Deterrence in the Twenty-first Century

maxwell.af.mil

Deterrence in the twenty-first century - Air University Press

CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGES FOR EXTENDED DETERRENCE

dynamic, ongoing Chinese military buildup raises questions

among allies about US nuclear guarantees and the resolve and

capability of the United States to deter aggression in East Asia.

North Korea has repeatedly ignored US-declared redlines regarding

aspects of its nuclear weapon and ballistic missile programs,

as illustrated in the following examples.

In June 2006, US intelligence reported activities under way in

North Korea to prepare to launch a number of ballistic missiles.

One of the missiles being prepared for launch was a Taepo

Dong-2 that was assessed as being capable of delivering a

nuclear weapon–sized payload to the continental United States. 3

On 26 June, Pres. George W. Bush stated, “I have made clear

to our partners on this issue [Japan, South Korea, China, and

Russia] . . . that we need to send a focused message to the

North Koreans in that this [long-range missile] launch is provocative.”

On 29 June, at a news conference with Japanese

prime minister Junichiro Koizumi, Bush again warned,

“Launching the missile is unacceptable.” On 4 and 5 July,

North Korea defied US warnings and launched seven ballistic

missiles into the Sea of Japan, including the Taepo Dong-2.

On 3 October 2006, North Korea announced that it was preparing

to conduct a nuclear test. Later that same day, Secretary

of State Condoleezza Rice responded by stating that

The United States is seriously concerned about today’s announcement

by the North Korean government of its intention to undertake

a nuclear test. . . . A North Korean test of a nuclear weapon

would severely undermine our confidence in North Korea’s commitment

to denuclearization and to the Six Party Talks and would

pose a threat to peace and security in Asia and the world. A provocative

action of this nature would only further isolate the North

Korean regime. . . .

Furthermore, the next day Assistant Secretary of State

Christopher Hill stated that

[The test is], frankly, rather unthinkable. . . . The DPRK [Democratic

People’s Republic of Korea], if it wants an economic future,

indeed . . . if it wants a future, needs to get rid of these weapons.

It can have a future or it can have these weapons. It cannot have

both. . . . We are not going to live with a nuclear North Korea. . . .

I’m not prepared, at this point, to say what that precisely means,

but I’m telling you, we cannot accept a nuclear North Korea. . . .

We’re not coming to terms with a nuclear North Korea.”

125

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines