U.S. Divided: Lawmakers Split on South Korea’s Nuclear Intentions

U.S. Prioritizes China
Desires Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Presidential Prerogative

It came as a shock when U.S. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham recently suggested that provocations from North Korea could lead to nuclear armament in South Korea and Japan.

Graham believes it is time for both South Korea and Japan to consider their independent nuclear programs. It is currently assumed that South Korea heavily relies on the U.S., which possesses nuclear weapons, for its defense.

There are concerns within the U.S. that the country is overly dependent on the belief that it would protect South Korea’s security at the cost of sacrificing its cities.

On the 20th, Elbridge Colby, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Force Development, and Robert Peters, a researcher at the Heritage Foundation, reportedly discussed matters such as South Korea’s own nuclear armament and tactical nuclear re-deployment on VOA’s Washington Talk.

The host asked, “In a contingency situation, the U.S. will be focused on reacting to China. Now, will the U.S. provide a nuclear umbrella to South Korea when North Korea can strike the U.S. mainland?”

In response, Colby stated that while the Biden administration is focused on China, this does not mean it has abandoned South Korea.

He further stated that South Korea, as one of the U.S.’s major allies, needs a more realistic understanding of what the U.S. can offer.

In response to the host’s question of whether the U.S. will provide a nuclear umbrella to South Korea under the assumption that North Korea strikes a U.S. city, he pointed out, “But obviously, the United States does not want to get into the business of city trading with North Korea. South Korean security should not depend on trusting the United States to sacrifice 5 American cities to do something to do North Korea.”

If the U.S. does not provide a nuclear umbrella to South Korea, it appears that South Korea plans to pursue its independent atomic armament. In fact, due to the uncertainty of North Korea’s nuclear use, most South Koreans want their nuclear weapons, and there is a belief that the possibility of peaceful coexistence increases when both North and South Korea possess nuclear weapons.

However, the U.S. seems to be against South Korea’s nuclear armament. During the discussion, Peters, the researcher, stated, “Before we get to the point of South Korea becoming an independent nuclear power, I would like to see the United States attempt to reinvigorate our nuclear posture in the Western Pacific to include things like sea cruise missiles.”

Going on, he affirmed the stance that if South Korea’s ultimate goal of wanting its nuclear weapons is for stability and deterring war, “If the last best option before you get to a war stability breaking down is Korea, unfortunately, becoming an independent nuclear power, I think that should always be a legitimate conversation.”

The U.S. does not currently want nuclear proliferation, and the decision to use atomic weapons is the exclusive right of the U.S. President, so it is in the hands of the U.S. President regardless of speculation.

Experts believe that the U.S. leadership, which prioritizes America’s security, is unlikely to hand over the nuclear umbrella to South Korea even if a war breaks out.

Meanwhile, in response to Graham’s remarks, Republican Representative Mike Rogers, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, reportedly expressed his opposition, stating that he does not think that having its independent nuclear weapons is a desirable move.

Representative Rogers argued that there should be no more nuclear powers that the U.S. has to deal with and made it clear that he does not want South Korea to have its independent nuclear weapons, stating that the claim that South Korea should possess nuclear weapons is a minority view.