ASIA: Nuclear threat 'remains', despite North Korean deal
Updated
North Korea's willingness to abandon its nuclear program could be put to the test within days. Despite breaching an April 13 deadline to open up its Pyongyang nuclear plant to international inspectors, there's been little progress made because of a row over 25 million dollars in frozen North Korean funds. The six nation deal, forged by China, has put the spotlight firmly on North Korea. But is it the only country in Asia that remains a serious nuclear threat?
Presenter: Rob Sharp
Speakers: Professor Hugh White, head of the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at ANU and a visiting fellow at the Lowy Institute of International Policy.
WHITE: Well I think there's a couple of different angles we have to look at. The first is obviously Asia is one of the centres, perhaps the principal centre in the world for proliferation risks to new states, horizontal proliferation as it's called. And there we see of course not just the way in which Pakistan and India have acquired nuclear weapons. North Korea now having tested a capability last year and the threat on the margins on the region of course of Iran. But there's also a different kind of threat, that is the threat that the strategic nuclear competition between China and the United States might become a destablising factor in the region itself. That's a reflection of the fact that they have a complex relationships and competitive elements as well as cooperative elements. And the way in which each side is developing their nuclear weapons might be seen to threaten the other. And I think if those issues aren't resolved, there's a risk that those that we'll have a kind of mutually reinforcing cycle of suspicion of one another, which could drive an arms race between the two of them.
SHARP: Speaking of China, obviously the February 13th agreement was led by China. It's now nearly four weeks since Pyongyang had agreed to open up the front gates of the Yong Beyond ???? nuclear plant. They're still shut. Is North Korea still a threat?
WHITE: I think the fact that North Korea has nuclear weapons remains a very dangerous feature of the strategic environment in North East Asia and I think the fact that the February agreement is proving to be so difficult to implement reinforces yet again how difficult it is to negotiate with North Korea and how tough it is to really achieve substantial progress on denuclearisation through negotiations. Having said that, nobody's come up with any better approaches. I don't think there's much alternative, but to keep working at it. But, I think the optimism that some people felt when the February agreement was reached, this problem had been fixed was somewhat premature.
SHARP: Do you think there is optimism still that North Korea may give up its nuclear ambitions?
WHITE: I'm sure there are some people who still think there's a chance that we can negotiate through with the North Koreans to a point where it abandons its nuclear weapons, but we're a hell of a long way from that still and I think it will take a lot of steps, a lot of persuasion, a lot of pressure and probably a lot of inducements to get them to that point. And if you like, what we did in February was just begin that process. We didn't reach the end of it.
SHARP: Are there any other countries that are of major threat do you think? Only a report this week, suggested that Abdul Qadeer Khan's technology's is still being sought by some countries?
WHITE: Look I think there's a number of countries around, particularly in the Middle East, who in the light of Iran's program must be thinking about their options. People often mention Saudi Arabia and Egypt in this connection and I think that's credible.
Another country that people often mention is Japan. There's a thought that Japan now that it faces a nuclear neighbour in North Korea might be tempted to go down the nuclear route. I don't think that's an imminent threat myself. I think Japan will remain nuclear free as long as it's confident in the extended deterrents provided by the US alliance, by its alliance with the United States and as long it's confident of that, I don't think it will take the step of developing nuclear weapons. The converse of that of course is that if and when Japan loses that confidence, then it could go nuclear very quickly and I'm sure being Japanese very efficiently.
SHARP: How will that place Japan relationship wise with the United States if that happens?
WHITE: I think it would be a very serious issue for the US-Japan relationship. I think you could virtually say that a Japanese decision to go nuclear would be a decision to abandon the US-Japan alliance as the principle focus of Japan's security policy. That's why it will be such an important step for Japan, that's why I don't see it as being imminent. But I think it will be unwise to rule that out as impossible for all time. One day, sometime in the future, that relationship will change and I think some of the uncertainties that we see unfolding in the Asia-Pacific with the rise of China, the emergence of India, and the changing domestic politics of security within Japan itself could produce those kinds of trends.
SHARP: What about other countries like India, Pakistan?
WHITE: Welll India and Pakistan obviously have a very significant and difficult bilateral nuclear relationship themselves. One can argue that the advent of nuclear weapons on both sides of that difficult relationship has actually helped to stabilise that relationship.
SHARP: Because they inform each other?
WHITE: Well, they've both got such a strong state now in avoiding conflict and the fact of both sides having nuclear weapons has somewhat neutralised India's advantage in conventional weapons. But I think also the fear that the weapons might be used has pushed both sides towards a more accommodating approach on the negotiations on the Kashmir issue. There's still a long way to go on that. But you would have to say the atmospherics of the Kashmir issue and the outline of the deal around the line of control which ten years ago would have been regarded as totally unacceptable to both sides. That is now regarded as something which might conceivably in the future be the foundation for some kind of understanding. So, without ever wanting to say that nuclear weapons are a good thing, I think there might be an example there where they have helped to bring a certain sobriety and maturity to the approach of both sides.
