Will South Korea Go Nuclear?

As Pyongyang grows its nuclear arsenal, Seoul considers its atomic options.

By
15
President Biden and South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol. (Photo by Kim Min-Hee - Pool/Getty Images)

South Korea has begun to publicly discuss what was once unthinkable: pursuing its own nuclear weapons program. Such a move is unlikely to deter North Korea—but it could alienate Seoul’s most important ally. 

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has spent President Joe Biden’s time in office pledging to “beef up” his nuclear arsenal while testing a record number of missiles. Between Biden’s abandonment of America’s Afghan allies, and Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine, South Koreans increasingly question the United States’ commitment to their defense. 

“It’s possible that the problem gets worse and our country will introduce tactical nuclear weapons or build them on our own,” South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol said this month. “If that’s the case, we can have our own nuclear weapons pretty quickly, given our scientific and technological capabilities.”

Yoon’s comments reflect a growing consensus in South Korea that the country needs more of a stake in its own national defense. More than 70 percent of South Koreans were in favor of acquiring nuclear weapons, a 2022 study by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found. That’s as clear a sign as any of the country’s waning faith in its alliance with the United States.

Start a Free Trial
Get every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism. Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
15
By
Comments (15)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Jeff Younger

    Neither the current nor the previous occupant of the Oval Office have inspired much confidence among our allies. We need to return to a strong international leadership role that reinforces our commitment to our traditional allies while demonstrating that free nations will not sit by idly as dictatorships pursue imperialist foreign policies. Our intentions need to be communicated clearly and without reservation, while economic and, when necessary, military forces brought to bear when diplomacy has failed.

    Most importantly, our foreign policy should not swing radically each time the party in control of the White House changes. For most of our history, such changes were insignificant, at least measured by the perception of our allies. The past decade has left most wondering if the US will follow through on any commitment, or for how long. The next election?

    That’s a recipe for mayhem, as the bad actors of the world are currently proving.

    Collapse
  2. Eeeeq’kk

    Maybe if we weren’t so flaky as a country and didn’t elect presidents who openly muse about pulling out of NATO, these things wouldn’t happen.

    I’m open to the idea that a nuclear RoK and Japan might be a good thing. Both are US allies and could help cover enemy targets. We are under gunned right now due to foolish treaties and decades of neglect from the Congress. France has had nukes for decades without issue. Korean and Japanese politicians are no less responsible than the French ones. I wonder if it would stop there though.

    Nukes save lives. Politicians who will cavalierly send the children of the working class into war’s meat grinder are much more cautious when their soft, pink bodies are put at immediate risk of broiling. Good.

    Collapse
  3. GregL

    Makes sense. No one declares war on nuclear power. And who really trusts a future US president would commit US troops and full US involvement should the DPRK strike south? With Kim's desire to be a nuclear power, there needs to be MAD to keep the madman in check.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Steve Eggleston

    I suspect South Korea's nuclear ambitions are aimed a bit further north than Pyongyang. Before the Japanese made them a vassal state and ultimately annexed them, the Chinese did the same thing, and they tried again in late 1950.

    Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    MatthewRobin

    Maybe South Korean nuclear weapons could allow the US to withdraw its forces from Korea.

    Collapse
  6. Aschlegel

    How could anyone blame SK for wanting to peruse their own nukes? As far as containing NK’s nuke program we have been mostly hot air. Bush, Obama, and Trump can take a long hard look in the mirror on this issue. I’m no Fan of Biden, but this is one issue that he essentially inherited with little to no options (to be fair his predecessors could make the same claim to varying degrees). US should declare the previous strategy a failure and reintroduce nukes to SK as the only logical next step. If we aren’t willing to do this, let SK have their own without interference.

    Collapse
  7. DTruitt

    The Biden admin blew it with ROK by refusing to respect their request to be participants in response planning in the event of a DPRK nuclear attack ON THEIR OWN NATION. Blinken effectively told them to eff themselves. So this is the logical response to such undeserved disrespect by the US. Both of the last two presidents have openly disrespected the ROKs, which is mind boggling as they have been key allies since the division of Korea right after WW Two.

    Biden does not really seem to be running things in his administration and likely because of growing dementia and inability, because it would have been difficult to imagine the old Joe Biden of the Senate Foreign Relations committee being so ham handed with a key regional ally, especially during a time of ratcheting threats from the PRC.

    The question now is, has it already gone too far? It would be better if the ROKs did not develop nuclear arms, but they may believe they have no choice.

    Collapse
  8. Dmoelling

    South Korea has ordered new ballistic missile launching submarines. While non-nuclear powered, the only reason for these is to provide a secure deterrent launch platform for nuclear missiles. They are serious about this

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    DougAz

    https://thebulletin.org/2023/01/the-us-has-a-new-nuclear-proliferation-problem-south-korea/

    Bulletin is a great source on all things nuclear.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    JohnD

    Thanks Charlotte /also what about Japan? With N Korea so committed to nukes, if S Korea develops nukes, wouldn’t it be expected that Japan would follow suit?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Aylene Wright

      I think there would be much more domestic political opposition in Japan, but if that changes then I am sure they would have the technology to quickly go nuclear militarily; they're already quite into nuclear as a source of domestic energy.

      It occurs to me that while we tend to focus on losing Americans from the "Greatest Generation", the Japanese WWII veterans and nuclear bomb survivors are dying off, too, and likely not coincidentally there's more of a trend now for Japan to beef up conventional military capability.

      It would be nice if fading memories of WWII would allow younger leaders of Japan and SK, to whom the war is ancient history, to work closer together, but that might be a naive expectation.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        JohnD

        Very good point about Japanese history and their disappearing memory of WWII. In 20 years or so, I could see a world where China is very weakened by their demographic and economic challenges, and Japan (always resource poor) might relook at NE China / Manchuria as a possible colonial opportunity. History repeating itself, perhaps?

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Aylene Wright

          I actually find another Russo-Japan war to be more plausible, as there are STILL some northern islands at the Russia-Japan border that are "disputed" and that's per both Russian and Japanese people I have met. Although the Russian was basically "these islands aren't worth much, if Japan pays us enough to be a good deal we'll happily sell them". Doubt Putin would agree, though.

          That history is actually a reason some Japanese people state for taking Ukraine's side. "Those damn Russians grabbed our land, too!" (Well, I suppose they would use a politer euphemism for "damn".)

          Collapse
Load More