalists?” Other articles have pushed back, stressing “the value of diplomacy.”

Kim has expressed skepticism. In a speech in April, he said President Trump “continuously observes” that the two leaders are friendly. But Kim added that the U.S. is making one-sided demands and using the wrong “political calculations.”

Analysts say Kim’s own political calculations have made it hard to give up nuclear weapons.

Jean Lee, a former Associated Press correspondent who spent much time in Pyongyang, said North Korea’s propaganda described the nuclear program as “the one thing that he has told his people is protecting them from a foreign invasion.”

Giving up the nuclear program would undermine Kim’s legitimacy as a ruler, said Ken Gause, who studies the North Korean leadership for CNA, a research group based in Arlington, Va.

“I think he can dismantle parts of the program,” Gause said, but only in ways that are “not verifiable and not irreversible,” and “probably not near as much as we would want.”

To accept even a partial dismantling, Kim would need concessions from the United States, such as the lifting of economic sanctions against North Korea. “Kim is not moving an iota unless the U.S. put stuff on the table,” said Gause, “which means money going into the pockets of the elite because that’s the people he has to satisfy.”

NPR

You can read more at the link, but this is why North Korea wants a “freeze deal” in return for sanctions relief. With a freeze deal they give up nothing, they just suspend testing and get sanctions relief, probably the re-opening of the Kaesong Industrial Complex and Kumgang mountain tours. These were huge money makers for the regime before their closure.

If these projects are reopened, the North Koreans will behave for a while and cash up their regime and at a time of their choosing they will start another provocation cycle. However, every provocation cycle they feature better and better military capabilities due to the prior sanctions relief that has allowed them to pour money into weapons development.

President Trump appears to want to stop this cycle, but some in the administration appear to just want the problem to go away with a freeze deal and let someone down the road deal with the problem which has been the US policy for decades and that is what Kim Jong-un is counting on.

Apparently the Japanese government is concerned that President Trump will cut a deal to eliminate North Korea’s ICBMs, but leave them with nuclear weapons. This is significant to Japan because North Korea’s shorter range missiles can easily target Japan with nuclear weapons:

When U.S. President Donald Trump sits down to talk peace with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un later this month, one of America’s closest allies — Japan — will be looking on with apprehension.
Like the first time Trump met Kim in June, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has found himself on the outside peering in before their second summit set for Feb. 27-28 in Hanoi. The meeting brings both the promise of a less-dangerous North Korea and the potential peril of a weak deal that leaves Japan exposed to Kim’s weapons of mass destruction and does nothing to help ease Tokyo’s own hostility with Pyongyang.
Mitoji Yabunaka, who served as Japan’s envoy to six-party talks with North Korea more than a decade ago, said the country feared “a half-baked, deceptive agreement which leads to the Trump administration taking a soft line on North Korea by removing economic sanctions” without serious progress on disarmament. That would be “the nightmare scenario,” Yabunaka said.
While Japan and the U.S. — which guarantees the country’s security under a 1960 treaty — both want North Korea to give up its weapons, their interests could diverge as talks progress. Kim’s short- to medium-range rockets pose the most immediate danger to Japan, not the intercontinental ballistic missiles that now threaten the American homeland.

Stars & Stripes

You can read more at the link, but if such a deal is reached with the Kim regime I suspect that the Trump administration would make certain security guarantees towards Japan that North Korea would face an overwhelming counterattack if they ever targeted Japan with their missiles.

I guess we will see what deal is struck in about a week.

Why should anyone be surprised by this?:

North Korea has been working to protect its nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities from military strikes, according to UN monitors.

Citing a confidential report drafted by UN sanction monitors, Reuters on Monday said the group “found evidence of a consistent trend on the part of North Korea to disperse its assembly, storage and testing locations.”

The North Korean mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the 300-page report, which was submitted to a 15-member UN Security Council sanctions committee on Friday. 

KBS Global

What did the UN expect, Kim Jong-un to lay out his missile and nuclear facilities and equipment in a big open field with an X marks the spot for easy targeting by the US? Of course the North Koreans are going to disperse and then harden all their facilities, they would be fools not to.

The left wing South Korean newspaper, the Hankyoreh, has an editorial published saying that to move the peace process forward we all just need to learn to live with a North Korea with nuclear weapons:

During a seminar last year, an expert on the North Korean nuclear issue said the end point of denuclearization talks would be “a situation where a peace regime is so firmly in place that it wouldn’t even matter if North Korea were hiding a few nuclear weapons.” We might describe it as an approach of “killing the North Korean nuclear issue through a peace process.” Quite a few of the participants vehemently objected. “Are you suggesting we accept a nuclear North Korea?” they asked, insisting that the North should not be allowed to have even a single nuclear weapon.

(………) Even if Kim’s “complete denuclearization” is a different proposition from the one the North put forth at the time of the Agreed Framework, we have no way of knowing the timeline or conditions. The least we can say is that it doesn’t appear to be the “swift surrender” envisioned by the West. (……….)

A world where North Korea does not possess a single nuclear weapon does not appear to be on the horizon for now. We need to practice somehow living with a nuclear-equipped North Korea. We will soon be facing a moment of truth where we will need to confront the reality of North Korea’s nuclear program.

Hankyoreh

You can read the whole thing at the link, but I think this is clearly a trial balloon by the Korean left. They realize that the Kim regime is not going to give up its nuclear weapons and now want to start socializing the concept of letting them keep some of their nukes to keep the peace process moving forward.

This all plays into the Kim regime’s confederation strategy where they can end the US-ROK alliance, withdraw US troops, remove the US nuclear umbrella, and then dictate terms of the confederation because they have the military advantage with their nuclear weapons.

It looks like the capitulation to Kim Jong-un’s demands is being considered by the Trump administration:

The U.S. government is willing to lift some economic sanctions on North Korea if the regime demonstrates “sincere measures” toward denuclearization, a source with knowledge of Pyongyang-Washington talks exclusively told the JoongAng Ilbo on Tuesday.

The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said he wasn’t specifically told whether that meant the United States was willing to ease its own unilateral sanctions on the North or give sanctions exemptions to third countries, including South Korea, to carry out joint projects with Pyongyang.

The United States, one of five veto-wielding members in the United Nations Security Council, has a crucial say in UN sanctions on the North. Unanimous approval from a UN North Korean sanctions committee composed of the five countries – the United States, Britain, Russia, China and France – and 10 nonpermanent members on the UN Security Council is normally required for a sanctions waiver.

If the former hypothesis is true, it would mean Washington is willing to ease sanctions even before North Korean carries out total denuclearization, which goes against the long-held mantra of the White House that sanctions will not be eased before the North’s final, fully verified denuclearization, or FFVD.

The source told the paper that Washington’s definition of “sincere measures” from the North included a partial inventory of its nuclear weapons and facilities or allowing outside experts to inspect the Yongbyon nuclear plant.  [Joong Ang Ilbo]

This is a perfect example of “pretend denuclearization” if this does in fact happen.  The Kim regime will have once again received a huge influx of cash for doing little to nothing in return and they get to keep their nukes.