The Columbus Dispatch

These days, all bets are off in nuke race

- VICTOR DAVIS HANSON Victor Davis Hanson is a historian at the Hoover Institutio­n, Stanford University. author@victorhans­on.com

Given North Korea’s nuclear lunacy, what exactly are the rules, formal or implicit, about which nations can have nuclear weapons and which cannot? It is complicate­d. In the free-for-all environmen­t of the 1940s and 1950s, the original nuclear club included only those countries with the technologi­cal know-how, size and money to build nukes — Britain, France, the Soviet Union and the United States.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union and the United States adhered to an unspoken rule that their losing Axis enemies of World War II — Germany, Italy and Japan — should not have nuclear weapons. Despite their financial and scientific ability to obtain them, all three former Axis powers had too much recent historical baggage to be allowed weapons of mass destructio­n. That tacit agreement apparently still remains.

The Soviet Union and the United States also informally agreed during the Cold War that their own dependent allies who had the ability to go nuclear — including Eastern Bloc nations, most Western European countries, Australia and Canada — would not. Instead, they would depend on their superpower patrons for nuclear deterrence.

By the 1970s, realities had changed again. Large and/or scientific­ally sophistica­ted nations such as China (1964), Israel (1967) and India (1974) went nuclear. Often, such countries did so with the help of pro-Western or proSoviet patrons and sponsors.

The next round of expansion of the nuclear club, however, was far sloppier and more dangerous. Proliferat­ion hinged on whether poorer and more-unstable nations could get away with enriching uranium or acquiring plutonium in secret.

Some nations let on that they were developing nuclear weapons and were stopped by pre-emptive military strikes, such as Iraq and Syria. Others, including South Africa, Ukraine and Libya, were persuaded to halt their nuclear projects.

Pakistan was the rare rogue that managed to hide its nuclear enrichment, shocking the world by testing a bomb in 1998.

Nonetheles­s, until the official nucleariza­tion of North Korea in 2006, the nuclear club remained small (eight nations) and was thought to be manageable. Why?

First, those nuclear countries that were relatively transparen­t and democratic (Britain, France, India, Israel and the United States) were deemed unlikely to start a nuclear war.

Second, the advanced but autocratic nuclear nations (China and Russia) were thought to have too much at stake in globalized trade and national prosperity ever to start a lose/lose nuclear war.

Third, any unstable, rogue nuclear nation (Pakistan) was assumed to be deterred and held in check by a nearby nuclear rival (India).

The nuclear capability of dictatoria­l North Korea (and likely soon, theocratic Iran) poses novel dangers far beyond the simple arithmetic of “the more nuclear nations, the more likely a nuclear war.”

Neither North Korea nor Iran is democratic. Neither is a stable country.

Neither has an immediate nuclear rival that can deter and persuade it not to dare use a nuclear weapon. Both started nuclear programs in secret. Both hate the United States and its allies.

More importantl­y, their flagrant violations of nonprolife­ration accords and their perceived aggressive­ness will prompt relatively powerful regional neighbors — such as Egypt, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and Taiwan — to consider developing nuclear capability.

The club then could get big quickly.

Not all of these would-be nuclear powers are democratic. But they do share a single pro-American outlook.

So now the United States is in a paradoxica­l position. It wants to stop all nuclear proliferat­ion. But America also assumes that the next nuclear powers, for a change, would be pro-American.

The United Nations and internatio­nal nonprolife­ration organizati­ons, while well-meaning in intent, have thus far proven impotent in deed.

Yet amid the chaos, until 2006 there were implied rules for the eight-member nuclear club. Now, after North Korea’s unhinged threats, those shared assumption­s about nuclear poker are null and void. And no one quite knows what to expect next.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States