Would nuclear weapons make us safer?

By Emanuel Pastreich

It has become popular for Korean businessmen and bureaucrats to argue that Korea needs to have its own nuclear weapons in order to assure its security. The change in thinking has been aided by a series of high-profile editorials in the Korean media, including editorials by moderate thinkers, advocating for the option of South Korean nuclear weapons as part of a general military build-up.

When Koreans start their argument for Seoul developing its own nuclear weapons, they refer to the importance of the non-proliferation treaty, but go on to suggest that we must be practical and that Seoul must seriously consider its own nuclear program for its own interests.

I understand why Koreans have come to the conclusion that Korea must have more independence in its security and intelligence policy. That judgment is absolutely correct. The Trump administration in specific, along with the entire Washington political culture, has become so corrupt and so ruthless that we cannot expect America to effectively stand up for Korea's interests.

However, the arguments advanced for the possession of South Korean nuclear weapons assume that if South Korea has nuclear weapons, and a larger military, it will be more secure.

There is no reason to make such an assumption.

In a simple conflict with a single clear enemy an argument can be made for increasing military strength. But South Korea's security is determined by a complex system that extends to China, Japan, Russia and the United States. Deterring North Korea is but one factor in the equation, and perhaps not the most important one.

The most likely scenario that will result if South Korea starts to develop nuclear weapons and to bulk up its military will be to encourage further a major arms race in East Asia between South Korea, Japan and China (and Russia, the United States and other nations). That race has already started, but it has not spun out of control yet.

If a full-fledged nuclear arms race takes off in Northeast Asia, we will all forget about North Korea's tiny stash of weapons very quickly.

Anyone who thinks that Seoul's development of nuclear weapons and expansion of conventional weapons will make Korea a safer nation is living in a parallel universe and has no sense of strategy or for that matter realism.

If South Korea starts developing ICBMs and nuclear weapons, even with the encouragement of the United States, so will Japan, and maybe other nations as well. The Trump administration does not care about Korea's long-term security and such foolish remarks by Americans should be simply ignored. All decisions should be based on objective domestic Korean research and a domestic debate based on the scientific principle.

What people are missing in this discussion is what we should be grateful for. China has maintained a relatively small military compared to its economic power and has kept its stash of nuclear weapons to under 300. But if South Korea starts to develop nuclear weapons, and the Abe administration announces similar intentions (which conservatives are already hinting at), China will feel entirely justified in increasing its stock of nuclear weapons.

China has a massive economy and considerable technological expertise. It could easily surpass the United States and Russia in nuclear weapons if it makes up its mind to do so, reaching ten thousand nuclear weapons in a few years.

And once the competition starts, the sky is the limit.

Japan might end up with 5,000 nuclear weapons, South Korea, 3,000, and Taiwan, Vietnam and Indonesia might follow into this dangerous nuclear arms race.

Would South Korea be safer in such an environment? No expert on nonproliferation and disarmament thinks so. But this discussion about nuclear weapons in Seoul is being led by people who do not know what they are talking about.

We can be sure of one thing: South Korea's economic scale and population is limited and it will not be able to compete if there is a full-blown arms race in Northeast Asia driven by Japan and China. The result of this foolish effort of Korea to increase its military power could be an environment that is even more dangerous for Korea and may lead to economic bankruptcy and an end to independence. We will look back with fondness to the age when North Korea had only a handful of weapons.

Korea would be better off it makes a series of proposals for talks on limitations on convention and nuclear weapons for the region, much as Europe did in the 1970s. If Korea lobbies hard for arms limitations, it can increase its stature in the region and save itself from a rather grim future.

Developing nuclear weapons in South Korea will significantly increase insecurity for the simple reason that South Korea will not be able to compete with the capacity of China and Japan to produce such weapons and because the instability in the region thus created will negate any marginal security for South Korea brought about by the new weapons.

Emanuel Yi Pastreich is a critic of literature, technology and international affairs. He teaches at Kyung Hee University and works at the Asia Institute. Contact epastreich@gmail.com.