North Korea’s announcement yesterday that it possessed nuclear weapons and was pulling out indefinitely from six-nation talks on its atomic programs underscores the contradictions in the nonproliferation policy now sought to be enforced by what is called “the international community.” In this context, there is nothing “international” about that community. It is an exclusive club of nuclear haves who insist that what the world needs for peace and security is for no one else to possess those weapons. If any country argues that it too needs weapons to defend its land and sovereignty, it becomes part of an “axis of evil”. The United States subscribes to the principle of nuclear disarmament but has been content to maintain the status quo because as the dominant world military power, its nuclear weaponry allows it to threaten any nation and if the threat does not succeed, to invade and occupy it.
The US reaction to North Korea’s declaration yesterday shows what difference nuclear capability can make. There was no rhetoric about the axis of evil; no threat of invasion. There was no “Talk, or else...” ultimatum. Instead, there was an assurance that no one would attack it and there were appeals to resume talks. What the world of nuclear have-nots notices is that the language is so very different from what is directed at Iran — still a source of evil, in whose case all “options are open.” The lesson, as has been pointed out by many observers, including this paper, is that if you want your home to be safe, keep a gun at home — and create the impression that you are going to use it. North Korea has done that. The beleaguered and isolated regime believes that it has mounted an effective defense against attack from the South or from the Americans themselves. Any protests from Washington to the contrary are not going to be believed because Pyongyang has seen US changing regime in Iraq. It knows that the minute the talks “succeed” in American terms, it will mean the surrender of its nuclear arsenal and complete vulnerability to aggression.
The argument here is not that the way to build an ideal world that will be safe for our children — America’s. Iran’s, North Korea’s and everyone else’s — is for all to possess weapons with which any mad man can destroy the world. The way for that is to ensure that no nation has to fear shock-awe-and-destroy invasions from mightier nations. In our part of the world, no nation believes that it can ensure its security by a couple of nuclear bombs. At the same time, no one believes that they have a moral responsibility to accept the neoconservative worldview that they must live forever in fear of Israel or any other marauding renegade.
This demands a more informed nuclear policy. The first task should be to disarm regional bullies. Before being forced to listen to sermons on the virtues of nuclear disarmament, the region would like to hear from the “international community” why there is no demand that Israel should open its facilities for inspection or that it should give up its nuclear weapons.
Any other way will fail.
