HOW REAL IS THE NUCLEAR THREAT?
Last week, the hostility between North Korea and the US and its allies reached a new level as Kim Jong-un launched a missile over Japan. Here, nuclear policy expert Cristina Varriale explains what that means for the world
What are North Korea’s current known capabilities and could one of their missiles reach us?
Over the past year, we’ve seen North Korea testing an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that is likely capable of reaching the continental US. Since 2006, North Korea have conducted five nuclear tests, clearly demonstrating their ability to create a nuclear explosion. They are also making progress with their programme to make the nuclear warhead small enough to fit on the end of their missiles (including the ICBM). Some estimates suggest that, if used at its full range, the missile could reach the West Coast of America, but more pessimistic estimates suggest that targets as far east as New York could be reachable – although there are question marks over whether these are accurate. US allies, such as South Korea, Japan and the US overseas territory of Guam, are also in range of North Korean missiles. [Last week, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe warned an ICBM could potentially even
hit Europe.] North Korea also have a chemical weapons programme, although much less is known about it.
What is the likelihood of North Korea dropping a bomb? Kim Jong-un knows that any direct military action against a US overseas territory, like Guam, or South Korea or Japan, will likely result in military retaliation that could overwhelm North Korea and end the regime. That is not a situation Jong-un wants to bring about.
How has it come to this? Although the regime and its leader are often depicted as crazy and irrational, its nature and goals have some logic. One of the main goals is regime survival. This has been the case since the beginning of the regime under Kim Il-sung, grandfather of current leader Kim Jong-un. Over the course of the Cold War, nuclear weapons appeared to act as a deterrent against military conflict with big powers. Countries which gave up their WMD programmes were forced to undergo regime change at the hand of the US. Iraq and Libya are examples of this for North Korea, and help drive the development of nuclear weapons for security.
What can be done to resolve the threat? The primary goal right now should be to reduce the risk of military engagement, whether initiated deliberately or accidentally. North Korea regularly cite the Us-south Korea joint military exercises as a justification: they see these as planning for an invasion of their country. So, there are questions over whether it might be possible to alter these exercises [which continued last week] in exchange for limitations in nuclear and missiles tests by the North. But the US say that these exercises are crucial for defence against North Korean threats.
What are the likely steps for the rest of the world? The challenge of addressing the North Korean nuclear and missile programmes is a global one, especially where sanctions are used to pressure and punish the regime. The focus should be on improved implementation of current sanctions resolutions.
Could the situation potentially escalate to involve other countries? Trump’s rhetoric has suggested that he considers a military option a possibility, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it has risen up the list of options to resolve the situation. A military strike was also an option under Obama, but wasn’t as publicly discussed. It’s unlikely this is a step that will be taken intentionally, as the impact would be catastrophic and could pull many other countries in the region into a conflict.
How likely is the UK to become embroiled? Other countries, like the UK, could be called upon by allies such as the US to provide support to any military efforts. This doesn’t necessarily mean infantry involvement on the Korean peninsula, but provisions such as support from the RAF or special forces.
America and the UK have nuclear warheads, why shouldn’t North Korea have them? A total of eight other countries (US, UK, France, China, Russia, Pakistan, India and Israel) have nuclear weapons. Because of the nature of the regime, it is often assumed that a relationship with a North Korea that possesses nuclear weapons would not be stable. However, the same was said of the Mao regime in China. One of the major concerns with North Korea’s nuclear and missile programmes is onward proliferation, where the regime sell materials, designs or parts of these programmes to others. The regime is known to have a missile-development relationship with others such as Iran, for example.
What would be the environmental impact of a missile being deployed? The effects of a nuclear detonation will vary considerably depending on many aspects, such as the yield of the explosion, when it is detonated (in the air, on the ground or in the sea) weather (wind direction, rain etc). For example, the nuclear accident at Chernobyl spread radiation westward because of the wind direction.
So how real is the threat? The current risk of nuclear war is still relatively low.
Cristina Varriale is a research analyst in proliferation and nuclear policy at the Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies