Difference between revisions of "North Korea and weapons of mass destruction" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(39 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{images OK}}{{started}}{{claimed}}{{Contracted}}
+
{{approved}}{{submitted}}{{images OK}}{{Paid}}{{copyedited}}
 
{{DPRK WMD}}
 
{{DPRK WMD}}
  
[[North Korea]] claims to possess [[nuclear weapon]]s, and the [[CIA]] asserts that it has a substantial arsenal of [[chemical weapons]]. North Korea, a member of the [[Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]] before withdrawing in 2003, cited the failure of the [[United States]] to fulfill its end of the [[Agreed Framework]], a 1994 agreement between the states to limit North Korea's nuclear ambitions, begin normalization of relations, and help North Korea supply some energy needs through [[nuclear reactors]].  
+
[[North Korea]] claims to possess [[nuclear weapon]]s, and the [[CIA]] asserts that it has a substantial arsenal of [[chemical weapon]]s. North Korea, a member of the [[Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]] before withdrawing in 2003, cited the failure of the [[United States]] to fulfill its end of the [[Agreed Framework]], a 1994 agreement between the states to limit North Korea's nuclear ambitions, begin normalization of relations, and help North Korea supply some energy needs through [[nuclear reactors]].  
 
 
On October 9, 2006, the North Korean government issued an announcement that it had successfully conducted a [[2006 North Korean nuclear test|nuclear test]] for the first time. Both the [[United States Geological Survey]] and Japanese seismological authorities detected an earthquake with a preliminary estimated magnitude of 4.2 on the [[Richter scale]] in North Korea, corroborating some aspects of the North Korean claims.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqcenter/recenteqsww/Quakes/ustqab.php | title=USGS Recent Earth Quakes | Earthquake detected in North Korea}}</ref>
 
  
 +
The world community left the MAD ([[Mutually Assured Destruction]]) world of [[nuclear weapons]] at the end of the [[Cold War]], only to enter the Terror world with rogue nations and terrorists groups eager to possess and use nuclear weapons. [[North Korea]] stands at the forefront of rogue nations seeking nuclear weapons and delivery systems along with [[Iran]]. The world community has been taking a unified stance, demanding a dismantling of nuclear programs in both nations. Six party talks have been conducted, including [[Russia]], [[China]], [[Japan]], [[South Korea]], North Korea, and the [[United States]], with a measure of success to date. North Korea, although weakened by [[famine]], [[drought]], a lack of resources, and foreign reserves, still has the capacity to build and use nuclear weapons.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
North Korea declared in 2009 that it had developed a nuclear weapon, and possessed a small stockpile of relatively simple nuclear weapons. North Korea may also have [[chemical weapon]] and/or [[biological weapon]]s capability. The [[United Nations]] responded to North Korea's ongoing missile and nuclear development with a variety of sanctions.
 
==Nuclear weapons==
 
==Nuclear weapons==
 
 
 
===Background===
 
===Background===
Korea has been a divided country since 1945, after Korea's liberation from Japan at the end of [[World War II]]. The [[Korean War]] began with North Korea's invasion of South Korea on June 25, 1950 and continues under truce to this day. The United States rejected North Korea's call for bilateral talks concerning a [[non-aggression pact]], calling for [[six-party talks]] that include the [[People's Republic of China]], [[Russia]], [[Japan]], and [[South Korea]]. The United States pointed out North Korea's violated of prior bilateral agreements while North Korea has insisted on bilateral talks with the United States leading to a [Diplomacy|diplomatic]] stalemate.  
+
Korea has been a divided country since 1945, after Korea's liberation from Japan at the end of [[World War II]]. The [[Korean War]] began with North Korea's invasion of South Korea on June 25, 1950, and continues under truce to this day. The United States rejected North Korea's call for bilateral talks concerning a [[non-aggression pact]], calling for [[six-party talks]] that include the [[People's Republic of China]], [[Russia]], [[Japan]], and [[South Korea]]. The United States pointed out North Korea's violation of prior bilateral agreements while North Korea has insisted on them, leading to a [[Diplomacy|diplomatic]] stalemate.  
  
On November 19 2006 North Korea’s ''Minju Joson'' newspaper accused South Korea of building up arms to attack the North, claiming that "the South Korean military is openly clamoring that the development and introduction of new weapons are to target the North." Pyongyang accused South Korea of conspiring with the United States to attack the isolated and impoverished state, an accusation made frequently by the North and routinely denied by the U.S.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15804503/| title=msnbc | Asia-Pacific | APEC calls on N. Korea to end nuclear initiative| accessdate=2006-11-26}}</ref>
+
On November 19, 2006, North Korea’s ''Minju Joson'' newspaper accused South Korea of building up arms to attack the North, claiming that "the South Korean military is openly clamoring that the development and introduction of new weapons are to target the North." Pyongyang accused South Korea of conspiring with the United States to attack the isolated and impoverished state, an accusation made frequently by the North and routinely denied by the U.S.<ref>[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15804503/ APEC calls on N. Korea to end nuclear initiative] ''The Associated Press'', November 19, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>
  
 
===Chronology of events===
 
===Chronology of events===
{{Main|North Korea Nuclear Program Chronology}}
 
  
 
===Plutonium===
 
===Plutonium===
 
[[Image:Yongbyon-5MWe-top-of-core.jpg|thumb|right|300px| [[Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center]]]]
 
[[Image:Yongbyon-5MWe-top-of-core.jpg|thumb|right|300px| [[Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center]]]]
Concern focuses around two [[Nuclear reactor|reactors]] at the [[Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center]], both of them small power stations using [[Magnox]] techniques. The smaller (5[[MWe]]) reached completion in 1986 and has since produced possibly 8,000 spent fuel elements. Construction of the larger plant (50MWe) commenced in 1984 but in 2003 still stood incomplete. North Koreans constructed that larger plant based on the declassified blueprints of the [[Sellafield|Calder Hall]] power reactors used to produce [[plutonium]] for the [[United Kingdom|UK]] [[United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction|nuclear weapons program]]. The smaller plant produces enough material to build one new bomb per year. If completed, the larger plant could produce enough for ten each year.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.thebulletin.org/article_nn.php?art_ofn=ja06norris | title=Global nuclear stockpiles, 1945-2006 | thebulletin.org | accessdate=2006-10-05}}</ref> Small amounts of plutonium could have been produced in a Russian-supplied IRT-2000 [[heavy water]]–moderated [[Heavy water reactor|research reactor]] completed in 1967, although safeguards violations at the plant have never been reported.
+
Concern focuses around two [[Nuclear reactor|reactors]] at the [[Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center]], both of them small power stations using [[Magnox]] techniques. The smaller (5 [[MWe]]) reached completion in 1986, and has since produced possibly 8,000 spent fuel elements. Construction of the larger plant (50 MWe) commenced in 1984, but as of 2003 still stood incomplete. North Koreans constructed that larger plant based on the declassified blueprints of the [[Sellafield|Calder Hall]] power reactors used to produce [[plutonium]] for the [[United Kingdom|UK]] [[United Kingdom and weapons of mass destruction|nuclear weapons program]]. The smaller plant produces enough material to build one new bomb per year. Small amounts of plutonium could have been produced in a Russian-supplied IRT-2000 [[heavy water]]–moderated [[Heavy water reactor|research reactor]] completed in 1967, although safeguards violations at the plant have never been reported.
  
On March 12, 1993, North Korea said that it planned to withdraw from the [[Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]] (NPT), refusing to allow inspectors access to its nuclear sites. By 1994, the [[United States]] believed that North Korea had enough reprocessed plutonium to produce about ten bombs with the amount of plutonium increasing. Faced with diplomatic pressure and the threat of American military [[air strike]]s against the reactor, North Korea agreed to dismantle its plutonium program as part of the [[Agreed Framework between the United States of America and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea|Agreed Framework]] in which South Korea and the United States would provide North Korea with [[light water reactor]]s and [[fuel oil]] until those reactors could be completed. Because the light water reactors would require imported [[enriched uranium]], the United States could easily track the amount of reactor fuel and waste, increasing North Korea's difficulty of diverting nuclear waste for plutonium reprocessing. With bureaucratic red tape and political obstacles from the North Korea, the [[Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization]] (KEDO), established to advance the implementation of the Agreed Framework, had failed to build the promised light water reactors. North Korea charged that the United States failed to uphold their end of the agreement by providing energy aid, and in late 2002, North Korea returned to using its old reactors.
+
On March 12, 1993, North Korea said that it planned to withdraw from the [[Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]] (NPT), refusing to allow inspectors access to its nuclear sites. By 1994, the [[United States]] believed that North Korea had enough reprocessed plutonium to produce about ten bombs, with the amount of plutonium increasing. Faced with diplomatic pressure and the threat of American military [[air strike]]s against the reactor, North Korea agreed to dismantle its plutonium program as part of the [[Agreed Framework between the United States of America and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea|Agreed Framework]], in which South Korea and the United States would provide North Korea with [[light water reactor]]s and [[fuel oil]] until those reactors could be completed. Because the light water reactors would require imported [[enriched uranium]], the United States could easily track the amount of reactor fuel and waste, increasing North Korea's difficulty of diverting nuclear waste for plutonium reprocessing. With bureaucratic red tape and political obstacles from North Korea, the [[Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization]] (KEDO), established to advance the implementation of the Agreed Framework, had failed to build the promised light water reactors. North Korea charged that the United States failed to uphold their end of the agreement by providing energy aid, and in late 2002, North Korea returned to using its old reactors.
  
 
===Enriched uranium===
 
===Enriched uranium===
{{nuclear weapons}}
+
With the abandonment of its plutonium program, United States officials charged North Korea with beginning an enriched uranium program. [[Pakistan]], through [[Abdul Qadeer Khan]], supplied key technology and information to North Korea in exchange for missile technology around 1997, according to U.S. [[intelligence (information gathering)|intelligence]] officials. Pakistani President Pervez Musharaf acknowledged in 2005, that Khan had provided centrifuges and their designs to North Korea.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4180286.stm Khan 'gave N Korea centrifuges'] BBC, August 24, 2005. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>
With the abandonment of its plutonium program, United States officials charged North Korea with beginning an enriched uranium program. [[Pakistan]], through [[Abdul Qadeer Khan]], supplied key technology and information to North Korea in exchange for missile technology around 1997, according to U.S. [[intelligence (information gathering)|intelligence]] officials. Pakistani President Pervez Musharaf acknowledged in 2005 that Khan had provided centrifuges and their designs to North Korea.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4180286.stm</ref>
+
The media publicized that program in October 2002, when North Korean officials admitted to the United States restarting the uranium enrichment program.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2335231.stm N Korea 'admits nuclear programme'] ''BBC News'', October 17, 2002. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>  Under the Agreed Framework North Korea explicitly agreed to freeze plutonium programs (specifically, its  "graphite moderated reactors and related facilities." The agreement also committed North Korea to implement the Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the [[Korean Peninsula]], committing both Koreas to abandon enrichment or reprocessing facilities. The United States called North Korea on the violation of its commitment to abandon enrichment facilities.
The media publicized that program publicized in October 2002 when North Korean officials admitted to the United States restarting the urainium enrichment program.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2335231.stm | title=BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | N Korea 'admits nuclear programme | accessdate=2006-10-05}}</ref>  Under the Agreed Framework North Korea explicitly agreed to freeze plutonium programs (specifically, its  "graphite moderated reactors and related facilities." The agreement also committed North Korea to implement the Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the [[Korean Peninsula]], committing both Koreas to abandon enrichment or reprocessing facilities. The United States called North Korea on the violation of its commitment to abandon enrichment facilities.
 
  
In December 2002, the KEDO Board followed through on threats to suspend fuel oil shipments in response to North Korea's violation, leading North Korea to the end of the Agreed Framework and announce plans to reactivate a dormant nuclear fuel processing program and power plant north of Pyongyang. North Korea soon thereafter expelled [[International Atomic Energy Agency|United Nations inspectors]] and withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty. In 2007 reports emanating from Washington suggested that the 2002 [[CIA]] reports of North Korea developing uranium enrichment technology had been overstated or misread the intelligence. U.S. officials ceased making that a major issue in the [[six-party talks]].<ref name=reuters-uranium-program>{{cite news|url=http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N09302593.htm|title=N.Korean uranium enrichment program fades as issue|author=Carol Giacomo|publisher=[[Reuters]]|date=10 February 2007|accessdate=2007-02-11}}</ref><ref name=nyt-uranium-program>{{cite news|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/washington/01korea.html|title=U.S. Had Doubts on North Korean Uranium Drive|publisher=New York Times|date=March 1, 2007|accessdate=2007-03-01}}</ref><ref name=wp-uranium-program>{{cite news|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801977.html|title=New Doubts On Nuclear Efforts by North Korea|publisher=Washington Post|date=March 1, 2007|accessdate=2007-03-01}}</ref>
+
In December 2002, the KEDO Board followed through on threats to suspend fuel oil shipments in response to North Korea's violation, leading North Korea to the end of the Agreed Framework and announce plans to reactivate a dormant nuclear fuel processing program and power plant north of Pyongyang. North Korea soon thereafter expelled [[International Atomic Energy Agency|United Nations inspectors]] and withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty.  
  
 
===North Korea-United States relations===
 
===North Korea-United States relations===
{{main|United States-North Korea relations}}
+
[[President of the United States|U.S. President]] [[George W. Bush]]'s strategy with North Korea and Iran, the other nations named as a member of the "[[Axis of evil|Axis of Evil]]" following the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]] differed from that against [[Saddam]]'s [[Iraq]]. The [[United States]] officials sought diplomatic pressure with [[China]], [[Japan]], [[South Korea]], [[Russia]], joining to persuade North Korea to abandon it's nuclear ambitions. Although not ruling out military action as a last resort, the United States ruled immediate military action out. North Korea, maintaining one of the largest standing armies in the world, and positioned to inflict enormous initial damage on the South, made the military option one of extreme last resort. The last resort would come with [[North Korea]] close to producing nuclear weapons. North Korea possession of nuclear weapons, as with [[Iran]], would upset the balance of power. During the standoff between the [[USSR]] and the [[U.S.]] during the Cold War, a rational approach prevailed in the MAD ([[Mutually Assured Destruction]]) world. With North Korea and Iran, international policy thinkers doubt either nation would stop at the thought of total annihilation.
Even though [[President of the United States|U.S. President]] [[George W. Bush]] had named North Korea as part of an "[[Axis of evil|Axis of Evil]]" following the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]], U.S. officials stated that the United States was not planning any immediate military action.
+
 
 +
As North Korea further inflamed American ire evidence of state-sponsored [[illegal drug trade|drug smuggling]], [[money laundering]], and wide scale [[counterfeit]]ing. Diplomatic efforts at resolving the North Korean situation complicated by the differing goals and interests of the nations of the region. While none of the parties desire a North Korea with nuclear weapons, [[Japan]] and [[South Korea]], especially, express concern about North Korean counter-strikes following possible military action against North Korea. The [[People's Republic of China]] and South Korea also worry about the economic and social consequences should this situation cause the [[Politics of North Korea|North Korean government]] to collapse.
  
According to John Feffer, co-director of the [[think tank]] Foreign Policy in Focus,
+
===Nuclear deterrence===
<blockquote>The primary problem is that the current U.S. administration fundamentally doesn’t want an agreement with North Korea. The Bush administration considers the 1994 Agreed Framework to have been a flawed agreement. It doesn’t want be saddled with a similar agreement, for if it did sign one, it would then be open to charges of "appeasing" Pyongyang. The Vice President has summed up the approach as: "We don’t negotiate with evil, we defeat evil."<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.korea-is-one.org/article.php3?id_article=2598 | title=Korea Is One: U.S. Talks with North Korea ’Set Up to Fail’ | accessdate=2006-10-05}}</ref></blockquote>
+
Some scholars and analysts have argued that North Korea has been using nuclear weapons primarily as a political tool, particularly to bring the U.S. to the table to begin reestablishing normal relations and end the long-standing economic embargo against North Korea. That argument contends that the threat of nuclear weapons has been the only North Korean policy that has brought the United States into negotiations on their terms. In a lecture in 1993, Bruce Cummings asserted that, based on information gathered by the [[CIA]], the activity around the Yongbyon facility may have been done expressly to draw the attention of [[U.S. satellites]]. He also pointed out that the CIA had not claimed North Korea had nuclear weapons, but that they had enough material to create such weapons should they choose to do so.
  
American ire at North Korea is further inflamed by allegations of state-sponsored [[illegal drug trade|drug smuggling]], [[money laundering]], and wide scale [[counterfeit]]ing.
+
North Korea’s energy supply has been deteriorating since the 1990s, when [[Russia]] and [[China]] abandoned their communist commitment. North Korea, once a darling of the Soviet and Chinese communist powers, became an embarrassment. As Russia and China turned toward a free enterprise approach toward domestic and international economy, they sought to ween North Korea from their dependence upon their aid, especially Russian oil. That, coupled with a lack of foreign reserves to purchase oil on the open market, left [[North Korea]] in an energy crisis.
  
Diplomatic efforts at resolving the North Korean situation are complicated by the different goals and interests of the nations of the region. While none of the parties desire a North Korea with nuclear weapons, Japan and South Korea are especially concerned about North Korean counter-strikes following possible military action against North Korea. The People's Republic of China and South Korea are also very worried about the economic and social consequences should this situation cause the [[Politics of North Korea|North Korean government]] to collapse.
+
Although North Korea possesses an insignificant indigenous nuclear power capacity, the two light-water moderated plants, if built, would be an important source of electricity in a nation with scarce resources. Although couched in a derisive statement, [[Donald Rumsfeld]] demonstrated the severe lack of electricity for the entire nation in a photograph released in October 2006.<ref>[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=410158&in_page_id=1811 North Korea might now have The Bomb, but it doesn't have much electricity] ''Daily Mail'', October 13, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> Many parties have a vested interest in the claim that North Korea has nuclear weapons.  
  
In early 2000 the Zurich-based company [[Asea Brown Boveri|ABB]]<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/C1256C290031524BC125673100226662.aspx | title=Board Election Results February 28, 1996}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | url=http://www02.abb.com/GLOBAL/FRABB/FRABB028.NSF/viewunid/87B8052667AB4631C1256D5900339D37/$file/ABB+Group+Annual+Report,+2000_English.pdf | title=ABB Group Annual Report 2000 }}</ref> was awarded the contract to provide the design and key components for two light-water nuclear reactors to North Korea.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.abb.com/cawp/seitp202/C1256C290031524B4125686C00433604.aspx | title= ABB to deliver systems, equipment to North Korean nuclear plants }}</ref>
+
Leading politicians in [[Japan]] have called for discussion on removing Article 9 of the [[Japanese Constitution]] prohibiting a standing army beyond national security forces in light of North Korea's provocative missile tests in the [[Sea of Japan]] and noncompliance with ending nuclear weapons development. The United States has followed a bipartisan foreign policy war on terror, committed to take the war with terrorist groups and nations to the source rather than wait for terrorist attacks on home soil, since the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]]. Although the [[Iraq War]] has been hotly debated in the United States, neither the [[Democrat]]'s nor the [[Republican]]s seek abandoning that foreign policy principle. The United States recently reduced its forces in [[Foreign Policy of South Korea|South Korea from 40,000]] to 30,000 troops in a commitment to turn over full defense of South Korea to the [[Military of South Korea|South Korean military]]. The reality of taking the lead in their own defense has sobered South Korean politicians of all parities to take the North Korean treat seriously, prompting an increased criticism of the [[Sunshine Policy]].
  
===Nuclear deterrence===
+
On March 17, 2007, North Korea announced at international nuclear talks of preparing to shut down its main nuclear facility. The concession followed a series of [[six-party talks]], involving North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan, and the United States, began in 2003. On July 14, [[IAEA]] inspectors confirmed the shutdown of North Korea's [[Yongbyon nuclear reactor]].<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6900184.stm UN confirms N Korea nuclear halt] BBC, July 16, 2007. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>
Some scholars and analysts have argued that North Korea is using nuclear weapons primarily as a political tool, particularly to bring the U.S. to the table to begin reestablishing normal relations and end the long-standing economic embargo against North Korea. A key point of this argument is the observation that the threat of nuclear weapons is the only thing that has brought the U.S. into serious negotiations. In a lecture in 1993, Bruce Cummings asserted that, based on information gathered by the CIA, the activity around the Yongbyon facility may have been done expressly to draw the attention of U.S. satellites. He also pointed out that the CIA had not claimed North Korea had nuclear weapons, but that they had enough material to create such weapons should they choose to do so.
+
 
 +
===Nuclear tests===
 +
On October 9, 2006, North Korea announced it had successfully conducted its [[2006 North Korean nuclear test|first nuclear test]]. An [[underground nuclear explosion]] was detected, its yield was estimated as less than a [[kiloton]], and some radioactive output was detected.<ref name=radioactive>Robert Burns and Anne Gearan, [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101300576.html U.S.: Test Points to N. Korea Nuke Blast] ''The Associated Press'', October 13, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref><ref name="ntest1">Wm. Robert Johnston, [http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/dprk-ntest.html North Korea's first nuclear test] October 21, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016. </ref>
 +
 
 +
On May 25, 2009, North Korea conducted a [[2009 North Korean nuclear test|second nuclear test]], resulting in an explosion estimated to be between 2 and 7 kilotons.<ref name="ntest2">Vitaly Fedchenko, [http://books.sipri.org/files/FS/SIPRIFS0912.pdf North Korea's Nuclear test Explosion] ''SIPRI Fact Sheet'', December 2009. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> The 2009 test, like the 2006 test, is believed to have occurred at [[Mantapsan]], [[Kilju County]], in the north-eastern part of North Korea.<ref>[http://npsglobal.org/eng/news/23-nuclear-a-radiological/566-north-koreas-new-nuclear-test-raises-universal-condemnation.html North Korea's new nuclear test raises universal condemnation] ''NPSGlobal Foundation'', May 25, 2009. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>
 +
 
 +
On February 11, 2013, the [[U.S. Geological Survey]] detected a magnitude 5.1 [[seismic]] disturbance.<ref>[http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usc000f5t0#executive M 5.1 Nuclear Explosion - 24km ENE of Sungjibaegam, North Korea] USGS, February 11, 2013. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> North Korea has officially reported it as a successful nuclear test with a lighter warhead that delivers more force than before, but has not revealed the exact yield. Multiple South Korean sources estimate the yield at 6–9 kilotons, while the German [[Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources]] estimated the yield at 40 kilotons (later revised to 14kT).<ref name="KoreaHearldFeb14">Choi He-suk, [http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20130214000765 Estimates differ on size of N.K. blast] ''The Korea Herald'', February 14, 2013. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>
  
North Korea’s energy supply has been deteriorating since the 1990s. Although North Korea's indigenous nuclear power capacity is insignificant, the two light-water moderated plants, if built, would be an important source of electricity in a nation with scarce resources. Although couched in a derisive statement, Donald Rumsfeld demonstrated the severe lack of electricity for the entire nation in a photograph released in October 2006.<ref>{{cite web |title=North Korea might now have The Bomb, but it doesn't have much electricity|url= http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=410158&in_page_id=1811}}</ref>
+
On January 6, 2016 in Korea, the [[United States Geological Survey]] detected a magnitude 5.1 seismic disturbance,<ref>[http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/us10004bnm M5.1 - 21km ENE of Sungjibaegam, North Korea] USGS, January 6, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> reported to be a [[January 2016 North Korean nuclear test|fourth underground nuclear test]].<ref>[https://www.rt.com/news/328038-north-korea-earthquake-nuclear/ North Korea claims fully successful hydrogen bomb test] ''Russia Today'', January 5, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> North Korea claimed that this test involved a [[Thermonuclear weapon|hydrogen bomb]]. This claim has not been verified. Within hours, many nations and organizations had condemned the test.<ref>[http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/n-korean-nuclear-test/2404166.html N Korean nuclear test condemned as intolerable provocation] ''Channel News Asia'', January 6, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> Expert U.S. analysts do not believe that a hydrogen bomb was detonated. Seismic data collected so far suggests a 6-9 kiloton yield and that magnitude is not consistent with the power that would be generated by a hydrogen bomb explosion. "What we're speculating is they tried to do a boosted nuclear device, which is an atomic bomb that has a little bit of hydrogen, an isotope in it called tritium," said [[Joseph Cirincione]], president of the global security firm [[Ploughshares Fund]].<ref name="NBC News">Robert Windrem,[http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/north-korea-likely-lying-about-hydrogen-bomb-test-experts-say-n491401 North Korea Likely Lying About Hydrogen Bomb Test, Experts Say] ''NBC News'', January 6, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>  
  
Another factor in this argument is that many parties have a vested interest in the claim that North Korea has nuclear weapons. For North Korea, it has been a bargaining tool for opening diplomatic discussions and receiving aid. The [[Grand National Party]], currently the opposition party in South Korea, has made their disagreement with the [[Sunshine policy]] a major political wedge. Leading politicians in [[Japan]] have openly expressed a desire to remove [[Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution]], and the threat of a nuclear-armed North Korea feeds into the perceived need for a larger standing army and defense force. The Bush administration in the United States has also made the threat of terrorism the central focus of foreign policy since the [[September 11, 2001 attacks]]. The U.S. maintains a force of nearly 40,000 troops in South Korea, the second largest in East Asia,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/cda06-02.cfm|title=Global U.S. Troop Deployment, 1950-2005|author=Tim Kane|accessdate=2006-05-24}}</ref> that would likely have to be curtailed if the political situation changed significantly in Korea, something expected to negatively affect the U.S. sphere of influence in the region.
+
On February 7, 2016, roughly a month after the alleged hydrogen bomb test, North Korea claimed to have put a [[satellite]] into [[orbit]] around the [[Earth]]. [[Prime Minister of Japan|Japanese Prime Minister]] [[Shinzō Abe]] had warned the North to not launch the rocket, and if it did and the rocket violated [[Japan]]ese territory, it would be shot down. Nevertheless, North Korea launched the rocket anyway, claiming the satellite was purely intended for peaceful, scientific purposes. Several nations, including the [[United States]], Japan, and [[South Korea]], have criticized the launch, and despite North Korean claims that the rocket was for peaceful purposes, it has been heavily criticized as an attempt to perform an [[Intercontinental ballistic missile|ICBM]] test under the guise of a peaceful satellite launch. [[China]] also criticized the launch, however urged "the relevant parties" to "refrain from taking actions that may further escalate tensions on the Korean peninsula".<ref>[http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35515207 North Korea fires long-range rocket despite warnings] ''BBC News'', February 7, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>
  
On March 17, 2007, North Korea told delegates at international nuclear talks that it is preparing to shut down its main nuclear facility. The agreement was reached following a series of [[six-party talks]], involving North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan, and the U.S, begun in 2003.  According to the agreement, a list of its nuclear programs will be submitted and the nuclear facility will be disabled in exchange for fuel aid and normalization talks with the U.S. and Japan.<ref>[http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/3/16/154255.shtml N. Korea Plans to Shut Down Nuke Facility]. March 17, 2007.</ref> This had been delayed from April due to a dispute with the United States over [[Banco Delta Asia]], but on July 14, [[IAEA]] inspectors confirm the shutdown of North Korea's [[Yongbyon nuclear reactor]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6900184.stm|title=UN confirms N Korea nuclear halt|author=BBC|accessdate=2007-07-16}}</ref>
+
A fifth nuclear test occurred on September 9, 2016. This test yield is considered the highest among all five tests thus far, surpassing its previous record in 2013.
  
 
==Biological and chemical weapons==
 
==Biological and chemical weapons==
North Korea acceded to the [[Biological Weapons Convention]] in 1987, and the [[Geneva Protocol]] on January 4, 1989, but has not signed the [[Chemical Weapons Convention]].
+
North Korea acceded to the [[Biological Weapons Convention]] in 1987, and the [[Geneva Protocol]] on January 4, 1989, but refused to sign the [[Chemical Weapons Convention]].
The country is believed to possess a substantial arsenal of chemical weapons. It reportedly acquired the technology necessary to produce [[tabun (nerve agent)|tabun]] and [[mustard gas]] as early as the 1950s,<ref>{{cite web | url=http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/currentconflicts/a/koreanmilitary_3.htm | title=North Korean Military Capabilities | accessdate=2006-10-05}}</ref> and now possesses a full arsenal of [[nerve gas|nerve agents]] and other advanced varieties, with the means to launch them in [[artillery]] shells.{{Fact|date=February 2007}}  North Korea has expended considerable resources on equipping its army with chemical-protection equipment.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} South Korea, however, has not felt the need to take such measures.{{Fact|date=March 2007}}
+
Intelligence reports suggest that North Korea possesses a substantial arsenal of chemical weapons, reportedly acquiring the technology to produce [[tabun (nerve agent)|tabun]] and [[mustard gas]] as early as the 1950s, and now possesses a full arsenal of [[nerve gas|nerve agents]] and other advanced varieties, with the means to launch them in [[artillery]] shells. North Korea has expended considerable resources on equipping its army with chemical-protection equipment.
  
 
==Delivery systems==
 
==Delivery systems==
{{main|North Korean missile tests}}
+
North Korea's missile technology limits its ability to deliver weapons of mass destruction to targets. As of 2005, North Korea's [[No Dong]] missiles travel 1,300 [[kilometre|km]], able to reach [[South Korea]], [[Japan]], and parts of [[Russia]] and [[China]], but not the [[United States]] or Europe although the missile's capacity to carry nuclear weapons has been questioned. BM-25, a North Korean designed long-range ballistic missile with range capabilities of up to 1,550 miles (2493 km), has the potential of carrying a nuclear warhead. North Korea has been developing the [[Taepodong-1]] missile with a range of 2,000 km. With the [[Taepodong-2]] missile in development, North Korea soon will have a missile with an expected range of 5,000-6,000 km.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5091702.stm North Korea warned about missile] ''BBC News'', June 18, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> With this North Korea could deliver a warhead to all countries in [[Southeast Asia]], parts of [[Alaska]], and the continental United States. The North Koreans tested Taepodong-2 missile on July 4, 2005, unsuccessfully. United States intelligence estimates that the weapon take eleven years to become operational, although that production time could shorten. The Taepodong-2 could hit the western United States as well as other nations the Western hemisphere. The current model of the Taepodong-2 lacks the capacity to carry nuclear warheads to the United States.  
[[Image:Taepodong1.jpg|thumb|right|A ''Taepodong''-1 missile fired in 1998.]]
 
North Korea's ability to deliver weapons of mass destruction to a hypothetical target is somewhat limited by its missile technology. As of 2005, North Korea's total range with its [[No Dong]] missiles is only 1,300 [[kilometre|km]], enough to reach [[South Korea]], [[Japan]], and parts of [[Russia]] and [[China]], but not the [[United States]] or Europe. It is not known if this missile is actually capable of carrying the nuclear weapons North Korea has so far developed. BM-25 is a North Korean designed long-range ballistic missile with range capabilities of up to 1,550 miles (2493km), and potential of carrying a nuclear warhead. They have also developed the [[Taepodong-1]] missile, which has a range of 2,000 km, but it is not yet in full deployment. With the development of the [[Taepodong-2]] missile, with an expected range of 5,000-6,000 km,<ref>{{cite web | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/5091702.stm | title=BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | North Korea warned about missile | accessdate=2006-10-05}}</ref> North Korea could hypothetically deliver a warhead to almost all countries in [[Southeast Asia]], and parts of [[Alaska]] or the continental United States. The Taepodong- 2 missile was tested on July 4, 2005, unsuccessfully. US intelligence estimates that the weapon will not be operational for another 11 years. The Taepodong- 2 could theoretically hit the western United States and other US interests in the Western hemisphere. The current model of the Taepodong- 2 could not carry nuclear warheards to the United States. Former [[CIA]] director [[George Tenet]] has claimed that, with a light payload, Taepodong-2 could reach western parts of [[Continental United States]], though with low accuracy.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www2.gol.com/users/coynerhm/missle_threat.htm | title=C.I.A. Sees a North Korean Missile Threat | accessdate=2006-10-05}}</ref>
 
  
 +
[[File:North Korean missile range.png|thumb|250px|Estimated maximum range of some North Korean missiles]]
 +
There is evidence that North Korea has been able to miniaturize a nuclear warhead for use on a ballistic missile.<ref> Mark B. Schneider, [http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2013/05/does-north-korea-have-a-missile-deliverable-nuclear-weapon Does North Korea Have a Missile-Deliverable Nuclear Weapon?] The Heritage Foundation, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> An April 2012 display of missiles purporting to be ICBMs were declared fakes by Western analysts, and indicated North Korea was a long way from having a credible ICBM.<ref>Eric Talmadge, [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/analysts-say-north-koreas-new-missiles-are-fakes-7681655.html Analysts say North Korea's new missiles are fakes] ''The Independent'', April 26, 2012. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> Various North Korean rocket tests continued into the 2010s, for example in [[2013 North Korean missile tests|2013]], in [[2014 North Korean missile tests|2014]], and in 2016. North Korea performed no tests of medium-range missiles sufficiently powerful to reach Japan in 2015, but South Korea's ''[[Yonhap]]'' news agency believes that at least one missile fired during North Korea's March 2016 missile tests is likely a medium-range [[Rodong-1|Rodong missile]].<ref> Jack Kim and Ju-min Park, [http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-idUSKCN0WJ30V Defiant North Korea fires ballistic missile into sea, Japan protests] ''Reuters'', March 19, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> North Korea appeared to launch a missile test from a submarine on April 23, 2016; while the missile only traveled 30&nbsp;km, one U.S. analyst noted that "North Korea's sub launch capability has gone from a joke to something very serious".<ref>Don Melvin and Jim Sciutto, [http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/23/asia/north-korea-launches-missile-from-submarine/ North Korea launches missile from submarine] ''CNN'', April 23, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref> An August 2016 North Korean missile test of a Rodong missile that flew {{convert|1000|km}} landed about {{convert|250|km}} west of Japan's [[Oga Peninsula]], in international waters but inside Japan's [[exclusive economic zone]], prompting Japan to condemn the "unforgivable act of violence toward Japan's security".<ref name=nyt-20160802>Choe Sang-Hun, [http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/world/asia/north-korea-missile-test.html North Korea Fires Ballistic Missile Into Waters Off Japan] ''The New York Times'', August 2, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref><ref name=cbs-violence />
  
 +
As of 2016, North Korea is known to have approximately 300 Rodong missiles whose maximum range is 800 miles.<ref name=cbs-violence>[http://www.cbsnews.com/news/japan-north-korea-missile-launch-unforgivable-act-of-violence/ Japan: North Korea missile launch an "unforgivable act of violence"] ''CBS News'', July 27, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.</ref>
  
==See also==
+
==Notes==
* [[Foreign relations of North Korea]]
+
<references/>
* [[U.S.-North Korea relations]]
+
 
* [[List of Korea-related topics]]
+
==References==
 +
* Scobell, Andrew and John M. Sanford. ''North Korea's Military Threat Pyongyang's Conventional Forces, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Ballistic Missiles.'' Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 2007. ISBN 978-1584872863
 +
* United States. ''Regional Implications of the Changing Nuclear Equation on the Korean Peninsula Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, March 12, 2003.'' Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 2003. ISBN 978-0160704888
 +
* United States. ''WMD Developments on the Korean Peninsula Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, February 4, 2003.'' Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 2003. ISBN 978-0160701924.
 +
* United States. ''Drugs, Counterfeiting, and Weapons Proliferation the North Korean Connection: Hearing Before the Financial Management, the Budget, and International Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, May 20, 2003.'' Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 2003. ISBN 978-0160709210
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
{{wikinewsportal|North Korea nuclear proliferation}}
+
All links retrieved November 16, 2022.
 
+
* [http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/cw/ Federation of American Scientists guide to North Korean chemical weapons].
* [http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/cw/ Federation of American Scientists guide to North Korean chemical weapons]
+
* [http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050601033447.58xh4pkp.html North Korea's missile arsenal: Key facts (based on South Korean defense ministry data); June 1, 2005].  
* [http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050601033447.58xh4pkp.html North Korea's missile arsenal] – Key facts (based on South Korean defense ministry data); [[Agence France-Presse|AFP]], 1 June 2005
+
* [http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1057723 A.Q. Khan hand in North Korea bomb, by Venkatesan Vembu, Daily News & Analysis, October 10, 2006].
* [http://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/publications/northkorea.pdf North Korea: Problems, Perceptions and Proposals] – Oxford Research Group, April 2004
+
* [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-11813699 North Korea's nuclear programme: How advanced is it?; BBC, August 10, 2017]
* [http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-weapons/issues/proliferation/north-korea/ Nuclear Files.org] Information on the North Korean nuclear program including links to source documents
 
* [http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20548721-601,00.html]
 
* [http://alsos.wlu.edu/qsearch.aspx?browse=warfare/North+Korean+Nuclear+Weapons+Program Annotated bibliography for the North Korean nuclear weapons program from the Alsos Digital Library]
 
* [http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1057723 A.Q. Khan hand in North Korea bomb], by Venkatesan Vembu, [[Daily News & Analysis]], 10 October 2006
 
* [http://ifri.org/files/Securite_defense/Proliferation_Paper_Michishita.pdf The 13th February Action Plan and the Prospects for the North Korean Nuclear Issue] - analysis by Narushige Michishita, IFRI Proliferation Papers n° 17, 2007
 
  
<!---->
+
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 +
[[Category:Politics]]
 +
[[Category:Korea]]
  
 
{{credits|161784339}}
 
{{credits|161784339}}

Latest revision as of 06:33, 16 November 2022

North Korea and weapons
of mass destruction
North Korea and weapons of mass destruction

Events

  • North Korean missile tests:
    • 1993
    • 1998
    • 2006
  • 2006 nuclear test

Weapons

  • Taepodong-1
  • Taepodong-2

See also

  • Musudan-ri
  • Ryanggang explosion
  • Yongbyon
  • Korean People's Army

North Korea claims to possess nuclear weapons, and the CIA asserts that it has a substantial arsenal of chemical weapons. North Korea, a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty before withdrawing in 2003, cited the failure of the United States to fulfill its end of the Agreed Framework, a 1994 agreement between the states to limit North Korea's nuclear ambitions, begin normalization of relations, and help North Korea supply some energy needs through nuclear reactors.

The world community left the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) world of nuclear weapons at the end of the Cold War, only to enter the Terror world with rogue nations and terrorists groups eager to possess and use nuclear weapons. North Korea stands at the forefront of rogue nations seeking nuclear weapons and delivery systems along with Iran. The world community has been taking a unified stance, demanding a dismantling of nuclear programs in both nations. Six party talks have been conducted, including Russia, China, Japan, South Korea, North Korea, and the United States, with a measure of success to date. North Korea, although weakened by famine, drought, a lack of resources, and foreign reserves, still has the capacity to build and use nuclear weapons.

North Korea declared in 2009 that it had developed a nuclear weapon, and possessed a small stockpile of relatively simple nuclear weapons. North Korea may also have chemical weapon and/or biological weapons capability. The United Nations responded to North Korea's ongoing missile and nuclear development with a variety of sanctions.

Nuclear weapons

Background

Korea has been a divided country since 1945, after Korea's liberation from Japan at the end of World War II. The Korean War began with North Korea's invasion of South Korea on June 25, 1950, and continues under truce to this day. The United States rejected North Korea's call for bilateral talks concerning a non-aggression pact, calling for six-party talks that include the People's Republic of China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea. The United States pointed out North Korea's violation of prior bilateral agreements while North Korea has insisted on them, leading to a diplomatic stalemate.

On November 19, 2006, North Korea’s Minju Joson newspaper accused South Korea of building up arms to attack the North, claiming that "the South Korean military is openly clamoring that the development and introduction of new weapons are to target the North." Pyongyang accused South Korea of conspiring with the United States to attack the isolated and impoverished state, an accusation made frequently by the North and routinely denied by the U.S.[1]

Chronology of events

Plutonium

Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center

Concern focuses around two reactors at the Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center, both of them small power stations using Magnox techniques. The smaller (5 MWe) reached completion in 1986, and has since produced possibly 8,000 spent fuel elements. Construction of the larger plant (50 MWe) commenced in 1984, but as of 2003 still stood incomplete. North Koreans constructed that larger plant based on the declassified blueprints of the Calder Hall power reactors used to produce plutonium for the UK nuclear weapons program. The smaller plant produces enough material to build one new bomb per year. Small amounts of plutonium could have been produced in a Russian-supplied IRT-2000 heavy water–moderated research reactor completed in 1967, although safeguards violations at the plant have never been reported.

On March 12, 1993, North Korea said that it planned to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), refusing to allow inspectors access to its nuclear sites. By 1994, the United States believed that North Korea had enough reprocessed plutonium to produce about ten bombs, with the amount of plutonium increasing. Faced with diplomatic pressure and the threat of American military air strikes against the reactor, North Korea agreed to dismantle its plutonium program as part of the Agreed Framework, in which South Korea and the United States would provide North Korea with light water reactors and fuel oil until those reactors could be completed. Because the light water reactors would require imported enriched uranium, the United States could easily track the amount of reactor fuel and waste, increasing North Korea's difficulty of diverting nuclear waste for plutonium reprocessing. With bureaucratic red tape and political obstacles from North Korea, the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), established to advance the implementation of the Agreed Framework, had failed to build the promised light water reactors. North Korea charged that the United States failed to uphold their end of the agreement by providing energy aid, and in late 2002, North Korea returned to using its old reactors.

Enriched uranium

With the abandonment of its plutonium program, United States officials charged North Korea with beginning an enriched uranium program. Pakistan, through Abdul Qadeer Khan, supplied key technology and information to North Korea in exchange for missile technology around 1997, according to U.S. intelligence officials. Pakistani President Pervez Musharaf acknowledged in 2005, that Khan had provided centrifuges and their designs to North Korea.[2] The media publicized that program in October 2002, when North Korean officials admitted to the United States restarting the uranium enrichment program.[3] Under the Agreed Framework North Korea explicitly agreed to freeze plutonium programs (specifically, its "graphite moderated reactors and related facilities." The agreement also committed North Korea to implement the Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, committing both Koreas to abandon enrichment or reprocessing facilities. The United States called North Korea on the violation of its commitment to abandon enrichment facilities.

In December 2002, the KEDO Board followed through on threats to suspend fuel oil shipments in response to North Korea's violation, leading North Korea to the end of the Agreed Framework and announce plans to reactivate a dormant nuclear fuel processing program and power plant north of Pyongyang. North Korea soon thereafter expelled United Nations inspectors and withdrew from the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

North Korea-United States relations

U.S. President George W. Bush's strategy with North Korea and Iran, the other nations named as a member of the "Axis of Evil" following the September 11, 2001 attacks differed from that against Saddam's Iraq. The United States officials sought diplomatic pressure with China, Japan, South Korea, Russia, joining to persuade North Korea to abandon it's nuclear ambitions. Although not ruling out military action as a last resort, the United States ruled immediate military action out. North Korea, maintaining one of the largest standing armies in the world, and positioned to inflict enormous initial damage on the South, made the military option one of extreme last resort. The last resort would come with North Korea close to producing nuclear weapons. North Korea possession of nuclear weapons, as with Iran, would upset the balance of power. During the standoff between the USSR and the U.S. during the Cold War, a rational approach prevailed in the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) world. With North Korea and Iran, international policy thinkers doubt either nation would stop at the thought of total annihilation.

As North Korea further inflamed American ire evidence of state-sponsored drug smuggling, money laundering, and wide scale counterfeiting. Diplomatic efforts at resolving the North Korean situation complicated by the differing goals and interests of the nations of the region. While none of the parties desire a North Korea with nuclear weapons, Japan and South Korea, especially, express concern about North Korean counter-strikes following possible military action against North Korea. The People's Republic of China and South Korea also worry about the economic and social consequences should this situation cause the North Korean government to collapse.

Nuclear deterrence

Some scholars and analysts have argued that North Korea has been using nuclear weapons primarily as a political tool, particularly to bring the U.S. to the table to begin reestablishing normal relations and end the long-standing economic embargo against North Korea. That argument contends that the threat of nuclear weapons has been the only North Korean policy that has brought the United States into negotiations on their terms. In a lecture in 1993, Bruce Cummings asserted that, based on information gathered by the CIA, the activity around the Yongbyon facility may have been done expressly to draw the attention of U.S. satellites. He also pointed out that the CIA had not claimed North Korea had nuclear weapons, but that they had enough material to create such weapons should they choose to do so.

North Korea’s energy supply has been deteriorating since the 1990s, when Russia and China abandoned their communist commitment. North Korea, once a darling of the Soviet and Chinese communist powers, became an embarrassment. As Russia and China turned toward a free enterprise approach toward domestic and international economy, they sought to ween North Korea from their dependence upon their aid, especially Russian oil. That, coupled with a lack of foreign reserves to purchase oil on the open market, left North Korea in an energy crisis.

Although North Korea possesses an insignificant indigenous nuclear power capacity, the two light-water moderated plants, if built, would be an important source of electricity in a nation with scarce resources. Although couched in a derisive statement, Donald Rumsfeld demonstrated the severe lack of electricity for the entire nation in a photograph released in October 2006.[4] Many parties have a vested interest in the claim that North Korea has nuclear weapons.

Leading politicians in Japan have called for discussion on removing Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution prohibiting a standing army beyond national security forces in light of North Korea's provocative missile tests in the Sea of Japan and noncompliance with ending nuclear weapons development. The United States has followed a bipartisan foreign policy war on terror, committed to take the war with terrorist groups and nations to the source rather than wait for terrorist attacks on home soil, since the September 11, 2001 attacks. Although the Iraq War has been hotly debated in the United States, neither the Democrat's nor the Republicans seek abandoning that foreign policy principle. The United States recently reduced its forces in South Korea from 40,000 to 30,000 troops in a commitment to turn over full defense of South Korea to the South Korean military. The reality of taking the lead in their own defense has sobered South Korean politicians of all parities to take the North Korean treat seriously, prompting an increased criticism of the Sunshine Policy.

On March 17, 2007, North Korea announced at international nuclear talks of preparing to shut down its main nuclear facility. The concession followed a series of six-party talks, involving North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan, and the United States, began in 2003. On July 14, IAEA inspectors confirmed the shutdown of North Korea's Yongbyon nuclear reactor.[5]

Nuclear tests

On October 9, 2006, North Korea announced it had successfully conducted its first nuclear test. An underground nuclear explosion was detected, its yield was estimated as less than a kiloton, and some radioactive output was detected.[6][7]

On May 25, 2009, North Korea conducted a second nuclear test, resulting in an explosion estimated to be between 2 and 7 kilotons.[8] The 2009 test, like the 2006 test, is believed to have occurred at Mantapsan, Kilju County, in the north-eastern part of North Korea.[9]

On February 11, 2013, the U.S. Geological Survey detected a magnitude 5.1 seismic disturbance.[10] North Korea has officially reported it as a successful nuclear test with a lighter warhead that delivers more force than before, but has not revealed the exact yield. Multiple South Korean sources estimate the yield at 6–9 kilotons, while the German Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources estimated the yield at 40 kilotons (later revised to 14kT).[11]

On January 6, 2016 in Korea, the United States Geological Survey detected a magnitude 5.1 seismic disturbance,[12] reported to be a fourth underground nuclear test.[13] North Korea claimed that this test involved a hydrogen bomb. This claim has not been verified. Within hours, many nations and organizations had condemned the test.[14] Expert U.S. analysts do not believe that a hydrogen bomb was detonated. Seismic data collected so far suggests a 6-9 kiloton yield and that magnitude is not consistent with the power that would be generated by a hydrogen bomb explosion. "What we're speculating is they tried to do a boosted nuclear device, which is an atomic bomb that has a little bit of hydrogen, an isotope in it called tritium," said Joseph Cirincione, president of the global security firm Ploughshares Fund.[15]

On February 7, 2016, roughly a month after the alleged hydrogen bomb test, North Korea claimed to have put a satellite into orbit around the Earth. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzō Abe had warned the North to not launch the rocket, and if it did and the rocket violated Japanese territory, it would be shot down. Nevertheless, North Korea launched the rocket anyway, claiming the satellite was purely intended for peaceful, scientific purposes. Several nations, including the United States, Japan, and South Korea, have criticized the launch, and despite North Korean claims that the rocket was for peaceful purposes, it has been heavily criticized as an attempt to perform an ICBM test under the guise of a peaceful satellite launch. China also criticized the launch, however urged "the relevant parties" to "refrain from taking actions that may further escalate tensions on the Korean peninsula".[16]

A fifth nuclear test occurred on September 9, 2016. This test yield is considered the highest among all five tests thus far, surpassing its previous record in 2013.

Biological and chemical weapons

North Korea acceded to the Biological Weapons Convention in 1987, and the Geneva Protocol on January 4, 1989, but refused to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention. Intelligence reports suggest that North Korea possesses a substantial arsenal of chemical weapons, reportedly acquiring the technology to produce tabun and mustard gas as early as the 1950s, and now possesses a full arsenal of nerve agents and other advanced varieties, with the means to launch them in artillery shells. North Korea has expended considerable resources on equipping its army with chemical-protection equipment.

Delivery systems

North Korea's missile technology limits its ability to deliver weapons of mass destruction to targets. As of 2005, North Korea's No Dong missiles travel 1,300 km, able to reach South Korea, Japan, and parts of Russia and China, but not the United States or Europe although the missile's capacity to carry nuclear weapons has been questioned. BM-25, a North Korean designed long-range ballistic missile with range capabilities of up to 1,550 miles (2493 km), has the potential of carrying a nuclear warhead. North Korea has been developing the Taepodong-1 missile with a range of 2,000 km. With the Taepodong-2 missile in development, North Korea soon will have a missile with an expected range of 5,000-6,000 km.[17] With this North Korea could deliver a warhead to all countries in Southeast Asia, parts of Alaska, and the continental United States. The North Koreans tested Taepodong-2 missile on July 4, 2005, unsuccessfully. United States intelligence estimates that the weapon take eleven years to become operational, although that production time could shorten. The Taepodong-2 could hit the western United States as well as other nations the Western hemisphere. The current model of the Taepodong-2 lacks the capacity to carry nuclear warheads to the United States.

Estimated maximum range of some North Korean missiles

There is evidence that North Korea has been able to miniaturize a nuclear warhead for use on a ballistic missile.[18] An April 2012 display of missiles purporting to be ICBMs were declared fakes by Western analysts, and indicated North Korea was a long way from having a credible ICBM.[19] Various North Korean rocket tests continued into the 2010s, for example in 2013, in 2014, and in 2016. North Korea performed no tests of medium-range missiles sufficiently powerful to reach Japan in 2015, but South Korea's Yonhap news agency believes that at least one missile fired during North Korea's March 2016 missile tests is likely a medium-range Rodong missile.[20] North Korea appeared to launch a missile test from a submarine on April 23, 2016; while the missile only traveled 30 km, one U.S. analyst noted that "North Korea's sub launch capability has gone from a joke to something very serious".[21] An August 2016 North Korean missile test of a Rodong missile that flew 1,000 kilometers (620 mi) landed about 250 kilometers (160 mi) west of Japan's Oga Peninsula, in international waters but inside Japan's exclusive economic zone, prompting Japan to condemn the "unforgivable act of violence toward Japan's security".[22][23]

As of 2016, North Korea is known to have approximately 300 Rodong missiles whose maximum range is 800 miles.[23]

Notes

  1. APEC calls on N. Korea to end nuclear initiative The Associated Press, November 19, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  2. Khan 'gave N Korea centrifuges' BBC, August 24, 2005. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  3. N Korea 'admits nuclear programme' BBC News, October 17, 2002. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  4. North Korea might now have The Bomb, but it doesn't have much electricity Daily Mail, October 13, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  5. UN confirms N Korea nuclear halt BBC, July 16, 2007. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  6. Robert Burns and Anne Gearan, U.S.: Test Points to N. Korea Nuke Blast The Associated Press, October 13, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  7. Wm. Robert Johnston, North Korea's first nuclear test October 21, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  8. Vitaly Fedchenko, North Korea's Nuclear test Explosion SIPRI Fact Sheet, December 2009. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  9. North Korea's new nuclear test raises universal condemnation NPSGlobal Foundation, May 25, 2009. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  10. M 5.1 Nuclear Explosion - 24km ENE of Sungjibaegam, North Korea USGS, February 11, 2013. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  11. Choi He-suk, Estimates differ on size of N.K. blast The Korea Herald, February 14, 2013. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  12. M5.1 - 21km ENE of Sungjibaegam, North Korea USGS, January 6, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  13. North Korea claims fully successful hydrogen bomb test Russia Today, January 5, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  14. N Korean nuclear test condemned as intolerable provocation Channel News Asia, January 6, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  15. Robert Windrem,North Korea Likely Lying About Hydrogen Bomb Test, Experts Say NBC News, January 6, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  16. North Korea fires long-range rocket despite warnings BBC News, February 7, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  17. North Korea warned about missile BBC News, June 18, 2006. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  18. Mark B. Schneider, Does North Korea Have a Missile-Deliverable Nuclear Weapon? The Heritage Foundation, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  19. Eric Talmadge, Analysts say North Korea's new missiles are fakes The Independent, April 26, 2012. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  20. Jack Kim and Ju-min Park, Defiant North Korea fires ballistic missile into sea, Japan protests Reuters, March 19, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  21. Don Melvin and Jim Sciutto, North Korea launches missile from submarine CNN, April 23, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  22. Choe Sang-Hun, North Korea Fires Ballistic Missile Into Waters Off Japan The New York Times, August 2, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.
  23. 23.0 23.1 Japan: North Korea missile launch an "unforgivable act of violence" CBS News, July 27, 2016. Retrieved October 13, 2016.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Scobell, Andrew and John M. Sanford. North Korea's Military Threat Pyongyang's Conventional Forces, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Ballistic Missiles. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 2007. ISBN 978-1584872863
  • United States. Regional Implications of the Changing Nuclear Equation on the Korean Peninsula Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, March 12, 2003. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 2003. ISBN 978-0160704888
  • United States. WMD Developments on the Korean Peninsula Hearing Before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, February 4, 2003. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 2003. ISBN 978-0160701924.
  • United States. Drugs, Counterfeiting, and Weapons Proliferation the North Korean Connection: Hearing Before the Financial Management, the Budget, and International Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Eighth Congress, first session, May 20, 2003. Washington: U.S. G.P.O., 2003. ISBN 978-0160709210

External links

All links retrieved November 16, 2022.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.