April 13, 2023

"The (South) Korean Nuclear Threat"

Dr Jeffrey Robertson, writing at the Australian Institute of International Affairs (AIIA) website, has written the excellent article, of April 13, 2023, below:

The (South) Korean Nuclear Threat 
By Dr Jeffrey Robertson
ANALYSIS

SHARE
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

South Korea is in the midst of a debate to secure nuclear weapons and few outside realise the seriousness and level of the debate. Few inside realise the question is much bigger than just South Korea, with great implications for the region, including Australia. 

Debate on securing an independent nuclear weapons capacity once sat on the fringe of mainstream politics in Seoul. The extreme left and right, ex-military, religionists, and mavericks seeking attention were its champions. This is no longer the case. Today it is widely accepted, even common. Polls taken over the last year put public support in the 70-80 percent range. Securing nuclear weapons is now mainstream, viable, and if trends continue, even likely.

What makes South Korea want nuclear weapons? There’s a ready response from those pushing the agenda. North Korea’s missile and nuclear tests, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and concerns regarding a rising China. Each can readily be used to justify the pursuit of nuclear weapons. Yet, each are just squalls on the surface of the sea. Underneath, more powerful currents are pushing the pursuit of nuclear weapons: national pride, the desire to be more independent, and a healthy dose of domestic political opportunism.

National pride is a core contributor to the decision to pursue nuclear weapons. For both Koreas, there’s a keen sense of historical injustice marked by invasions from all sides, including occupation, and division. For South Koreans, there’s also a competitive streak that stretches from the individual to the national desire to be number one. There’s even speculation that the U.S. would be willing to allow Seoul to secure nuclear weapons in order for it to play a larger role in balancing China, placing South Korea at a new level of partnership with Washington. Among many, securing a nuclear weapons capacity provokes a certain element of national pride: more than just a middle power – a member of the nuclear weapons club.

The desire to be more independent is also an important contributing factor. Donald Trump, and the fear of a second Trump administration, may have given the extra push, but the desire for greater independence is much older. From the earliest negotiations between the U.S. and South Korea to secure agreement on a Korean War ceasefire, Seoul fought not just for the promise of U.S. support in the event of another North Korean invasion, but also for the capability to make its own decisions. Since the 1950s, South Korea clawed back this capability, steadily removing U.S. restrictions on its armed forces and building an independent armed forces capacity. It is now a leading global arms supplier, ship (and submarine) builder, has an indigenous jet fighter program, and is developing its own military satellite and missile defense programs.

South Korea is now the tenth largest economy in the world. The desire for a greater capability to act independently is an inevitable trend – and some see nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantor of independent action.

Domestic political opportunism is the icing on the cake. Already, civic groups with professors, former public servants, students, journalists, and other budding politicians have emerged to push for an independent nuclear weapons capacity. Ostensibly, such groups are formed to coordinate and educate citizens on nuclear weapons. In reality, they are used to pursue political power. They exploit latent nationalism with popular concerns and fears, exacerbate and muddy debate, and ultimately position group leaders into positions of political power. Any subject that mixes national pride and independence is ripe for exploitation. The current presidentYoon Suk-yeol [photo above, in white mask], has made remarks supporting the acquisition of nuclear weapons, and the Mayor of Seoul – a position that is a stepping stone to the presidency – has also stated his support. Nuclear weapons will see multiple candidates jump on the bandwagon in the lead-up to the April 2024 legislative elections, and likely more than one candidate in the 2027 presidential elections.

Proliferation, from France to North Korea, is a story of national pride, independence, and political opportunism. South Korea is no different.

It is likely the consequences of this momentous decision to pursue an independent nuclear weapons capacity have not been fully thought through. The short to medium-term impact can be easily ascertained. South Korea will face global condemnation and potentially political and economic sanctions. Yet, South Korea’s diplomatic credentials as a state that exercises substantial restraint may also give pause for thought. So, too, will its role in global supply chains. In the current political climate, a well-coordinated diplomatic campaign, demonstrating that much of the blame lies not in Seoul but in Pyongyang and its enablers, could limit sanction severity and longevity.

In the 1960s, Australia made the decision to forego nuclear weapons in the context of a global diplomatic and strategic understanding that proliferation could be controlled. Since that time, debates about Australia securing nuclear weapons have arisen, but they’ve never been mainstream. Debates in recent years have been more brain-storming and speculation than serious policy-specific programming. A South Korean decision to pursue nuclear weapons would substantially transform strategic outlooks across the region and lead to a more serious debate in Australia. The current nuclear submarine debate would look like a Sunday School picnic.

Jeffrey Robertson is an Associate Professor of Diplomatic Studies at Yonsei University and a Visiting Fellow at the Asia Institute, University of Melbourne. He researches the diplomatic practice and foreign policy of middle powers with a focus on the Korean Peninsula. He writes and updates research at https://junotane.com and on Twitter @junotane. 

This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Pete Comment


I'm one of the "band of brothers" writing outside the mainstream on a future Australian  second strike, nuclear deterrent capability. See my:


"B-21 Nuclear Bombers for Australia May Be Worth It." August 23, 2022


-  "US Nuclear Weapon Sharing Under AUKUS? Addition." January 7, 2023


-  "Australian Nuclear Deterrent: French Missile Help?" January 12, 2023, and


-  "B-21s May Be A Good Idea: Further Thoughts" March 16, 2023, which talks of Australian B-21s, from a base in Alice Springs, conducting nuclear strike on Beijing.

6 comments:

  1. South Korea also wants nuclear-powered submarines:

    "South Korea’s longrunning nuclear submarine ambitions are more than hype, and
    there are signs it may be inching to a conclusive decision on its acquisition
    plans.

    According to an anonymous source cited in media reports, a technical meeting
    attended by representatives from South Korea’s Defines Acquisition Program
    Administration, the Republic of Korea Navy, Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine
    Engineering and an unidentified foreign company with expertise in building
    nuclear-powered subs was recently held."

    See:

    https://asiatimes.com/2022/06/south-korea-has-nuclear-subs-firmly-in-its-sights/

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'll keep my comment short as I am pressed for time.

    A nuclear-armed South Korea will almost certainly result in a nuclear-armed Japan. Though I have always seen that as an inevitability - it was only a matter of time.

    Cheers Pete

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nukes or not, South Korea's military is bulking up:

    "Up to three "Joint Firepower Ships" could be built. They'll each carry over
    80 ballistic missiles of a new type.

    DSME was selected as the preferred negotiations partner for the conceptual
    design of the Joint Firepower Ship.

    South Korea’s plans for an Arsenal Ship first emerged in August 2019 at the
    same time as the CVX aircraft carrier project (then known as LPX-II
    project). However, virtually no information on the arsenal ship was
    published ever since, to the point where its funding was a question mark as
    CVX took center stage earlier this year. This was until the fall of 2021
    and a ROK Joint Chiefs of Staff announcement."

    See:

    https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/04/south-koreas-dsme-to-design-arsenal-ship-for-rok-navy/

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Anonymous at 4/15/2023 5:09 AM looks like APRIL FOOLS

    Until the Joint Firepower Ship mention can be located at the actual S Korean Navy website at https://www.navy.mil.kr/mbshome/mbs/navy/index.do

    the Joint Firepower Ship looks like APRIL FOOLS.

    DETAIL

    See the "Joint Arsenal Ship" artwork at the website you have alluded to :

    https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/04/south-koreas-dsme-to-design-arsenal-ship-for-rok-navy/

    Artwork is at least 24 years old - being at US FAS 1999 article

    https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ship/arsenal_ship.htm (just scroll down to bottom)

    Cheers Pete

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi Anonymous at 4/14/2023 1:15 AM

    I've been writing substantially on South Korean nuclear-powered submarine (KSS-N) issues since 2015 see https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/search?q=KSS-N

    Regarding https://asiatimes.com/2022/06/south-korea-has-nuclear-subs-firmly-in-its-sights/

    "According to an anonymous source cited in media reports, a technical meeting
    attended by representatives from South Korea’s Defines Acquisition Program
    Administration, the Republic of Korea Navy, Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine
    Engineering and an unidentified foreign company with expertise in building
    nuclear-powered subs was recently held."

    That "...unidentified foreign company..." is very likely Naval Group with SK interested in (a higher likelihood of the US allowing SK to utilise) LEU Barracuda K-15 reactor technology than HEU reactors from other N submarine countries. See: https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2021/08/s-korea-richer-than-russia-so-sk-ssbn.html

    With the US permitting Australia having weapons grade HEU reactors for AUKUS - then US dominated anti-proliferation international law is now very weak on LEU submarine reactors for SK.

    The cost and specialised nature of any future SK SSBN points directly to SK nuclear armed SLBMs. This is given NK would automatically respond with nuclear missiles to Even conventional warhead SLBMS.

    Regards Pete

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Gessler at 4/15/2023 2:07 AM

    Undoubtedly a nuclear-armed South Korea would "permit" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenemy Japan to be nuclear-armed.

    Also the consequent weakening of the already discredited NPT would also see other countries in the region, with past interest in nuclear weapons, to likely acquire them. That includes Taiwan (risking preemptive action by China) and future nuclear sub owning Australia puttin N-hypersonic-missiles on those subs.

    This proliferation process from northeast Asia "down" to Australia is metaphorically termed here the Nuclear Cascade ie. like a radioactive waterfall.

    "Nuclear Tipping Points" is a broader proliferation metaphor.

    Regards Pete

    ReplyDelete

You can comment :)