CONDUCTED A FUSION WEAPON TEST?
THE WHITE HOUSE SAID --
REFERRING THERE TO THE FUSION WEAPON --
THERE THEY ARE REFERRING TO THE CONCEPT OF BOASTING A WEAPON
TO MAKE IT STRONGER THAN THE FISSION WEAPONS BUT NOT AS
DEADLY AS A FUSION WEAPON.
SOUTH KOREA, BASED ON THE EARTHQUAKE
GENERATED BY THE TESTS, THEY SAY THAT THEY EXPECT THAT THE WEAPON
THAT HAD BEEN TESTED HAD THE DESTRUCTIVE CAPABILITY OF ABOUT
6 KT, WHICH WOULD BE LOWffER THAN YOU WOULD EXPECT IN A FUSION
WEAPON, WHICH WOULD GENERATE HUNDREDS OF KILOTONS, OR TENS
IN THE CASE OF A FAILED TEST.
OBVIOUSLY NORTH KOREA WANTS TO
HAVE THE WEAPON, BUT MORE THAN THAT THEY WANT US TO THINK
THEY DO.
WHICH IS INTERESTING, BECAUSE THEY WANT US TO FEAR THEM.
I
GUESS TO SOME EXTENT WE SHOULD FEAR THEM, BECAUSE I DON'T SEE
NORTH KOREA AS A RATIONAL ACTOR WHATSOEVER.
BUT THERE ARE ALL
SORTS OF IRRATIONAL ACTORS IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPHERE THAT
HAVE ACCESS TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS, PAKISTAN BEING ONE OF THEM.
SO
IT IS INTERESTING TO SEE THE U.S. CONTINUE TO BE THE ARBITER
OF WHO CAN AND CANNOT HAVE THESE TYPES OF WEAPONS.
I UNDERSTAND
WHY THERE SHOULD BE SOME FEAR OR CONCERN THAT NORTH KOREA HAS
THESE WEAPONS, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY HAVE THE CAPABILITIES
THAT THEY CLAIM THEY HAVE AT THIS MOMENT, BUT WHAT DO WE DO
IF A COUNTRY STARTS DEVELOPING NUCLEAR WEAPONS?
WE HAVE CERTAIN
SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN, AND THOSE SECTIONS WORKED, RIGHT,
AND IT LED TO THE NEGOTIATION.
WE HAVE NO DIPLOMATIC TIES WITH
NORTH KOREA.
SO IF THEY DECIDE TO CONTINUE WITH THEIR
DEVELOPMENT, AND THEY DO SOMETIME -- AND IT MIGHT BE IN THE
FAR FUTURE -- DEVELOP THESE NUCLEAR CAPABILITIES, WHAT WILL BE TO?
WE DON'T HAVE ANY DIPLOMATIC TIES TO THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE.
UNDER BUSH AND OBAMA WE HAD THESE DEALS WHERE WE PROVIDE
THEM WITH SOME AID AND CASH OR FOOD IN EXCHANGE FOR THEM NOT
DEVELOPING THE WEAPONS, AND IT SEEMS THAT THAT SLOWED IT DOWN
SOME.
I AM ON RECORD AS BELIEVING THAT THEY DO HAVE THE
FISSION WEAPONS, I BELIEVE THAT, THAT IS MORE THAN CAPABLE ENOUGH
OF DOING SIGNIFICANT HARM.
IF THEY COULD DEPLOY ONE OF THESE
INTO A CITY IN SOUTH KOREA, WHICH IS EASILY DONE CONSIDERING
HOW CLOSE THEY ARE, THEY COULD KILL HALF A MILLION PEOPLE
INSTANTANEOUSLY.
THAT IS SCARY ENOUGH BY ITSELF.
AND THEY HAVE
THE CAPABILITY, AGAIN, BECAUSE OF HOW CLOSE THEY ARE TO SOUTH
KOREA, THERE HAVE BEEN ESTIMATES OF HOW MUCH DAMAGE THEY COULD DO
IN A FEW HOURS USING PURELY CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS AND THE
DEATHS THAT WOULD BE DONE IN THE FIRST FEW HOURS ARE TENS OR
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF SOUTH KOREANS.
SO THEY CAN DO DAMAGE.
I DON'T DOUBT THAT.
LOOK, WHEN A STORY ABOUT NORTH KOREA
DEVELOPING NUCLEAR WEAPONS COMES UP, HONESTLY, I WILL BE HONEST
WITH THE AUDIENCE BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT TO BE -- I DON'T KNOW
WHAT TO TELL YOU.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF ANALYSIS TO PROVIDE
BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW.
THERE IS SO MUCH WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE
COUNTRY AND WHAT THEY HAVE OR HAVEN'T DEVELOPED.
AT THE SAME
TIME, WHEN THIS STORY COMES UP, AND IT OFTEN DOES, I THINK OF
POLITICAL SCHOLARS I HAVE READ FROM --
THAT SOUNDS SO UNBEARABLY ELITIST --
I HAVE READ VERY WIDELY IN WOOD AND LEATHER BOUND BOOKS --
BUT WHEN IT COMES TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND COUNTRIES OBTAINING
THEM, I THINK OF KENNETH WALTZ, HE MAKES A GOOD POINT, HE SAYS
IF EVERY COUNTRY ON THE PLANET HAD ACCESS TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS,
THAT WOULD ACTUALLY LESSEN THE CHANCES OF A NUCLEAR WAR.
THE FLAW, OF COURSE --
THE FLAW IS THAT HE CONSIDERS EVERY COUNTRY TO BE A
RATIONAL ACTOR, AND I DON'T THINK NORTH KOREA IS.
YOU CAN GO FURTHER AND SAY THAT -- I MEAN, PEOPLE ARE
GENERALLY BASING THIS ON THE SITUATION THAT EXISTED BETWEEN
THE U.S. AND THE SOVIET UNION DURING THE COLD WAR, IN THAT WE
COULD NOT AFFORD TO USE OUR WEAPONS AGAINST THEM BECAUSE
THEN THEY WOULD RETALIATE WITH THEIR WEAPONS.
BUT THE PROBLEM
WITH THAT IS THE REASON WE HAD THAT MUTUALLY ASSURED
DESTRUCTION IS THAT WE DID NOT HAVE A SINGULAR CAPACITY TO USE
NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON THEM THAT
COULD BE TAKEN OUT BY RUSSIAN
WEAPONS.
WE HAD THE TRIAD.
WE HAD THE PLANES, THE GROUND-BASED
MISSILES, AND THE SUBMARINES.
IF THEY ATTACKED US, ONE OF THOSE AT LEAST WILL SURVIVE.
BUT THE
PROBLEM IS IF PAKISTAN HAS NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND
THEY
HAVE
A
CERTAIN NUMBER OF BASES AND THEY
DON'T HAVE THAT TRIAD, IT'S
NOT IMPOSSIBLE THAT INDIA COULD SAFELY TAKE OUT THEIR
CAPACITY TO RETALIATE.
I LIKE THAT THEORY BUT IN REALITY IT HAS SOME FLAWS.
OF COURSE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE SHOULD DO EITHER, EXACTLY.
LONG-TERM THE
IDEA IS WE TRY TO SET IT UP SO THAT SIMILAR WITH CUBA ONCE THE
CURRENT REGIME IS OUSTED OR DIES OF DIABETES OR WHATEVER,
CONSIDERING HIS DIET, THEN MAYBE WHOEVER COMES TO POWER WILL
HAVE REASON TO WANT TO TALK WITH US, AND THEN WE CAN START
TO DISMANTLE SOME OF THEIR NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
AND HOPEFULLY SOME OF OURS AS WELL.
AND WE GOT SOME OF THAT WITH IRAN.