A storm of rogue state is being raised around the world. The democratic People’s Republic of Korea detonated in third nuclear blast-a miniaturized atomic bomb. The test was identified by an earthquake at magnitude of in-between 4.7 and 5.2 on rectal scale. The emerging nuclear state raised serious concerns of international community regarding non-proliferation issues.

Certainly, there is nothing new of surprise in North Korea missile launch. It went for its first self-declared test in October 9, 2006, second test was carried out in May 25, 2009, and the latest third on February 12, 2013, with the announcement of forth and fifth in very near future. The first both tests were made from plutonium devices but the third is reported to be of uranium based. Since, the uranium based nuclear devices are easier to make therefore, the test indicating that Pyongyang’s scientists are getting better at making smaller and more powerful weapons. The current tested nuclear warhead was capable to restrain six to seven kilotons of TNT. Moreover, the planned fourth nuclear test would be much larger than the third intimidating nearly of 10 kilotons of TNT. Since the country has plenty of uranium reservoirs the scientists posed apprehensions about the sternness of North Korea’s nuclear weapon programme.

North Korea had too face sanctions in reaction to its tests in the same way, the very recent test provoked sharp international condemnations for it. The United Nations General Secretary Ban Ki Moon criticized in the words that Pyongyang disobeyed the international calls that the testing was a grave violation of the Security Council Resolutions. With the tougher and more expanded sanctions of the UN over North Korea, it still set out the intentions of uranium based fourth and fifth nuclear test with a possibility of another more long-range rocket launcher.

The North Korea justified the test by targeting the US and its “continual hostility” against it. The country has also been developing missile technology to strike the costal areas of the US. Consequently the US called it as a provocative action and a disastrous outcome to international security and harmony. Additionally, it came up with huge and massive condemnations.

The test created new security concerns for the North East Asian security by congregating Tokyo and Seoul more vulnerable to nuclear threats stemming from North Korea. As a result, the US intended to work collaboratively with its regional allies Japan and South Korea to take every possible measure against North Korean supercilious step.
Pragmatically, the test does not means that North Korea is going to drop nuclear bomb on the US, instead the international community is more concerned about the significant escalating enhancement of North Korean nuclear capabilities. Since, the each new test results with a more sophisticated expertise and technology than its previous attempts.
All around the world, several countries along with the international community is concerned about the new security implications for the country in particular and the region in general, pursued by the current test. China one of the big partisan of North Korea too strongly sentenced against the blast and called it would worsen the situation in Korean Peninsula. The Chinese Foreign Minister in this arena said, “It is China’s firm stance to realize non-nuclearization for the Korean Peninsula and prevent nuclear proliferation and maintain peace and stability in North East Asia.” Another point to keep in focus is that “Chinese companies are more implicated in North Korea today than they were before, so the Chinese could stand lose on that front if the US tightens sanctions.”

Since the universal security parameters have also shifted. The fourth de-facto nuclear state is about to appear on the globe. Whilst the introduction of WMDs in any region is not only matter of pride for that state, it also initiates deterrence equation for rest of the states. In the wake, one must keep in view the historical antagonistic evidences of European and south Asian quest for nuclear weapons sequentially to create regional deterrence. The North Korea test already led South Korea to go for WMDs in line to create symmetry in nuclear deterrence equation among them. Since the South Korea wants a nuclear free Korean Peninsula; it is largely upset and could view the test as an aggressive message to its new leadership; President Park Geun-hye.

Last but not the least, the Feb 12, 2013, detonation formed problematic position for Pakistan as well when the Times of India quoted an unnamed Indian government official by narrating, “when you talk about any nuclear test conducted by North Korea, the role of Pakistan can never be far behind.” In other words, the Indian media strived to malign Pakistan by accusing its associations to North Korea due to the recent uranium based detonation. Ironically, India must not forget that North Korea previous both tests were plutonium based for which fingers could be pointed to India as well. Anyhow, Pakistan Foreign Minister verified instantaneously that “all countries should comply with international obligations,” and also that “Pakistan supports a nuclear weapon free peninsula as agreed by all parties in the framework Agreement in 1994.”

The flying-up apprehensions around the globe is that why North Korea speeded up its nuclear detonations? The answer to the question can be wrapped up in the findings primed by John Hemmings who is a Research Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, that “North Korea in order to gain its importance wants; regime survival, acceptance as a nuclear power by the US, a peace treaty between the US and North Korea, trade and economic growth on their terms, and Korean unification under Pyongyang’s benign rule.”

Sarcastically, the test also raised attention-grabbing queries on the proliferation front. Summing up, the blast gives quite clear message to the international non-proliferation regime and perhaps undermines the disarmament efforts globally. Whatsoever, it not only defies the nuclear abolitionists’ demands, but also increases the probability of nuclear weapons horizontal proliferation in the region. Consequently, threatens to undermine an already fragile security situation in the region too.


http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/

@ Roshan

Search before posting any article and do not post same article in different threads.

__________________
To succeed,look at things not as they are,but as they can be.:)

April 18, 2013
Tarak Barkawi


Once again, the Emperor of the Hermit Kingdom - North Korea - is threatening nuclear war. Or so the media would have us believe. The basic idea purveyed by the media and by US spokespersons is that oriental despotisms - as Iran and North Korea are regularly portrayed - cannot possibly be trusted with nuclear weapons.

Accordingly, US policy is that it will "never accept" an Iranian or North Korean bomb. While rational people would never use a nuclear weapon except in circumstances in which it was rational to do so, unbalanced, crazy types might decide to unleash their nuclear arsenals, or turn them over to terrorists, or what not. It would seem that only rational Western nations like the US can be trusted with nukes.

Images of mullahs and Asiatic despots aside, there are obvious reasons why Iran and North Korea would want nuclear weapons. Most significantly, a nuclear weapon is a guarantee that they will not suffer the same fate as Iraq in 2003. One of the only times it is rational and credible to make nuclear threats is in a situation of existential crisis. For this reason, no one invades or pushes too far a power armed with nuclear weapons.

Were Iran or North Korea to use a nuclear weapon in any other circumstance, they would face obliteration. Since nuclear weapons can be traced to their origin, it would be suicidal for these countries to provide weapons to terrorist groups. Such groups do not have a country to lose, unlike the leaderships of Iran and North Korea. So if they turn out to have rational reasons for pursuing nuclear weapons, and are likely to be governed by the same realities of nuclear deterrence that constrained the US and the Soviet Union in the Cold War, what about the rationality of US policy?

For one, for the US to say it will "never accept" what is already a reality is an absurdity: North Korea already has the bomb. It must now be treated as a nuclear power. More broadly, the recent history of US foreign policy is not exactly a testament to rationality. In response to a terrorist attack that killed nearly 3,000 of its citizens, the US invaded two countries, starting wars that resulted in the deaths of thousands. Ten years later, it has lost both of those wars and broken its budget. Luckily, not every country that suffers from terrorism reacts with such deadly and self-defeating spasms of revenge and blood lust.

North Korea has in living memory suffered from the wanton destructiveness of US policy. This is a fact that must be remembered in the face of media images of North Korea's supposedly irrational militarism.

Over the three years of the Korean War, in the words of General Curtis LeMay, the US Air Force "burned down every town in North and South Korea." Moreover, it is the US that has made repeated nuclear threats against North Korea, despite the fact that North Korea has never posed a serious threat to the US which considered several times during the Korean War, both tactical and strategic weapons. Over the course of the war, a million North Koreans were killed by US, UN and South Korean forces.

This history offers some perspective on the recent crisis, which began not with North Korean threats, but with US and South Korean war games and manoeuvres. These included practice sorties by two nuclear capable B-2 stealth bombers sent over South Korea, loudly announced in the media so that the point would not be lost on North Korea's leaders.
North Korea responded with bombast. Guam, still a base for US nuclear bombers, was "threatened" by North Korea's jury-rigged missiles. In turn, the US deployed its equally ineffective, but much more expensive Thaad missile defence system to Guam.

One wonders what is more laughable: the idea that North Korea could hit a speck in the Pacific like Guam. What is not laughable is the fact that it is the US, which has a consistent pattern of threatening the use of nuclear weapons. No one is in doubt that US nuclear weapons actually work, and that it remains the only power ever to have used them in anger. The North Korean bomb may be an uncomfortable fact of life. But so too is the US bomb. And none of us should make any easy assumptions about the rationality of the leadership of either country, however.

The writer is an associate professor at the Department of Politics, New School for Social Research. This article has been reprinted from Al-Jazeera.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-ne...inions/columns

Delusion of grandeur
Posted on 7 hours ago


Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services
0
Muhammad Daheem
US analysts, under the delusion of grandeur, believe that North Korean missiles can’t reach America. According to CS Monitor “North Korea’s US attack plans are nutty.” US analysts are not taking North Korean threats very seriously. The current escalation is dangerous for the world peace. Anything can happen. North Korea is unpredictable. That makes Pentagon much worried.
Kim Jong-un, Korean leader, met with military aides to discuss “an urgent operation” against America. The question is: can North Korea strike the US with nuclear missiles? What would happen if Kim Jong-un acts on his threats? What would be the consequences of this attack? The words of the general staff “The moment of explosion is approaching fast” are considered to be a serious threat. It seems that Korean leader is sick of “not war not peace” situation. He seems to be serious to finish it; this way or that way. He has a unique style.
As a matter of fact North Korea finds itself in a state of war with South Korea and the United States of America. Pyongyang upholds the idea that it has right to launch a “preemptive nuclear strike on the US.” Its viewpoint is that America is an imperialist successor to Japan. The US forces in South Korea and Japan are “well within range of medium-range North Korean rockets.” It has openly threatened US and South Korea of nuclear attack. Kim Jong-un has already determined the paths of possible missile strikes on the United States of America.
North Korea may be making preparations for a nuclear or missile test to show its strength, in the month of April, to celebrate on the occasion of the birth anniversary of founding leader Kim- il Sung.
The hostility between US and NK has its roots in Cold War days’ politics. Korea closed its doors for the western traders in the mid-19th century.
After the World War II, Korea was divided along the 38th parallel for a temporary period. It could not be unified due to tussle between Russia and the United States of America. It is pertinent to mention here that in 1951 more than 28,000 US forces stayed on the Korean peninsula. In 1963 Soviet Union agreed to help North Korea in developing a peaceful nuclear energy program and training its nuclear scientists while America had several warheads in South Korea.
In 1993 North Korea had enough raw materials for several nuclear weapons from a major nuclear reactor. Negotiations succeeded between US and North Korea in 1994. North Korea agreed to freeze its existing plutonium enrichment program and allowed IAEA to monitor it. Both sides agreed that Korean Peninsula would be nuclear- free zone. In return certain concessions were given to North Korea including heavy fuel oil for a limited period. Soon after, Republicans refused to support the agreement. Congress did not provide sufficient amount of funds. The Americans did not act upon the agreement thoroughly and honestly. Stephen W. Bosworth, KEDO’s first director, later commented: “The agreement Framework was a political orphan within two weeks after its signature”. It is believed that American administration infuriated North Korea at several stages.
In fact, change of government, in North Korea, was the prime objective of the American administration. Sick of American tactics, “North Korea, in May 1998, warned the United States of America that it would restart nuclear research.”
The tension mounted between North Korea and US when Bush categorized North Korea as part of the “Axis of Evil” in 2002. Bush blamed North Korea for developing a uranium enrichment program for nuclear weapons purposes. The US warned North Korea to terminate the program or face the consequences. Later on, KEDO agreed to suspend heavy fuel oil shipments to North Korea in the same year.
“In late 2002 and early 2003, North Korea terminated the freeze on its existing plutonium-based nuclear facilities, expelled IAEA inspectors and removed seals and monitoring equipment, quit the NPT, and resumed reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel to extract plutonium for weapons purposes.” It was, in fact, reaction of American threats and hostile policy towards North Korea. Now North Korea had a great desire to have a deterrent force in the face of U.S. threats.
North Korea agreed to six-party talk in August 2003. It included the United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, and Russia. Several rounds of talks ended without any positive result.
The United States of America imposed sanctions on Banco Delta Asia in 2005. Pyongyang had many accounts in this bank. It was a big setback for North Korea. It was a serious matter but US refused to resolve the issue. In response to that North Korea staged several missile tests in 2006.
After talks in 2007, America agreed to unfreeze all of the North Korean assets on March 19, 2007. In early June 2008, the United States agreed to start lifting restrictions after North Korea began the disarming process. President Bush announced he would remove North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Bush was criticized from within “for settling for too little.” Moreover, North Korea blamed the US for not fulfilling its promises in the disarmament process. It did not supply sufficient food items and medicines etc. to North Korea as promised.
On October 11, 2008, North Korea agreed to resume disarmament of its nuclear programme and the US responded by removing it from the list of terrorist countries. Nonetheless, situation remained tense between the two countries.
The US tightened the grip and UN tightened sanctions and the response of North Korea was equally harsh. At this critical juncture Kim Jong-il ordered the country’s first nuclear test. Relations between North Korea and the United States of America had gone from bad to worse.
The relations between USA and North Korea deteriorated further after the arrest of two American journalists on March 17, 2009. They were sentenced for twelve years of hard labour. The US called it a “sham trial.”
North Korea conducted second nuclear test on May 25,2009. It further deteriorated America-North Korean relations.
On August 4, 2009 former U.S. President Bill Clinton arrived in Pyongyang to secure the release of the two journalists, arrested for their illegal activities. He succeeded in his efforts. The two journalists were released and subsequently returned to Los Angeles with Clinton.
A big event happened. A South Korean warship sank. “On May 24, 2010, the United States set plans to participate in new military exercises with South Korea as a direct military response to the sinking of a South Korean warship by what officials called a North Korean torpedo.”
On May 28, 2010, the official (North) Korean Central News Agency blamed the United States for torpedoing ‘Cheonan’. It blamed Obama for “escalating instability in the Asia-Pacific region.” America, on the other hand, conducted war exercises to terrorize North Korea.
US is demanding denuclearization of North Korea while North Korea is determined to be accepted as a nuclear power. Moreover, North Korea, in an aggressive mood, has announced the reopening of the Yongbyon nuclear complex. This is the latest aggressive move made by North Korea. Nonetheless, there seems to be no possibility of any imminent attack from the north side. Ban Ki-moon has offered his services to resolve the crisis.
North Korea is neither a joke nor a paper tiger. It has the strength to destroy its enemies. It has massive underground fortifications. It can easily deploy its conventional forces for a possible attack against the United States’ forces stationed in South Korea.
America is speeding up deployment of its missile-defense cruisers into the Pacific on Guam. It has already deployed a warship. Many US warships and jets are already present there. The United States of America, no doubt, can destroy North Korea. The important thing is North Korea has the capability to make serious damage to America in nuclear war. America, in such a case, would no more be a world power but just like any third world country begging alms from all over the world. It would, of course, be a horrible war. Some US allies may be wiped out from the map of the earth. This is what really matters to America.
In case of nuclear war both sides will be annihilated while Japan and America will face serious losses. China my also join war in case its region is polluted by atomic bombing. This may lead to the Third World War.
North Korea has a strong and credible army in case of non-nuclear war. It has 500 combat aircraft. It has potential to destroy its enemies ruthlessly. Its troops are highly motivated, well-trained and well-equipped. Its forces have the capability to destroy Seoul completely. America would not be in a position to save Seoul from massive destruction. Both sides, in fact, are almost equally balanced. If China is affected seriously from the military operation near its border, it would certainly involve itself in war.The potential US allies, just like Britain, would also suffer in this war. China, of course, can play a vital role to lessen the tension between the two countries. The reaction of regional forces would play effective role. Unfortunately America and its allies have double standards. That is the major cause of disturbance all over the world.
A quick and sudden attack on North Korea may be retaliated with the same force by the North causing unbelievable losses in South Korea, Japan and the United States of America. The consequences of war, once started, would not be in control of any particular power as it happened in case of Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving behind traces of defeat for Americans and finally finding faults with their own false strategy. Americans will have to pay painfully expensive price of war. The aggressive approach of Washington and Pyongyang can lead to the beginning of the Third World War.
Kim Jong-un, the son of Kim Jong-il, took the charge of of the government after the death of his father on 17 December, 2011. The same year he became the Supreme Leader of North Korea.The Korean Leader announced on 29 February 2012 that North Korea will freeze nuclear tests, long-range missile launches, and uranium enrichment at its Yongbyon plant. International nuclear inspectors were also invited to join again to monitor the reactor. The Obama administration responded by offering 240,000 tonnes of food for the people of North Korea.
Later on, frustrated from Americans undue behaviour and unnecessary pressure, undaunted North Korea conducted a successful nuclear test on February 12, 2013. It was in response to US threats, “the sworn enemy of the Korean people.” It shocked and greatly annoyed South Korea, the United States of America and its allies.
America and its allies warned North Korea that it would have to “pay a price” for its actions. The United Nations Security Council imposed new economic sanctions against North Korea.
The young Korean leader threatened a “pre-emptive” nuclear strike against the United States. The next day it voided its non-aggression pact with South Korea.
It is believed that North Korea is developing long range ballistic missiles that could reach the west coast of the US. The United States intelligence community acknowledges that North Korea has the capability to target Hawaii with its current technology. Kim Jong-un, the young leader of North Korea, threatened the United States “declaring that rockets were ready to be fired at American bases in the Pacific.”
It was in response to two B2 stealth bombers’ adventure that “flew over the Korean peninsula on the day before.” For Pentagon it was a real and clear signal of danger. It called “for an advanced missile defense system to the western Pacific on April 3.”

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/

US analysts, under the delusion of grandeur, believe that North Korean missiles can’t reach America. According to CS Monitor “North Korea’s US attack plans are nutty.” US analysts are not taking North Korean threats very seriously. The current escalation is dangerous for the world peace. Anything can happen. North Korea is unpredictable. That makes Pentagon much worried.

Kim Jong-un, Korean leader, met with military aides to discuss “an urgent operation” against America. The question is: can North Korea strike the US with nuclear missiles? What would happen if Kim Jong-un acts on his threats? What would be the consequences of this attack? The words of the general staff “The moment of explosion is approaching fast” are considered to be a serious threat. It seems that Korean leader is sick of “not war not peace” situation. He seems to be serious to finish it; this way or that way. He has a unique style.

As a matter of fact North Korea finds itself in a state of war with South Korea and the United States of America. Pyongyang upholds the idea that it has right to launch a “preemptive nuclear strike on the US.” Its viewpoint is that America is an imperialist successor to Japan. The US forces in South Korea and Japan are “well within range of medium-range North Korean rockets.” It has openly threatened US and South Korea of nuclear attack. Kim Jong-un has already determined the paths of possible missile strikes on the United States of America.

North Korea may be making preparations for a nuclear or missile test to show its strength, in the month of April, to celebrate on the occasion of the birth anniversary of founding leader Kim- il Sung.

The hostility between US and NK has its roots in Cold War days’ politics. Korea closed its doors for the western traders in the mid-19th century.

After the World War II, Korea was divided along the 38th parallel for a temporary period. It could not be unified due to tussle between Russia and the United States of America. It is pertinent to mention here that in 1951 more than 28,000 US forces stayed on the Korean peninsula. In 1963 Soviet Union agreed to help North Korea in developing a peaceful nuclear energy program and training its nuclear scientists while America had several warheads in South Korea.

In 1993 North Korea had enough raw materials for several nuclear weapons from a major nuclear reactor. Negotiations succeeded between US and North Korea in 1994. North Korea agreed to freeze its existing plutonium enrichment program and allowed IAEA to monitor it. Both sides agreed that Korean Peninsula would be nuclear- free zone. In return certain concessions were given to North Korea including heavy fuel oil for a limited period. Soon after, Republicans refused to support the agreement. Congress did not provide sufficient amount of funds. The Americans did not act upon the agreement thoroughly and honestly. Stephen W. Bosworth, KEDO’s first director, later commented: “The agreement Framework was a political orphan within two weeks after its signature”. It is believed that American administration infuriated North Korea at several stages.
In fact, change of government, in North Korea, was the prime objective of the American administration. Sick of American tactics, “North Korea, in May 1998, warned the United States of America that it would restart nuclear research.”

The tension mounted between North Korea and US when Bush categorized North Korea as part of the “Axis of Evil” in 2002. Bush blamed North Korea for developing a uranium enrichment program for nuclear weapons purposes. The US warned North Korea to terminate the program or face the consequences. Later on, KEDO agreed to suspend heavy fuel oil shipments to North Korea in the same year.

“In late 2002 and early 2003, North Korea terminated the freeze on its existing plutonium-based nuclear facilities, expelled IAEA inspectors and removed seals and monitoring equipment, quit the NPT, and resumed reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel to extract plutonium for weapons purposes.” It was, in fact, reaction of American threats and hostile policy towards North Korea. Now North Korea had a great desire to have a deterrent force in the face of U.S. threats.

North Korea agreed to six-party talk in August 2003. It included the United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, and Russia. Several rounds of talks ended without any positive result.

The United States of America imposed sanctions on Banco Delta Asia in 2005. Pyongyang had many accounts in this bank. It was a big setback for North Korea. It was a serious matter but US refused to resolve the issue. In response to that North Korea staged several missile tests in 2006.

After talks in 2007, America agreed to unfreeze all of the North Korean assets on March 19, 2007. In early June 2008, the United States agreed to start lifting restrictions after North Korea began the disarming process. President Bush announced he would remove North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. Bush was criticized from within “for settling for too little.” Moreover, North Korea blamed the US for not fulfilling its promises in the disarmament process. It did not supply sufficient food items and medicines etc. to North Korea as promised.

On October 11, 2008, North Korea agreed to resume disarmament of its nuclear programme and the US responded by removing it from the list of terrorist countries. Nonetheless, situation remained tense between the two countries.

The US tightened the grip and UN tightened sanctions and the response of North Korea was equally harsh. At this critical juncture Kim Jong-il ordered the country’s first nuclear test. Relations between North Korea and the United States of America had gone from bad to worse.

The relations between USA and North Korea deteriorated further after the arrest of two American journalists on March 17, 2009. They were sentenced for twelve years of hard labour. The US called it a “sham trial.”

North Korea conducted second nuclear test on May 25,2009. It further deteriorated America-North Korean relations.

On August 4, 2009 former U.S. President Bill Clinton arrived in Pyongyang to secure the release of the two journalists, arrested for their illegal activities. He succeeded in his efforts. The two journalists were released and subsequently returned to Los Angeles with Clinton.

A big event happened. A South Korean warship sank. “On May 24, 2010, the United States set plans to participate in new military exercises with South Korea as a direct military response to the sinking of a South Korean warship by what officials called a North Korean torpedo.”

On May 28, 2010, the official (North) Korean Central News Agency blamed the United States for torpedoing ‘Cheonan’. It blamed Obama for “escalating instability in the Asia-Pacific region.” America, on the other hand, conducted war exercises to terrorize North Korea.

US is demanding denuclearization of North Korea while North Korea is determined to be accepted as a nuclear power. Moreover, North Korea, in an aggressive mood, has announced the reopening of the Yongbyon nuclear complex. This is the latest aggressive move made by North Korea. Nonetheless, there seems to be no possibility of any imminent attack from the north side. Ban Ki-moon has offered his services to resolve the crisis.

North Korea is neither a joke nor a paper tiger. It has the strength to destroy its enemies. It has massive underground fortifications. It can easily deploy its conventional forces for a possible attack against the United States’ forces stationed in South Korea.

America is speeding up deployment of its missile-defense cruisers into the Pacific on Guam. It has already deployed a warship. Many US warships and jets are already present there. The United States of America, no doubt, can destroy North Korea. The important thing is North Korea has the capability to make serious damage to America in nuclear war.
America, in such a case, would no more be a world power but just like any third world country begging alms from all over the world. It would, of course, be a horrible war. Some US allies may be wiped out from the map of the earth. This is what really matters to America.

In case of nuclear war both sides will be annihilated while Japan and America will face serious losses. China my also join war in case its region is polluted by atomic bombing. This may lead to the Third World War.

North Korea has a strong and credible army in case of non-nuclear war. It has 500 combat aircraft. It has potential to destroy its enemies ruthlessly. Its troops are highly motivated, well-trained and well-equipped. Its forces have the capability to destroy Seoul completely. America would not be in a position to save Seoul from massive destruction. Both sides, in fact, are almost equally balanced. If China is affected seriously from the military operation near its border, it would certainly involve itself in war.The potential US allies, just like Britain, would also suffer in this war. China, of course, can play a vital role to lessen the tension between the two countries. The reaction of regional forces would play effective role. Unfortunately America and its allies have double standards. That is the major cause of disturbance all over the world.

A quick and sudden attack on North Korea may be retaliated with the same force by the North causing unbelievable losses in South Korea, Japan and the United States of America. The consequences of war, once started, would not be in control of any particular power as it happened in case of Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving behind traces of defeat for Americans and finally finding faults with their own false strategy. Americans will have to pay painfully expensive price of war. The aggressive approach of Washington and Pyongyang can lead to the beginning of the Third World War.

Kim Jong-un, the son of Kim Jong-il, took the charge of of the government after the death of his father on 17 December, 2011. The same year he became the Supreme Leader of North Korea.The Korean Leader announced on 29 February 2012 that North Korea will freeze nuclear tests, long-range missile launches, and uranium enrichment at its Yongbyon plant. International nuclear inspectors were also invited to join again to monitor the reactor. The Obama administration responded by offering 240,000 tonnes of food for the people of North Korea.

Later on, frustrated from Americans undue behaviour and unnecessary pressure, undaunted North Korea conducted a successful nuclear test on February 12, 2013. It was in response to US threats, “the sworn enemy of the Korean people.” It shocked and greatly annoyed South Korea, the United States of America and its allies.

America and its allies warned North Korea that it would have to “pay a price” for its actions. The United Nations Security Council imposed new economic sanctions against North Korea.

The young Korean leader threatened a “pre-emptive” nuclear strike against the United States. The next day it voided its non-aggression pact with South Korea.

It is believed that North Korea is developing long range ballistic missiles that could reach the west coast of the US. The United States intelligence community acknowledges that North Korea has the capability to target Hawaii with its current technology. Kim Jong-un, the young leader of North Korea, threatened the United States “declaring that rockets were ready to be fired at American bases in the Pacific.”

It was in response to two B2 stealth bombers’ adventure that “flew over the Korean peninsula on the day before.” For Pentagon it was a real and clear signal of danger. It called “for an advanced missile defense system to the western Pacific on April 3.”

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/category/40/

Miniature nuclear warheads are the new gadget that those splendid scientists at the Atomic Energy Commission of Pakistan are cooking up. Wonderful as these may sound, these come at the risk of another escalation with India. With reports that Pakistan was developing ‘tactical’ nuclear warheads persisting over a period of time, the Indian National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) has come out with India’s nuclear policy for the first time. This is: “India will not be the first to use nuclear weapons, but if it is attacked with such weapons, it would engage in nuclear retaliation which will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage on its adversary.” It has said, “The label on a nuclear weapon used for attacking India, strategic or tactical, is irrelevant from the Indian perspective.” The policy has been announced as a veiled threat. Relations between the two neighbours could be said to have improved. The point rather is that a nuclear war between Indian and Pakistan should never be on the cards.

In statements reminiscent of the Cold War era between the US and the Soviet Union, the NSAB convener spoke of the apparent “jihadist edge” to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons capability. He warned that Pakistan should not believe its tactical weapons capability has brought down the “threshold of nuclear use,” and that Pakistan still projects its nuclear deterrent as solely directed towards India. At the other end, Pakistan’s nuclear policy also implies that “it will not only use nuclear weapons in a retaliatory strike, it is also ready to take the lead and use nuclear weapons first to counter Indian conventional aggression.”

The trouble is that such hawkish statements from India shall not change the equation. It needs to be reminded that it is doves rather than hawks that have made the significant strides in relations between the two countries that have led to the contemplation of relaxing visa regimes for each others’ citizens. But as it stands, India’s official nuclear doctrine is as dangerous as Pakistan’s – and perhaps the fact that it has been made public should be taken as an opportunity for both countries to hold a new round of nuclear talks to renegotiate their nuclear doctrines. The statements suggest unnecessary brinkmanship and bring into sharp relief the horrible consequences that the hostilities can lead to. Both sides must be more sensible, and perhaps the international community too needs to move in to help improve ties. The Indian statements, however, are a classic lesson in how not to improve ties.

- See more at: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2013....1E4V8pWQ.dpuf

Nuclear deterrence

THE possibility of a civil-nuclear deal between the US and Pakistan may have been prematurely leaked to the media, but with the joint statement following Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s visit to the White House emphasising nuclear matters and Gen Raheel Sharif expected to visit the US this month, Pakistani officials have noticeably stepped up their public comments about nuclear-related matters in South Asia. Led by the Foreign Office, the official Pakistani comment is on the Indian conventional arms build-up and the emphasis that Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine is defensive and shaped by destabilising moves by India. To be sure, the massive Indian investments in its military and weapons-buying spree are of concern and do have implications for peace and stability in South Asia. Yet, it is the increasingly explicit connection between India’s weapons build-up and the Pakistani nuclear doctrine that is also worrying.

The adoption of so-called full-spectrum deterrence has been projected by the Pakistani security establishment as a strategic guarantee that Pakistan will be safe from an Indian attack, either small-scale or large-scale. But is that true and at what cost, particularly in terms of risk, is full-spectrum deterrence being pursued? Within the strategic community and at least among senior retired military officials, there are questions quietly being asked — if the Indian arms build-up is unwelcome, isn’t the Pakistani counter-response of full-spectrum deterrence exacerbating the dangers and increasing the risk of catastrophic conflict in South Asia? There are serious questions at both ends of what can effectively be termed a new deterrence strategy. Does Pakistan fundamentally need long-range missiles to hit the Andaman and Nicobar Islands to deny India a secure second-strike capability when Pakistan is not known to have the technology to track Indian land-based missiles? At the low end of the spectrum, which is where the main international concern appears to be, is Pakistan really committed to the idea of launching small nuclear missiles on its soil, even if against rapid Indian invasion forces?

Unhappily, even asking questions of the country’s evolving and more muscular nuclear policy is considered problematic by the security establishment. But does the use of seemingly scientific language and the adoption of exotic strategies really make Pakistan safer and better protected? Time and again, be it 1965, 1971 or 1999, the country has woken up to disasters that were created by what were argued to be the most robust of assumptions and infallible of theories. There is surely a case to be made that Indian military build-up is a problem for Pakistan’s security and peace in South Asia. But must the answer to those new challenges increasingly and automatically be a nuclear response by Pakistan? Perhaps the more uncomfortable truth is that twice in the new century, the threat of war between India and Pakistan has been triggered by terrorist attacks. To what extent will Pakistan go to neutralise that threat?

http://www.dawn.com/news/1216721/nuclear-deterrence
Published in Dawn, November 1st, 2015