South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol on Wednesday threatened that South Korea could obtain its own nuclear weapons if threats from the North grow, marking the first such comments from a South Korean leader in decades.
“It’s possible that the problem gets worse and our country will introduce tactical nuclear weapons or build them on our own,” Yoon said at a policy briefing with his foreign and defense ministers. “If that’s the case, we can have our own nuclear weapons pretty quickly, given our scientific and technological capabilities.”
Yoon’s warning comes as tensions are soaring on the Korean Peninsula, and the prospect of the South obtaining nukes will inflame tensions even more.
According to The New York Times, Yoon’s comments were the first time a South Korean leader officially mentioned arming the country with nuclear weapons since the US withdrew its nukes from the Korean Peninsula in 1991. Yoon added that he could ask the US to redeploy those weapons and said increasing military cooperation with Washington was another way he could deal with the growing threats from Pyongyang.
He also said that acquiring nuclear weapons was not yet an official government policy, but his office did not walk back his comments when asked to clarify them the following day.
“The most important part of his comments yesterday was that, as a realistic measure at the moment, it’s important to effectively strengthen extended deterrence within the security alliance between South Korea and the United States,” Yoon’s office said Thursday.
“However, when it comes to security, the worst-case scenario must always be taken into consideration, and from that perspective, he was making his commitment and determination ever clearer to protect the people as commander-in-chief against the escalating threat of North Korea’s nuclear weapons,” the office added.
South Korea is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which bans non-nuclear armed states from acquiring nuclear weapons. Yoon’s office said that Seoul still abides by the NPT.
North Korea launched a record number of missile tests in 2022 as the US and South Korea resumed massive war games. North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un recently ordered his country to expand its nuclear arsenal, and Yoon said shortly after that he was in talks with the US on expanding military exercises to include US nuclear forces.
The Biden administration has made virtually no effort to defuse tensions on the peninsula, at least publicly, and has only ramped things up by deploying bombers to South Korea for the first time since 2017. The administration maintains it’s open to talks with Pyongyang but hasn’t offered any incentive to bring North Korea to the table.
Waiting on US/West/NATO is evil and Russia is super nice comments.
I knew you would understand… 😉
I think they would be stupid not to. Besides giving then leverage with North Korea, it also gives them leverage with China, Japan, US, and Russia.
On the world stage, having nukes talks, and talks loudly.
Well, it DOES seem that having ‘your own’ nukes gives you a much stronger position in this world as it really is. But I am dubious that everyone ‘nuking it up’ is a very good idea. I see a lot of idiots/sociopaths sitting upon a multitude of petty thrones. :-/
You are right EM, it is not a good idea but I can see situations where there is some benefit and I have been anti-nuke my whole life…
Sure, having nukes keeps the ones who don’t have them out of your hair, and lets you posture along with the growing list of other folks who have them. Maybe I could find a way to build one using Wikipedia. 😉
You have a good heart EM.
Thank you. I am not sure it is as ‘good’ as it could be. I get pretty angry at a lot of what I see…..
You have a good heart.
Can I ask you a question EM? If you don’t mind…
Are you by chance a writer? You have a very good way with words…
I write as little as possible. I am an historian. Writing things down causes trouble, haha.
How very interesting, a historian. I admire that much.
Does anyone remember the The Ungoverned? Vernor Vinge’s libertarian utopia where everyone had their home nukes? Somehow, some way humanity has to put a break on the devising and inevitably using increasing lethal weapons. If we don’t succeed, we all die. And we’ll deserve it.
Yeah, ain’t Washington DC a hoot?
If Iraq kept its nukes, the US & UK would have been unable to bomb Iraq from the No Fly Zones which they did after the Gulf War ended and before the Iraq War started. If Syria had nukes, there would be no war there and if Afghanistan had nukes, there would be no war there either. If Libya had nukes, the Coalition Forces would not be able to bomb it. Iran should have nukes to keep the US, UK, Israel, Saudi Arabia and many other nations out of its territory. It is a good thing North Korea has nukes so it can keep the US, Japan, South Korea and other enemies out of its territory.
I completely agree with you. 🙂
Nuke it up!
Israel bombed Iran and killed Iranian scientists in order to prevent Iran develop the nukes. So we have a precedent. North Korea can do the same.
South Korea has been start/stop on this path many times over many years. Each time, it stops because the US insists, and because the US repeats its promises to make US nukes available against the North if it comes to that.
It is hard to see what has changed in that calculus. South Korea could spend an awful lot to get far less than what it already has from the US — unless it now somehow does not trust that.
There is no doubt nuclear weapons are big; Even so they are close to being technology from a century ago. North Korea is seeking blockbuster strength to save itself from the US at war with Russia and prodding war with China and Iran.
The US is a totalitarian military empire with very little imagination. It is at this time turning inward for war against it’s own citizens. South Korea will do much better looking to the future rather than joining with Japan as slaves in a proxy war against China that is similar to the US engineered slaughter in Ukraine.
One of the main deterrents of nuclear war for the past 75 years has been Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). Can this also be the case on the Korean peninsula?
Could it be true for Iran vis a vis Israel
India and Pakistan?
Japan and China?
Oh dear, this could go and on… 😉
Not indefinitely. That’s the problem.
My latest nuclear abolition plan is for the US to withdraw from S. Korea while that country builds its own nuclear arsenal and then we maneuver the two Koreas into mutual annihilation, which probably wouldn’t be that hard. Even Republicans and Democrats would be able to see the downside of nuclear war. Admittedly it’s not the most ethical of plans but it’s at least more realistic than expecting humanity to come to its senses by way of simple reason, and if an end ever justified a means this one does. Assuming a nuclear exchange is eventually going to happen, we very much need to try to make it as small and contained as possible, and it isn’t going to just happen that way on its own. Orchestrating a small scale nuclear war may be the only realistic way to prevent a much larger nuclear war which would effectively end civilization. Let’s get on this.
I think you raise some very interesting points…
Now I’m really worried.
We should all be worried…
It will reduce their reliance in the US,and quiet the loony to the north.If Ukraine had kept a few nukes and their TU-22’s,they would not be undergoing macerization.
Yawn. Who cares? The more small states have nukes, the less likely the aholes in DC will be inclined to mess with them.
As long as we already have aholes like Biden and Blinken running the show, we might as well see the entire planet armed to the teeth. It would certainly become a more honest world, as no one would be forced to act as though they look up to us.
Highly cynical OB1!
Well I notice we haven’t attacked North Korea…
Thankfully OB1, thankfully….