North Korea's Nuclear Test
October 11 (Wednesday) 2006
On October 9, North Korea's state-run broadcaster announced that a nuclear test had been conducted. The news shook the world. If the test has indeed been conducted, and moreover if it was successful, it would make North Korea the world's eighth nuclear power. Given the fact that countries around the world continue to struggle against terrorism, and North Korea's socially destructive acts – acts that should be labeled as state-level terrorism – are the subject of widespread alarm, the news has been received as a serious threat by the international community.
Leaders of nations around the world have raised voices of criticism and denouncement in concert. Japan's Prime Minister Abe happened to be visiting China at the time of the test, and was notified while en route from China to South Korea. This was at a time when the international community, threatened by North Korea's October 3 announcement that it would conduct a nuclear test, was intensifying its criticism. Prime Minister Abe joined Chinese President Hu Jintao in his opposition of the nuclear test, while President Roh Moo-hyun similarly denounced North Korea's actions in talks that were held during Abe's visit to South Korea.
It was an unexpected and ironic achievement that Abe's first official overseas trip was one of increased solidarity with China and South Korea in their rejection of North Korea's anti-societal nuclear test. It was announced that the nuclear test was conducted in Hwaderi near Kilju city. Concerned nations are endeavoring to ascertain the specific circumstances surrounding the test. While abnormal seismic waves have been observed, the radiation value, the magnitude, and whether or not the test was successful are areas that have not yet been confirmed. However, it is an important fact that the North Korean government warned of an imminent nuclear test and substantiated the warning six days later. The international community, which includes Japan, is now faced with the necessity to exercise optimal measures that will prevent the situation from escalating into crisis.
It is now clear that the nuclear test was not of the scale that international experts had initially assumed. However, in the event that it was not an ordinary bomb or failed large-scale nuclear experiment, the possibility would remain that it was a successful small-scale nuclear test. And if it was indeed a successful small-scale nuclear test, it would be impossible to deny North Korea's capability to mount a nuclear warhead on one of the missiles that were test-launched on July 5, particularly the high-precision Rodong missle. A Rodong missle can reach anywhere in the Japanese archipalego, so it is not exaggeration to say that Japan is now within range of nuclear attack. Given this possibility, the question of what Japan can do to prevent North Korea from pursuing a destructive course becomes a major issue.
The US and Japan are imposing economic sanctions (such as financial sanctions) on North Korea, and they are expected to have some constricting effect on North Korea's economy. Economic sanctions were the subject of UN debate after previous missile tests, but were never actually imposed. This time member states of the UN Security Council, with the exception of China, are showing an inclination towards consent on economic sanctions, and even China is finding itself in a position where outright rejection is difficult. Upon returning to Japan, Prime Minister Abe declared at the National Diet Budget Committee that, in addition to a UN accord, Japan is prepared to impose its own economic sanctions if the nuclear test is verified.
To what extent the economic sanctions will serve as a deterrent is unknown, but they are expected to at least have some effect. Furthermore, Japan is making steps towards developing missile-intercepting capabilities in cooperation with the US. Preparations are currently underway to complete certain systems of missile defense technology by 2011. According to experts, the effects of these measures cannot be relied on to provide comprehensive protection, but they should provide a degree of security.
It is difficult to understand why North Korea decided to go ahead with the test at this stage and antagonize the entire international community. Some theorize that it is gambling by attempting to expose the void left in the US, which has its hands full in Iraq. This gambit does not seem to hold much promise, and would in fact be counter effective with regards to South Korea's promotion of appeasement policies. It has also been observed by experts on North Korea that the zeal of military-centered nationalists is becoming dominant. In any event, the kind of domestic decision-making processes that led to action condemned by the world largely remain a mystery. Is there a danger that international deterrent pressure in response to North Korea’s test will provoke further nuclear activity? If so, how far will this activity go? These questions will continue to be subjects of great interest.
It has been considered that sales of developed missiles to other nations or terrorist organizations is the most dangerous scenario involving North Korea. The scenario has changed – it now involves the danger of nuclear proliferation. The US and a host of other countries, who greatly fear the spread of terrorism, are concerned. If nuclear proliferation from sales or other means becomes evident, it is unlikely that the US will rule out military sanctions. This stance, in turn, could increase the danger of nuclear retaliation from North Korea. If North Korea pursues this course, one of the most likely scenarios would be a nuclear attack on the Japanese archipelago.
In light of this combustible situation, Japan must quickly yet carefully form optimal policy that will prevent North Korea from further nuclear or other such activity that goes against the will of the international community. The most critical efforts will involve persuasion and deterrence from a unified international society.
In the midst of the North Korean threat, some point out that the argument for Japan's nuclear armament may gain momentum. This tone of discussion, however, has not surfaced – Japan remains steadfast in its "nuclear-free" policy. To carefully, methodically, and quickly formulate effective measures in close cooperation with the international community that will curb North Korea's anti-international, anti-societal, and inhumane acts of recklessness – this is the great challenge that Japan now faces.