South Korea's nuclear dilemma: Would U.S. trade Seattle for Seoul?
Send a link to a friend
[April 26, 2023]
By David Brunnstrom
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - At a summit with South Korean leader Yoon Suk
Yeol on Wednesday, U.S. President Joe Biden will seek to reassure South
Koreans that the U.S. nuclear umbrella is sufficient protection from
North Korean attack.
But with North Korean missiles now a direct threat to the United States,
an old Cold-War dilemma has resurfaced: would the United States risk
nuclear retaliation against itself to defend an ally?
WHY IS SOUTH KOREA WORRIED?
U.S. "extended deterrence" protection for South Korea rests on a simple,
if grim, assumption: if North Korea were to attack South Korea with
nuclear weapons, it would face devastating U.S. retaliatory strikes.
For years after Pyongyang first tested a nuclear bomb in 2006 this was a
believable threat - North Korea had relatively few bombs and limited
ability to send them far beyond its own borders.
But its arsenal has grown and it now has intercontinental ballistic
missiles (ICBMs) that can reach U.S. cities, making the cost of
defending South Korea potentially far higher.
Skeptical that the United States would really risk its own cities to
defend its ally - the more so after former President Donald Trump
questioned the value of the South Korean alliance when he was in office
- many South Koreans now support the idea of their country developing
its own nuclear weapons.
A poll last month found over 64% of South Koreans support this,
something the Biden administration is set against.
WHAT ARE SOUTH KOREA'S OPTIONS?
Yoon vowed in his election campaign to seek redeployment of U.S.
tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea and possibly "nuclear sharing,"
meaning joint command over U.S. weapons. In January, he raised the
possibility that Seoul might someday need to develop its own nuclear
arsenal, saying it could do this quickly given its scientific expertise.
Yoon never pursued redeployment of tactical nuclear weapons, which
Washington said it would not support, and walked back his comments on a
South Korean bomb, saying his administration was committed to the
nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT).
But his comments have driven a growing debate that one former senior
U.S. defense official said threatens to normalize a once unthinkable
concept of a South Korean nuclear arsenal.
WHAT TO EXPECT FROM THE BIDEN-YOON SUMMIT
To counter such sentiment, Biden will pledge what senior U.S. officials
say will be "substantial" steps to strengthen extended deterrence. A
"Washington Declaration" will include creation of a "Nuclear
Consultative Group" to give South Korea additional insight on U.S.
planning for major contingencies and "a voice in those deliberations,"
one official said.
[to top of second column]
|
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol
delivers remarks to the U.S.-Korea Business Council at the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 25, 2023.
REUTERS/Sarah Silbiger
The aim was to make clear "our absolute and enduring commitment to
provide extended deterrence to (South Korea), including, as
necessary, a decisive response," another said.
The leaders will announce plans to make deterrence more visible
through regular deployments of strategic assets, including a first
U.S. nuclear ballistic-missile submarine visit to South Korea since
the early 1980s.
However, the officials stressed there was "no vision" of returning
U.S. nuclear weapons to the Korean peninsula and that decisions on
their use was the sole authority of U.S. president, while Seoul
would reaffirm its commitment to the NPT and its non-nuclear status.
WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPLICATIONS OF A NUCLEAR SOUTH KOREA?
Nuclear expert Siegfried Hecker warned in January there could be
disastrous downsides to Seoul acquiring its own bomb, spurring North
Korea to build an even bigger arsenal and likely triggering highly
damaging sanctions on South Korea's economy.
Despite South Korea's technical expertise and civilian nuclear
program, creating a nuclear arsenal would take years and could spell
the end of its U.S. alliance and the protection of the U.S. nuclear
umbrella, he wrote.
It would also threaten worldwide non-proliferation efforts.
"South Korea would be the first democratic country to withdraw from
the NPT, dealing a blow to decades of U.S. leadership in preventing
nuclear proliferation," Hecker said. "Washington would have no
choice but to condemn and counter the South's decision to build the
bomb."
"The South can have its own nuclear arsenal — at great expense and
sacrifice — or work with the Americans to remain under the nuclear
umbrella with American troops stationed on the peninsula. It cannot
have both."
(Reporting by David Brunnstrom in Washington; additional reporting
by Josh Smith, Soo-hyang Choi and Ju-min Park in Seoul; Editing by
Don Durfee and Michael Perry)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |