North Korea's Nukes: What Next?

North Korea's first nuclear test has created new political realities for its neighbors.

Monday's test marks the culmination of a year of futile international diplomacy aimed at preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons to the Korean peninsula. North Korea's official announcement, reported by the government-controlled Korean Central News Agency said the test "will contribute to defending the peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in the area around it," according to a translation by Reuters.

While the United States was focusing on Iran's less-advanced nuclear program this summer, Pyonyang was test-firing ballistic missiles, provoking denunciation but no unified response from the rest of the world. Now, with six-party talks all but dead and the U.S. taking the lead in pushing for sanctions, North Korea's neighbors are considering what to do next.

Military strikes against North Korea's weapons of mass destruction are unlikely, according to international online commentators. Japan seems likely bolster its armed forces and tighten relations with China. South Korea is expected to cut back on the cross-border economic ties it hoped would restrain Pyongyang. But Russia and China have little interest in pursuing economic sanctions to punish the reclusive communist regime, say observers.

China's Advantage

The Chinese government condemned the test in harsh terms but several analysts say China feels less threatened than other nations.

"North Korea nukes have their uses for China," says the Hong Kong-based Asia Times.

"The emergence of North Korea as a nuclear power - the only other in East Asia apart from China itself - is perceived in Beijing as an evil that can be contained and even rendered useful as a counterweight to the United States military presence in the region."

The China Daily called for "cool-headedness" and for a return to negotiations without mention of sanctions.

"We suggest that the DPRK stop more excessive actions that will push the situation on the Korean Peninsula to a more dangerous edge," said the state-controlled news site. "What the country can and should do is to return without preconditions to the Six-Party Talks that have been seeking a peaceful solution to the crisis stemming from its nuclear programme."

A leading Chinese expert says China need not succumb to "blind pessimism" about a nuclear North Korea.

Shen Dingli, dean of the Institute of International Studies at the Fudan University, who predicted last week that North Korea would follow through on its threat to detonate a nuclear weapon, cites five reasons why North Korea believes the United States will not take military action.

"They are: first, the DPRK's nuclear deterrent effect; second, the deterrent effect of the DPRK conventional forces; third, the opposition of South Korea and Japan, the allies of the United States; forth, the opposition of China, Russia, and other countries; and finally, the restraining effect on the United States due to the Iraq situation, the Iranian nuclear challenge, and the chaotic situation surrounding Lebanon and Israel."

Dingli, writing for the U.S.-based Nautilus Institute, is also skeptical about scenarios of a regional arms race in which Japan and South Korea develop their own nuclear arsenals in self-defense.

"If Japan and South Korea develop their own nuclear programs in disregard of their military alliance relationship with the United States due to a DPRK nuclear test, this will only show that they no longer believe in U.S. military protection ... The United States may not control the DPRK's nuclear tests, but it still has the ability to prevent its East Asian allies from independently taking the path of developing nuclear weapons."

China's approach, Dingli says, should be to manage, not alienate, its nuclear neighbor.

An Alarmed Japan

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe had just met with Chinese President Hu Jintao and was arriving for talks in Seoul when news of the nuclear test broke.

"A North Korea with nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles constitutes a grave threat," Abe said. "Japan will now consider harsh measures."

"North Korea's show of defiance will likely have a major effect on [the] national defense debate in Japan with calls to expand the missile defense system over Japan or for the government to reserve the right to stage pre-emptive strikes," say the editors of Asahi Shimbun.

The test offers chance for China and Japan, longtime adversaries, to reconcile, says the Daily Yomiuri in Tokyo. The test came on the heel's of Abe's visit to Beijing, the first visit of a Japanese leader to China in five years.

"How China tackles the problems posed by Pyongyang's nuclear test will be a litmus test" of Beijing's intentions, say the editors. China has previously insisted that it would not talk with Japanese leaders unless they stopped visiting the Yasukuni shrine where Japan's militaristic past is honored. China's "more flexible stance" offers hope that the two countries can cooperate in dealing with North Korea, they write.

The test, says Asia Times' Donald Kirk, "has altered the landscape of alliances and enmities in East Asia, suddenly putting Japan in common cause with two terrible foes, China and South Korea."

Meanwhile, an association of victims of the 1945 U.S. nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki joined the chorus of international entities condemning North Korea.

South Korea Seeks Harder Line

The most likely scenario, according to the Korea Herald, is "stepped-up measures through the United Nations."

"This would entail an overall freezing of North Korean financial accounts worldwide and a ban on North Korean trade in international seas. Both would tighten the noose around the already destitute state."

Professor Ryoo Kihl-jae at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul told the Korea Times that he expects the North will soon call for a new diplomatic forum in which it can discuss nuclear disarmament or ways to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula with the United States.

Meanwhile, recriminations around the government's so-called "sunshine policy" of attempting to use economic and cultural ties to elicit North Korean restraint are growing more bitter.

"More than 40 million people living in South Korea are on the verge of being taken hostage by the nuclear weapons of the North... " said the editors of the Korea Times. "Our lenient North Korean policies of giving cash and assistance unilaterally are much to blame for having caused this situation."

Before Monday's test, the Chosun Ilbo daily wrote that North Korea "did not feel the strength of international cooperation when it test-fired its missiles in July this year. The Roh Moo-hyun administration only provided excuses for the missile tests, saying they were 'politically motivated' and continuing a variety of inter-Korean projects. As a result, North Korea did not budge an inch even when the UN Security Council passed Resolution 1695 with a unanimous vote in response to the missile tests."

Russia's Reluctance

A nuclear North Korea tilts the balance of forces in region against Moscow, one analyst told the Interfax news agency. Ivan Safranchuk, director of the Moscow office of the Center for Defense Information, said the test may push the United States, South Korean and Japan into a closer alliance, tantamount to "the revival of the military-political alliance of cold war times."

The Moscow Times notes that leaders of the State Duma blamed North Korea's decision on the United States.

Gennady Yevstafyev, former head of the Foreign Intelligence Service's arms control directorate, said Russia should now seek to prevent Washington and its allies from overreacting to the test and imposing a blockade of North Korea, which would alienate the country completely.

"The only hope for North Korea to enter talks again in the long term is to avoid this extreme reaction," Yevstafyev said, adding that economic incentives and security guarantees could eventually convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear program if talks resume."

Gennady Sysoyev of Kommersant criticized Russia's reluctance to take harsh measures, noting that the Kremlin has the same approach to Iran.

"As Moscow would say, pressure and sanctions against authoritarian regimes are counterproductive, since these measures will only oblige these countries to cut themselves off from the rest of the world. Since it then becomes impossible to influence these regimes, this move is extremely dangerous."

Actually, Sysoyev writes, Moscow is "preserving the hope of consolidating and strengthening its own position" with both countries.

More World Reaction

India condemns North Korea: "Indian officials insist Pyongyang's legal or political status could not be compared to India's position as a country outside the NPT[Non-Proliferation Treaty]. India, the officials said, had never violated its safeguards agreements. 'Please don't lump us with North Korea. India has been transparent, clear. We are separate, distinct. It is ridiculous to compare us to them,' a senior official said."
-- The Hindu

Pakistan denies Dr. Khan's role: "There is absolutely no link between the nuclear test conducted by North Korea or what might have gone on between Dr A.Q. Khan and North Korean government," said Foreign Office spokesperson Tasnim Aslam. "North Korea's programme is plutonium based and Pakistan's is mainly uranium based."
-- Dawn

Iran faults U.S. policy: "Decaying as it already was, a crucial part of US foreign policy went up in nuclear dust on Monday in the mountains of North Korea...For a whole lot of valid reasons, the western covenant 'believe our doctrines or go to hell' has been consigned once more to the thrash can of history. There's a lot of explanation the US and its assorted allies should make about their own nuclear ambitions before preaching to others."
-- Iran Daily

Israel sees a wakeup call: "It is imperative that the West and Israel quickly sober up and stop deluding themselves that the Iranian nuclear program can be stopped. Just like India and Pakistan before it, North Korea proved once again that diplomatic pressure, economic temptations, threats of military action, or sanctions could not stop fanatic regimes of totalitarian states from obtaining the bomb, if they are determined."
-- YNet News

Hans Blix's case for global disarmament: "There is a crying need for a revival of global-disarmament efforts, with further development of and respect for the United Nations. There might be a better chance to dissuade others--including North Korea and Iran--from developing nuclear weapons, if the nuclear states began, themselves, to move away from these weapons and, thereby, strengthen world security."
-- Outlook India

By Jefferson Morley |  October 10, 2006; 9:13 AM ET  | Category:  Asia
Previous: A Tough Mideast Tour for Rice | Next: Journalist's Murder Seen as Indictment of Putin


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Israel sees a wakeup call: "It is imperative that the West and Israel quickly sober up and stop deluding themselves that the Iranian nuclear program can be stopped. Just like India and Pakistan before it, North Korea proved once again that diplomatic pressure, economic temptations, threats of military action, or sanctions could not stop fanatic regimes of totalitarian states from obtaining the bomb, if they are determined."

LOOKS LIKE THE EDITORS OF YNET NEWS HAVE TO BRUSH UP THEIR DICTIONARIES AND LOOK UP THE MEANING OF FANATIC AND TOTALITARIAN. The last I checked, India was a democratic country with no military coup or takeover and a peaceful transision of power every 5 years after a open and fair elections.

Posted by: M Dighe | October 10, 2006 11:58 AM

The window of action is closing fast, either the US and its allies go into North Korea, start a middle scale war with lots of casualties, and stop Kim. Or remember my words, North Korea is going to be holding everybody hostage in 5 or 10 years when it has 10 or 30 nukes and ways to deliver them to the west coast of north america.

Posted by: Jess | October 10, 2006 12:16 PM

YNET Isreal is crying out loud comparing India & Pakistan with DPKR and Iran, then how about Isreal possessing Nukes? hope they are not closing their eyes and making calls.

Total disarmament would be the better solution for world peace, but nobody wants that now... thats very visibile today!

Also YNET wants the WEST to follow suit Isreal in containing Iran, yeah the same age old tactics..

Posted by: Indian | October 10, 2006 12:23 PM

YNET news have a lot of catching up to do regarding their general knowledge. Throwing around fancy words lumping India with Fanatic and Totalitarian only shows their Ignorance.
Also it is to everyones knowledge of that Israel has the nuclear powers too. So doesn't really add much weight to their words. Reminds me of a old adage
"People living in glass houses dont throw stones at others"

Posted by: Pavan | October 10, 2006 12:26 PM

It looks like the lines are beginning to be drawn for the last World War we'll face on Earth simply due to the fact that if another world war does break here, it will result in the majority destruction of all involved. If anyone thinks that this can be avoided, they're deluding themselves. All you need do to understand this is to look at the happenings before WW2 and make the appropriate parallels.

Posted by: J. Lyon | October 10, 2006 12:36 PM

I believe this was set into action the day Bush labeled Iraq Iran and North Korea as the axis of evil

Seeing Iraq invaded left Iran and North Lorea with ONE defense , a nuclear weapon

I am not saying N-K has a right to have one but since Bush took office there has been nothing but crisis after crisis with his tough talk with out any real thought to the consiquenses of HIS actions

A military salution is pretty much out because we are tied up in some country that was the ONLY one of the 3 that wasn't trying to make a MWD but looked like an easy target so we live with it

Posted by: toolman28 | October 10, 2006 12:47 PM

Why don't you take the lead and start something new by supplying the country with the facts about a political candidate. Supply us with the list of facts so we can qualify or disqualify a person based on those facts. The facts about their education, job history, civic history, family history (not pedigree but how their kids turn out says a lot about their ability to lead their family), and voting history. Clear, concise, unbiased facts would go farther for me than catchy slogans and campaign promises. I want to know that the person I am voting to protect me and represent me to the world is going to be thoughtful about the consequences of their actions. Facts compiled by respected trustworthy people not ones submitted by who knows who.

I'm not looking for a person who hasn't made mistakes, but am looking for someone who is sound, mature, and has adjusted themselves to correct the mistakes, which is sometimes called wisdom.

People are busy and I for one do not have the time to watch all of the debates and listen to all of the banter, but I do have time to read the facts about something that will affect not only my life but the lives of people around the world, people who when I watch them starving or destitute on TV breaks my heart.

C'mon guys pick up the media slack and give us some meat so we can pick someone who'll go into the history books as the person who turned it around!

Posted by: William | October 10, 2006 01:02 PM

It is sad how the UN (the US being no exception) has failed to act, this whole policy of "Disarm your country and open up to tests or else we will be very angry and will write a nasty letter telling you how angry we are" does not work. When will they get it through their thick skulls. Bottom line, more should have been done to put political and economic pressure on N.K. forces, we now should start applying this pressure but should also look at stepping up our military presance including the storage of Tactical Nuclear devices in the territories or our Asian allies, not to use them of course but the concept of deterrence applies no less now than it did in the cold war. We need to be ready to deliver nuclear weapons with our military in a matter of minutes and we need North Korea to be fully aware of this capability. I know many are opposed to this approach as the Cold War brought us to the very brink of WWIII and a world wide nuclear holocust, but deterrence is also what prevented the cold war from turning into WWIII.

Posted by: Dissapointed | October 10, 2006 01:04 PM

toolman, you are a tool. Remember the Reagan years? You are saying what everyone else said when Reagan demanded that the wall be torn down. You have to have a tough stance, a view of the goal line, and a determination to get there. Bush has all of those.

Posted by: acastleberry | October 10, 2006 01:20 PM

Bush and the Republicans.

Shoot first then ask questions.

What a concept! It got us in trouble in Iraq and it will get in trouble elsewhere!

It's time to vote these morons out!

Posted by: | October 10, 2006 01:44 PM

Why is China suddenly speaking against North Korea test now ? It should have thought about this when it[China] helped Pakistan's nuclear programme, Pakistan then helped North Korea. What goes around comes around.
Now you have a nuclear regime at the border...China made a stupid move when it helped Pakistan's nuclear programme.

Posted by: | October 10, 2006 02:21 PM

Well, hopefully this is just part of the same pattern of sabre rattling this regime has engaged in for some years now, but hopefully this will finally serve as a wake up call to the Bush administration of how essential diplomacy is in this region. I think it's rather alarmist to call this the beginning of a world war, since either America or Russia could nuke North Korea into a smoking hole in the ground and this dictator well knows that. Most people who have really studied the North Korean regime understand the fact that this is more about economics than war. This leader is using the few cards he has to play a bluff and get the world's attention. So far it seems to be working remarkably well.

Posted by: Jim | October 10, 2006 03:34 PM

In an interview on North Korea Today, Canadian General Romeo Dallaire (so highly critical at the lack of support, from major powers, for the UN mission he was asked to lead, in Rwanda) emphasizes that 1. there is NO military solution to this situation, 2. there is hope only in our going back to Pugwash and to advocating world DISARMAMENT (a famous world movement we have abandoned in the background, says he), 3. it is impossible for us to obtain viable and enduring results, unless we be led by STATESMEN, instead of mere politicians. I happen to agree with General Dallaire. I am glad to read Mr. Hans Blix is also making his convincing case for global disarmament ("There is a crying need for a revival of global-disarmament efforts, with further development of and respect for the United Nations. There might be a better chance to dissuade others--including North Korea and Iran--from developing nuclear weapons, if the nuclear states began, themselves, to move away from these weapons and, thereby, strengthen world security."). His is the voice of reason. Preaching by example is indeed more likely to be successful, than diplomacy having been replaced by the power trip too many of us have grown accustomed to, by now, i.e. the blind and powerful occupying themselves exclusively with brainwhashing, blackmailing, bribing, bullying, and declaring others "irrelevant"(!). The results of that power trip are now staring us in the face in Palestine, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Lebanon, in Iran, in North Korea, etc., as they have in Spain, in England, etc. That is indeed the preview to staying the course. And, to be sure, as the expression goes, "we ain't seen anything yet"...

Posted by: Robert Rose | October 10, 2006 04:52 PM

This was not the Bush admin's fault. It was the international communitys fault, the U.S. Included.
Lunatic communist leaders don't resond to diplomacy unless its in their favor.If you are gonna blame any US president for this, blame Carter and Clinton.

Posted by: Steve | October 10, 2006 04:58 PM

I completely agree that the Bush administration has screwed things up with his "Axis of Evil" "diplomacy", and I would have no problem with bilateral talks with North Korea. However, since they are interested in missile technology, I believe a demonstration is in order. After, checking with the Navy over safety considerations, I would fire a cruise missile with a practice warhead over North Korea, from the Yellow Sea over Pyongyang and strike an appropriate target in the Sea of Japan. Or, the missile could go from the Sea of Japan into the Yellow Sea. I believe such a demonstration would put any negotitions in a real world context, and set the tone for discussions.
However, we must have a fair Peace Treaty that takes into account the need for peaceful development of North Korea that benefits of all it's citizens. No "Free Trade" Imperialism, but bilateral trade!
I would also point out to China and North Korea, that there is a risk that a more militant Japan might arise if she fears an attack. Revenge is not worth a repeat of World War II. Once was enough!

Posted by: P. J. Casey | October 10, 2006 05:07 PM

This is absurd to say that N.Korea wants to kill everybody because he is a dictator or a communist.Lets stop this nonsense right now and smell the coffee.N.Korea has no interest in destroying any country,let alone the U.S.They will not gain any thing.They just wanted to be safe so that their nation will not end up like Iraq.Innocent Iraqis paying the price for U.S.Plus U.S has to get out of South Korea and Japan so that N.Korea will have no excuse to start war.I hope Iran gets nukes because Iran is the best!IRAN NUMBER 1!

Posted by: BRIGHT | October 10, 2006 05:14 PM

Fear those who have used nuclear weapons: USA.

Fear those who have 10,000 nuclear weapons: USA.

Fear those who have vowed to develop "a new generation of nuclear weapons": USA.

Fear those who have repeatedly invaded sovereign states without provocation: USA.

Posted by: | October 10, 2006 05:43 PM

Fear those who believe they have the right to have and use nuclear weapons because they are white while others have no such right: USA.

Fear those who believe they were born to rule the world: USA.

Posted by: | October 10, 2006 05:46 PM

'The release of atomic energy has not created a new problem. It has merely made more urgent the necessity of solving an existing one. Shall we put an end to the human race, or shall mankind renounce war?'
Albert Einstein

'If we do not abolish war on this earth, then surely, one day war will abolish us from the earth.'
Harry Truman

'Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind.'
John F. Kennedy

'I know war as few other men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I have long advocated its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness in both friend and foe has rendered it useless as a method of settling international disputes.'
General Douglas MacArthur

'War settles nothing... Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative...I think that people want peace so much that one of these days government had better get out of their way and let them have it.'
Dwight D. Eisenhower

'People who talk of outlawing the atomic bomb are mistaken - what needs to be outlawed is war.'
General Leslie Groves, Commanding officer, Manhattan Project

I would like to echo Robert Rose's statement that disarmament remains the only way to get off the train to Armageddon.

This is nowadays derided in the United States as the raving of 'kumbaya' fringe hippies. So I guess Eisenhower, MacArthur, Groves, Kennedy, Truman etc were all hippies. Today's American leaders are clearly men of much greater stature.

NPT was in fact a disarmament treaty, in which the existing nuclear powers promised to 'negotiate in good faith towards complete disarmament at an early date.'

Of course it was. Why else would the non-nuclear nations have signed? What would be in it for them? To freeze in place their status as 2nd-class citizens in the pecking order of nations?

The fact is, we broke this treaty when we publicly announced our intentions to keep nukes forever.

As long as we try to maintain a two-tier nuclear world, every nation will have an incentive to get into the top tier.

That incentive becomes a matter of urgency when the nuclear states start threatening and invading non-nuclear nations.

This isn't weakness, it is logic. It's condemned as weakness in the States because the dialogue there is dominated by the paid spokesmen of the armaments industry.

Posted by: OD | October 10, 2006 06:31 PM

...and the seizure of power by the US arms industry was itself a development that Eisenhower foresaw.

Posted by: OD | October 10, 2006 06:35 PM

...and the seizure of power by the US arms industry was itself a development that Eisenhower foresaw.

Posted by: OD | October 10, 2006 06:35 PM

But was the seizure of power by the US arms industry itself a development that Eisenhower foresaw?

Posted by: | October 10, 2006 07:14 PM

Yes, the seizure of power by the US arms industry was itself a development that Eisenhower foresaw.

Posted by: | October 10, 2006 07:15 PM

For those of you out there blaming Clinton and Carter. What? We are talking about being in power a total of 12 out of the last 38 years and it is their fault??? Why can't the repugs fix it? Are they incompetent? This includes your demigod Ronald Reagan. Whatever!

This is why we are having these problems. We refuse to accept responsibility in this country. Whether it is our debt, children, world position, the weak and impoverished.......etc.

I guess that means that the Dems can break stuff, but the Repugs are incapable of fixing things. I say, go with the Dems we are bound to get lucky at least once in a while.

Posted by: RobCor2 | October 10, 2006 07:39 PM developing and testing a nuclear explisive device is one thing. Threatening to launch at Washington....Please....This crazy fool wants to start the war machine up again. Remember, we have a cease fire agreement with the DPRK. They are starving and only have their military. I believe the Dictator wants to start war so we can destroy his country and rebuild it for him just like Japan. Simply put, the DPRK has NOTHING to loose and everything to gain.

Posted by: Nodiggie, Ca | October 10, 2006 10:35 PM

Disarmament? yeah right. Their are too many countries still willing to destroy one another. Do you think Iran and others would destroy Israel if they could? YES. You know, not every country in the world has the resources to become the greatest nation or have the same economic structures and life styles as others. Many countries share these blessings and protect and share what they have with thier very lives. War has been part of living since man was put on this earth. Until man can come to peace with all his neighbors there will be war(s). Pretty simple.

Deterents: Don't worry, The U.S. has subs ready to destroy the whole world with. It is the deterent and only the deterents that keep peace. Yes, fear those who have used nuclear weapons. The difference is those who control those weapons now are not making statements like "wiping Isreal off the face of the map", Invading Kuwait, or destroying World Trade Centers and killing innocent unarmed people.

Problem in Iraq: simply put, we failed to kill the will of the people to fight. Smart bombs.....too smart.

Posted by: Nodiggie, Ca | October 10, 2006 11:11 PM

Ah, so that's the problem, nodiggie? We didn't kill enough Iraqis?

By the way, seen today's front page story in the Post?

Iraq Death Toll Estimate Jumps
Study claims 655,000 Iraqis have died as a result of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

Funny how guys like you have gained such insight into the Middle East and military affairs, all without ever learning to spell words like 'deterrence' and 'Israel'.

Posted by: OD | October 11, 2006 12:51 AM

Nodiggie, Ca,

So let me sum up your POV;

you want to let the US continue to fight against the entire world to keep the Israeli settler movement safe(a group of people who make the KKK look like the NAACP in comparison, who even a majority of Israelis would like to see removed from the occupied territories). You would like us to stay scared, and stay isolated, because the world is just such a dangerous and unpredictable place. That is to say, It's the US and Israel against the whole world, Right?

Maybe, possibly, we could look into forcing the Israelis to raze the settlements in the West bank and East Jerusalem, quit the occupation and allow a free Palestinian state to emerge. Then prehaps, there will be far fewer threats to Israel and 9/11 like events in the US.

The possibility of further aggression agaisnt Kuwait by Iraq(or any other country for that matter) was already assured long before this current fiasco in Iraq occured, but that seemed to have escaped the attention of the current administration, due to their all consuming desire to restructure the middle east to favor the desires of the most radical of ultranationalist Israelis and the fundamentalist American Christian Right.


Posted by: J | October 11, 2006 02:28 AM


I LIKE current US Nuclear Non- Proliferation policy:

Reward nuclear India, because a nuclear India is now a friend of US and is not a present threat to US.

Tolerate nuclear Pakistan, because nuclear Pakistan is a useful friend of US and just a remote threat to US's ally, Israel.

Reject nuclear DPRK, because a nuclear North Korea is a sworn enemy of US, a present threat to US's ally, Japan and a future threat to US.

All the nauseating efforts at distinguishing one nuclear capable nation from another, India from Pakistan from N.Korea, only confirm the fact that NPT is secondary to US national interests.

All this bull of distinguishing India from Pakistan from N.Korea doesn't alter one iota of the fact that US cares more for itself than the rest of the world.

WELL DONE, USA! Countries all around the world have much to learn from your NPT policy - take good care of oneself and TO HELL WITH THE WORLD!

Posted by: SUPPORTER OF NUCLEAR DPRK | October 11, 2006 12:11 PM

The North Koreans are very tough negotiators, and they need to appreciate the strength of their opponents during negotiations.
However, I am coming around to the belief, that The Bush administration will string this crisis out in order to justify the various Missile Defense schemes currently in the pipeline, in order to sell them to the American people and other countries. One has only to look at the failure of Israel's Arrow system from Boeing which was helpless in the face of Katyusha rockets in the Israeli/Hizbollah war. For example, Japan is very close to North Korea, and they would not have time to use a missile defense system. They would need a sustantial second strike capacity. Deterance is more effective.
I am rather suspicious of the support for a Japanese Missile Defense System, and Japanese newspapers need to see if American Defense Contractors make any contributions to successful candidates in the last elections in Japan.

Posted by: P. J. Casey | October 11, 2006 01:54 PM

I dont't know what's all the fuss about.It seems that we now live in a free for all world.
Here we have the super nuclear powers i.e US, Russia, China, France and UK

also we have the others:
Pakistan, India, Israel and now North Korea.

One is entitled to ask, if it's ok for the above-mentioned countries to have the nukes, why NOT IRAN?

Posted by: nehad ismail, camberley, england | October 11, 2006 03:51 PM

USA foreign policy of pre-emptive war has failed. It needed direct open dialogue with those 'evil' contries to facilitate a save-face alternative for their policies. Soveriengty is not a big hit in Hollywood, were it seems my president gets it's foriegn policy ideas. The cold war is over. And by the way Mr. Editor, your geography 'americain' failed you. Russia extends into east Asia. Vladisvostok is within missile range, as are, India and Pakistan. China is not the only "important" country in the region. Is the only one our government seems to count on militarily. India will receive USA nuclear know how. DRPK is looking to survive in a very nuclearly tight continent. It is time to sit down and talk to these 'evil' soverign nations. Iraq has lost 600.000+ people in 3 years and diplomats knew it had no WMD. That is no Hollywood infotainment, and I doubt is a real count. How about some alternatives sources of energy that truly make us free, independent and above all, sovereign. Thank you Bro.

Posted by: MUCARO CAPARRA | October 12, 2006 12:55 AM

This article is to long and just needs to put in a little bit shorter phrase. Like it needs to get straight to the point.

Posted by: No comment | October 12, 2006 10:58 AM


I notice that Indian readers were sweating bullets over Korea's Nuclear Test.

My word of advice to Indian readers is not to be unduly worried, as there are huge differences between Incredible India and Communist Korea.

While Korea is "evil", India since its independence in 1947 until today has been the world's biggest democracy. India's demoNcratic and peace-loving credentials are unassailable. In Kashmir, for example, India held on to the disputed land based on the sole decision of the then Kashmiri Maharaja Hari Singh to join the Indian Union against the wishes of his subjects and India has until today prefer to settle the Kashmir dispute through bullets rather than ballots. India would rather station hundreds of thousands of soldiers in Kashmir to maintain its hold there rather than to hold a referendum to solve the dispute there.

Two, when India tested its nuclear bomb in 1998, the whole world was filled with pride and joy over India's great nuclear achievement with the world leaders then literally falling over one another to sent India bouquets and congratularty messages for the successful tests.

On the contracry, the Korean nuclear bomb has only invited worldwide condemnation and inminent sanctions.

Proud of DEMONcratic India!

Posted by: SUPPORTER OF NUCLEAR DPRK | October 13, 2006 05:03 PM

What was stated by the Indian officials is indeed correct as highlighted in The Hindu . India , though not signed the NPT ,it stood by the commitment as a responsible nation and it has not transferred its nuclear technology to any other country. On the contrary Pakistani rulers as seemingly unknown to them, have allowed AQ Khan and his ilk to sell , the nuclear designs to make weapons to those rogue countries like N.Korea and Iran .Yet the US still treats Pakistan as its prodigal son!. Hence bracketing India with N.Korea is unjust. In fact Mr.Bush should have included Pakistan in the list of "axis of evil" countries, considering its culpability as regards the nuclear technology transfer negating the very NPT, which the Americans force on other countries to strictly adhere. .If any one suspects Indian credential as regards Jammu & Kashmir he or she is sadly mistaken. The accession of J&K with India is final and no force on earth can shake it or unshackle . The disgruntled militants who are being covertly aided and abetted by Pakistan are creating problem in "J&K " for the past twenty two years. India is facing terrorism and this is known to all the countries including the US although no one admits it openly. Otherwise the former President Senior Bush would not have threatened to declare Pakistan as a "terrorist state" fifteen years back. To brand India as 'DemoNcratic " country is nothing but sheer ignorance. India is a peace loving country which stood for "Ahimsa" ie. Non-violence . And India respects and honour the agreements signed either by Raja Hari Singh or any one bilaterally. Where as the communist regimes ,bereft of democracy, neither respect nor honour such agreements hence the mudslinging at India. Yes India did go nuclear since there was no alternative as its arch enemy Pakistan possessed nuclear weapons. And there is no question of holding a referendum as the J&K accession is final and irrevocable. There are many ethnic groups or religious minorities in Pakistan as well as in many countries who are denied even basic rights and ruled ruthlessly. Can you demand to conduct "referendum" ? What will happen to each country's integrity and unity?. So let us not blame India without knowing the factual truths or ground realities.

Posted by: a.seshagirirao | October 14, 2006 07:22 PM


The US proposed the formation of the Nuclear Suppliers Group following the 1974 nuclear explosion by India. The primary purpose was to ensure that suppliers uniformly applied a comprehensive set of guidelines to ensure that nuclear cooperation did not contribute to proliferation, as that happened with India.

When India tested a nuclear device in 1974 after years of clandestine and covert operation to develop nuclear weapons under the guise of nuclear cooperation with other countries like Canada, Indian then-PM Indira Gandhi declared that it was a "PEACEFUL NUCLEAR EXPLOSION." - LOL

I'm sure Korea's nuclear explosion too will contribute to PEACE & STABILITY in the region by making the Warring America think thrice before attempting another Afghanistan or Iraq.

When India formally went nuclear in 1998, a furious Prez. Clinton reacted saying America would COME DOWN ON INDIA LIKE A TON OF BRICKS!

Amidst the worldwide firestorm of condemnations and sanctions, Indian then-PM AB.Vajpayee, told the Indians IT WAS NOT THE END OF THE WORLD.

Sure enough, 8 years later, America came to India bearing TONS OF GIFTS! LOL!



Posted by: SUPPORTER OF NUCLEAR DPRK | October 19, 2006 04:54 AM

The answer to it all is simple living
growing own food and not relying on others
then we dont have to deal with these
uncivilized nations on any terms, we just wont need them anymore for anything.

Posted by: terry in falls | October 21, 2006 03:44 PM

Thank you! |

Posted by: Hayden | October 29, 2006 05:52 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2006 The Washington Post Company