With North Korea continuing to hone its nuclear and missile capability, possibly to push ahead a fifth nuclear test, South Korea should have its own nuclear weapon for self-defense, the ruling Saenuri Party’s former floor leader told The Korea Herald.

Rep. Won Yoo-chul urged the government to shift away from observing a decades-old non-nuclear policy toward embracing nuclear armament for self-defense, proposing to use the North’s potential nuclear test as a “trigger” to begin the armament process. 

“The trigger strategy means that we should get into a process equivalent to nuclear armament right after North Korea carries out yet another nuclear test” he said. “The most efficient ways to deter nuclear warfare is to have nukes for our self-defense.”

Nuclear armament, according to the lawmaker, includes all the measures varying from the development of nukes to the planned redeployment of US tactical nuclear weapons, of which the best option should be selected to fit South Korea‘s security landscape.
 

To rally support behind his proposal, the former chairman of the parliamentary National Defense Committee built a study group for nuclear armament in July and has gathered opinions from like-minded lawmakers and security experts.

His proposal has prompted intense debates over whether the measure will indeed be conducive to South Korea’s security and economy. Some warned that if Seoul becomes a nuclear state, it would not only bring about economic sanctions from the international community but also lose moral ground to rebuke Pyongyang’s nuclear ambition.

But the fifth-term lawmaker dismissed the view as “short-sighted.” He asserted that the nuclear possession status could help maintain balance of power between the two Koreas and that the security benefit will far outweigh the potential setback in domestic economy and overseas reputation.

“Over the past decades, we have tried to solve North Korea’s nuclear issues through six-party talks but the approach has made little progress. It is time for us to come up with new strategy that reaches beyond conventional paradigm,” he said.

Won is not the first Korean politician advocating nuclear armament. Ranging from the former president Park Chung-hee to former presidential candidates Chung Mong-joon, groups of prominent politicians have backed the agenda.

But these efforts were often dismissed as unrealistic ideas or mere political stunts, as South Korea is prohibited by international law from developing nukes. The nation became a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1979 and its nuclear system is subject to inspection from International Atomic Energy Agency.

It is the suggestion of the Saenuri lawmaker that the government should withdraw from those pledges because South Korea confronts “destructive and terrorizing” threats from North Korea. Under Article 10 of the NPT, member states can leave the treaty when “extraordinary events jeopardizes national interest.”

“North Korea’s continuing efforts to improve its nuclear weapons, making them smaller and lighter, increasingly expose us to the consequent dangers,” he said.

“When that happens, no one is out there to protect us. The protection of the peoples’ lives and property is a sovereign right which we can never abandon.”

One of the major hurdles facing Won is the strong opposition from Korea’s long-time ally -- the United States. The US president Barack Obama set out his vision for a “nuclear-free world” back in 2009 and made the initiative one of the main goals during his tenure.

The latest opposition came from Robert Einhorn, former special adviser to the US Secretary of State for nonproliferation and arms control. During the meeting with Won in April, he warned that the decision to obtain nukes would come with a “serious price to pay.”

But the lawmaker expected that the US would change its course as North Korea continues to ratchet up its nuclear threat against Seoul and Washington, using the provocations like the launch of Musudan intermediate-range ballistic missile targeting the US continent.

“It seems to me that the US has become more open to the idea (of nuclear armament) than before. There is sentiment inside the US that conventional approaches toward North Korea’s nuclear threat have failed and needs to be revised,” Won said.

Citing the nuclear armament of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization states such as the UK and France, which the US has endorsed, he claimed that Washington should also be convinced to understand South Korea‘s armament for the sake of regional stability.

A number of local experts deterred Won’s idea, claiming that instead of a full-fledged approach that may trigger backlashes from the international community, Seoul should adopt a “conditional armament,” depending on Pyongyang‘s denuclearization efforts. They also suggested that the strategy should be used as leverage against the US and China, pushing Beijing to become more involved in curbing Pyongyang’s nuclear plans and Washington to reinforce its nuclear umbrella.

But in Won‘s opinion, this blueprint has its flaws in assuring national security, as the US-led nuclear umbrella is not guaranteed to take effect at all times.

“I respect (the conditional armament supporters’) opinion, but I am talking about moving toward real, substantive nuclear armament,” he said. “The US nuclear umbrella, which we see as protection, can be folded back anytime, and we just cannot borrow the umbrella whenever it rains.”

The lawmaker stressed that the nuclear armament will not conflict with Korea-US alliance and that the bilateral relationship would undergo little change regardless of who is elected as the next US president -- including Republican nominee Donald Trump, who calls for withdrawal of US forces stationed in Korea.

But he pointed out that the bilateral relationship should transform into a “matured partnership,” in which South Korea can reduce its overreliance on the US for security matters and exercise more authority in taking self-defense measures.

“While working to maintain a robust bilateral alliance, it is also crucial that we constantly keep asking ourselves what we can do for our own, independent self-defense.”

By Yeo Jun-suk (jasonyeo@heraldcorp.com)