90 seconds to midnight
Korea must proactively mitigate, adapt to existential risks
Last week, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (BAS) reset the Doomsday Clock to 90 seconds before midnight. This is the closest the clock has ever been to midnight since 1974 and for the second year in a row. This is yet another wake-up call for humanity demonstrating that a business-as-usual approach will no longer work.
The clock was started by the scientists involved in the creation of atomic bombs in 1945 who later deeply regretted their contributions to the project. These scientists, including a number of Nobel Prize laureates, feared that they had built a weapon too powerful and destructive to be undone.
Ever since, the clock has vacillated between 2 and 17 minutes to midnight, depending on the global geo-political dynamics of the time. During the Cold War, the most dangerous year was 1953 when the clock was set at 2 minutes to midnight following the Soviet acquisition of nuclear weapons and the Korean War. In the immediate aftermath of the Cold War, the clock moved to 17 minutes thanks to the progress made in the U.S.-Russia nuclear disarmament dialogue and the generally warmer political climate.
However, the clock is now moving into the danger zone once again, as the big power rivalry rears its ugly head. For the first two decades of the 21st century, the clock has inched ever closer to midnight.
In 2018, the clock reached the 2-minute mark, matching the Cold War’s lowest point. But this record was short lived because in 2022, the clock was set at 100 seconds to midnight. Then last year, the clock was pushed further to 90 seconds in the wake of Russia’s nuclear blackmail.
Two factors can explain this worsening trend.
First, existential risks for humanity come from three fronts. For the first six decades since World War II, nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were the sole source of concern. Then in 2007, climate change joined the list, as the impact from climate and other sustainability issues became increasingly acute worldwide.
Most recently, emerging technologies seem to fit the bill. Artificial intelligence (AI) is certainly the most talked about, but not the only issue under scrutiny. How AI combines with other state-of-the-art technologies in both cyber and outer spaces as well as in the bio-engineering sector is expected to pose challenges unforeseen before. This nexus, if misused, can wreak unimaginable havoc on human life. As such, rogue states and violent non-state actors, like terrorist groups, would be particularly keen to acquire such disruptive and dangerous technologies. Some disarmament experts are concerned about the possible emergence of a new kind of WMD through these advanced technologies. Now the triple specter is about to be let loose beyond human control.
Second and more seriously, it is harder than ever to come to a global consensus at a time when humanity needs more effective norms and rules to confront these existential threats. Bloc politics are reemerging globally in a competitive and confrontational manner between two camps, the liberal democratic block led by the United States versus the authoritarian bloc led by China.
As a result, key global norms for disarmament and many other critical issues are undergoing a serious stress test, some of which are now in virtual paralysis. Weakened global consensus also makes it very hard to introduce new norms or regimes that can lower the risks of new technologies.
Unfortunately, given the intensifying U.S.-China rivalry, the gap is more likely to widen between increasing existential risks and weakening global norms. This is unacceptable not only to the peoples of the two most powerful states but also to the whole world.
The world must unite urgently to stop the triple specter from spiraling out of control. There is no other way but for the two powers to work together to manage their hegemonic competition peacefully and responsibly. But there is a sign of hope: the recently resumed bilateral dialogue on arms control and climate action. But this is only the beginning. The path ahead will be full of obstacles, whether security related, political or otherwise.
No matter how tough this journey might be, Korea cannot and should not be a passive bystander. It is one of the most vulnerable to the immediate and complex challenges posed by all three specters. It also stands at the forefront of the intensifying bloc politics. But if Korea manages these challenges successfully, new opportunities will open up to Korea and the whole world. Korea must step up to the plate.