By José Carlos Palma*

The question of whether South Korea should acquire nuclear weapons has been a subject of intense debate in recent years, fueled by growing concerns about North Korea’s nuclear program and the perceived waning of U.S. commitment to extended deterrence. While the prospect of South Korea becoming a nuclear-armed state might initially seem like a way to bolster its security, a closer examination reveals that pursuing a nuclear deterrent would be counterproductive and detrimental to South Korea’s national interests.

Political Implications

South Korea’s membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its adherence to the 1992 Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula have been instrumental in its efforts to condemn North Korea’s nuclear ambitions and mobilize international support against its proliferation activities. Abandoning these commitments in favor of developing its nuclear weapons would not only undermine its moral authority to criticize North Korea but also damage its reputation on the global stage.

Military Implications

South Korea already possesses a formidable conventional arsenal capable of deterring and responding to a North Korean attack. Its recent commitment to strengthening its defense capabilities, including the development of precision strike weapons and the establishment of a strategic command, further underscores its conventional deterrence posture. Nuclear weapons would add little to South Korea’s security while significantly increasing the risk of escalation and conflict.

Economic Implications

Withdrawing from the NPT would expose South Korea to crippling economic sanctions, particularly from its largest trading partner, China. The impact of these sanctions would be compounded by the disruption of international cooperation with South Korea’s nuclear energy program, which is a crucial economic and energy priority.

Alternative Approaches

Instead of pursuing a destabilizing nuclear arms race, South Korea should prioritize strengthening its conventional capabilities and engage in international arms control efforts to reduce the threat posed by North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. Dialogue across the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) could also provide a forum for addressing the underlying security concerns that have fueled the nuclear debate.

In conclusion, while the desire for a nuclear deterrent might seem understandable given the security challenges posed by North Korea, acquiring nuclear weapons would not make South Korea safer. Instead, it would undermine South Korea’s efforts to protect itself, harm its international standing, and damage its economy. Relying on conventional capabilities, strengthening international cooperation on arms control, and engaging in dialogue with North Korea offer more viable and sustainable strategies for addressing the security challenges on the Korean Peninsula.

* Expert in international relations, such as foreign policy, international trade, domestic security, international security, developing nations, domestic security, intelligence, IT Consultant, world history, political consultant, and military analysis.