Trump’s North Korea nuclear remarks raise fears of arms race in South Korea and Japan

Experts warn that accepting North Korea as nuclear-armed could test the U.S. alliance and spur proliferation debates in Seoul and Tokyo.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally for Sen. Darline Graham at the Myrtle Beach Convention Center in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, on Aug. 21.
AP/YONHAP

Concerns are growing that the United States may be moving toward de facto acceptance of North Korea as a nuclear-armed state following U.S. President Donald Trump’s remarks on Wednesday that Pyongyang has “57 nuclear weapons.”

The JoongAng Ilbo asked eight foreign policy and security experts from South Korea and abroad about the direction South Korea should take on national security.

The experts warned that if North Korea’s nuclear arsenal comes to be accepted as a reality, South Korea should be prepared for a potential nuclear domino effect, with South Korea and Japan pursuing their own nuclear weapons, as well as a weakening of the South Korea-U.S. alliance.

Among U.S. experts, a growing number argue for a more pragmatic approach that focuses on managing the threat posed by a nuclear-armed North Korea rather than holding on to the longstanding goal of denuclearization.

“The United States and even its allies already recognize North Korea as a nuclear-armed state,” said Ankit Panda, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “We must prioritize deterrence and seek to manage a nuclear-armed North Korea.”

Harry Kazianis, former director of Korean studies at the Center for the National Interest, also called for moving beyond the goal of North Korea’s complete denuclearization.

“The nuclear issue, something we will never get solved in the way we want, which is full disarmament, is never going to happen, and holds back a better tomorrow,” Kazianis said. “However, if we can find the political courage to move past dead ideas like complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearization, we can unlock a better future on the Korean Peninsula.”

Joel Wit, a distinguished fellow at the Stimson Center, however, voiced concern that a shift in Trump’s approach and the cancellation of joint military exercises could have broader consequences for U.S. alliances in the region.

“I think the recent shift in President Trump’s approach to North Korea as well as his cancellation of exercises with the South will only fuel the underlying currents in South Korea and also Japan to seriously consider requesting the redeployment of American tactical nuclear weapons or building their own nuclear forces,” Wit said.

“Both moves will only fuel doubts about the U.S. alliance and the [protection] provided by Washington’s nuclear arsenal.”

Experts were divided over whether South Korea should develop its own nuclear weapons.

“North Korea has at least 60 nuclear weapons and the ability to likely kill every person in South Korea with its atomic arsenal in minutes,” Kazianis said. “We need to state the threat out loud and plan for how to deter it. That means nuclear weapons.”

“South Korea, if it decides to build nuclear weapons, should have nuclear weapons,” he added.

Panda, however, said neither South Korea nor Japan has yet reached the point of pursuing its own nuclear arsenal.

“States do not seek nuclear weapons idly, but they do if alternative security arrangements are deemed to be insufficiently credible to meet their needs,” Panda said. “Right now, South Korea and Japan are each struggling with an unreliable United States, but neither has reached a breaking point.”

South Korean experts placed greater emphasis on strengthening U.S. extended deterrence than on developing an independent nuclear arsenal.

“The South Korea-U.S. Nuclear Consultative Group needs to operate on a permanent and substantive basis,” said Jun Bong-geun, a visiting research fellow at the Sejong Institute. He also suggested a freeze on North Korea’s nuclear activities through a North Korea-U.S. summit as a second-best option.

Lee Sang-kyu, a research fellow at the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses, also called for stronger U.S. extended deterrence.

“It would be preferable to enhance the credibility of extended deterrence,” Lee said. 

Lee Byong-chul, a professor at Kyungnam University’s Institute for Far Eastern Studies, called for accelerating nuclear-related negotiations with the United States.

“If the trend toward accepting North Korea’s nuclear arsenal continues, South Korea should accelerate negotiations on nuclear-powered submarines, low-enriched uranium enrichment and spent nuclear fuel reprocessing,” Prof. Lee Byong-chul said.

Shin Beom-chul, a principal research fellow at the Sejong Institute, proposed a “South Korean-style nuclear sharing” arrangement under which U.S. tactical nuclear weapons stationed in locations such as Guam could be deployed to the Korean Peninsula aboard nuclear-powered submarines or through F-35A fighter jets.

Jeon Kyung-joo, a research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies, suggested coordinating with Washington on the potential use of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, including sea-launched cruise missiles, on the Korean Peninsula.

Experts also raised the possibility that alliance issues could become bargaining chips if a North Korea-U.S. summit takes place.

Wit said North Korean leader Kim Jong-un could demand an end to joint military exercises and a reduction in U.S. Forces Korea.

“President Trump would agree given his longstanding skepticism about the alliance and fixation with the financial cost of the American military commitment,” Wit said.

BY SHIM SEOK-YONG, YOON JI-WON [kim.jiye@joongang.co.kr]