Kim Jong-un in love with nukes
In defiance of the United Nation’s Security Council resolutions, North Korea has gone ahead with nuclear and missile programs. And in the past few weeks, there has been uncertainty and debate globally about the consequence, role, and implications of nuclear and missile programs by North Korea on international security. Importantly, America, China, South Korea, and Japan are worried. You may recall that North and South Korea are “technically” at war, because the 1950-1953 conflict ended in a truce, without a peace treaty. The isolated North Korea leader regularly threatens to destroy Japan, South Korea and the United States of America (USA) if provoked, and hasn’t relented in his aggression after a failed missile test on 16 April 2017.
America, the world-policeman, has declared that there is “no more strategic patience on North Korea.” As America plans its next move to curb the excesses of the belligerent leader, Mr Kim was reported to have warned the Americans of a “super-mighty preemptive strike”, saying “don’t mess with us”. One is tempted to ask: What will be the result of “super-mighty preemptive strike” when launched? “It will completely and immediately wipe out not only U.S. imperialist invasion forces in South Korea, and its surrounding areas but the US mainland and reduce them to ashes”, according to a North Korean source. Can you imagine what the leader of an isolated nation wants to do to humanity in the Twenty-first Century? Perhaps, that is why nuclear weapons are seen by many nations as the ultimate deterrent. The strength of nuclear weapons, they argue, lies in the immense, indiscriminate destruction and havoc they inflict, as well as vulnerability of the world to nuclear attack.
For some nations, the wicked nature of such destruction means that the nuclear weapon is not a viable offensive weapon. That is why nations such as Japan, Sweden, Switzerland, and Canada amongst a few have chosen not to “go nuclear” despite their technological capabilities. The acquisition of a nuclear weapon by any nation is for prestige and political reasons. But some experts have argued that despite the enormous deterrent or coercive capability of a nuclear weapon, “the possibility of a nuclear retaliation is so devastating that nuclear states are very unlikely to be provoked to deploying their nuclear arsenals.” So, the question one may ask is: would North Korea deploy a nuclear weapon if provoked, and will America retaliate with a similar weapon in its arsenal? I don’t think either of North Korea or America will deploy a nuclear weapon. But North Korea will continue with its missile testing programs in the face of sanctions.
Although, the possession of nuclear weapon is an equalizer for weak nations, which makes them too dangerous to be attacked, the security provided by nuclear weapons make them more appealing to those threatened by a superpower such as America with overwhelming military force. That is why the acquisition of nuclear weapons is an important factor in the strategic calculus of some weak nations particularly in Asia. For some time, China has been modernizing its nuclear arsenal, while an emerging economy such as India and politically unstable Pakistan have nuclear weapons. Iran and North Korea are not left out of the nuclear game as they have stepped up their weapons program.
In 2017 alone, North Korea has tested several medium-range missiles with one failing recently. Mr Kim Jong-un recently displayed his country’s missiles to mark 105th anniversary of the birth of his grandfather Kim II-sung, North Korea’s founding leader. New hardware including intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) which is capable of hitting America were on display. Indeed, North Korea has vowed to test missiles on a weekly basis. There is no doubt that Kim Jong-un, the supreme leader of North Korea loves nukes. Kim Jong-un has gone on serial missile testing to protect his regime.
One is tempted to think that the acquisition of nuclear capability by North Korea is to protect its people. Not quite. It’s to enhance its military security and prestige. All these efforts are aimed at protecting the regime of Mr Kim, not the people of North Korea per se. This explains the distortion of security in North Korea and other poor nations with nuclear capabilities, as the focus is almost exclusively regime survival. That is why Mr Kim finds nothing wrong in spending huge resources to making weapons of mass destruction instead of providing basic amenities for his people.
China’s Xi Jinping has been advised by America’s Donald Trump to rein in North Korea. China however, wants the Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons. It would not be in the interest of China to have an aggressive and unpredictable neighbor. Importantly, China is reluctant placing further restrictions on North Korea, as President of China, Xi Jinping, is favorably disposed to recent sanctions imposed on North Korea by the UN. Unfortunately, Russia vetoes UN statements condemning North Korea’s missile test. Since 2012, sanctions haven’t deterred Mr Kim as he has been recalcitrant. China however, wants peaceful solution to the North Korean issue, and fears unilateral American action. As I write, China’s bombers are on “high alert”,contrary to speculations that China may likely not make radical policy changes to restrict North Korea from testing its missiles because of the former’s non-interference policy of over half a century.
America should use diplomacy as an instrument of national power to realign North Korea to embracing regional and world peace. But if diplomacy fails, the use of force should be the next option. As the world keeps a closer watch on the North Korean leader and his serial missile testing endeavor, methinks that “global powers” should lessen the role of military power as an instrument of foreign policy, and a symbol of national status. China should advocate and promote regional cooperation among states in East Asia, with similar security interests in order to assume greater responsibility for global peace and stability in the area.
MA Johnson