Pat Buchanan Asks "Should Japan And South Korea Go Nuclear?"

Authored by Patrick Buchanan via Buchanan.org,

By setting off a 100-kiloton bomb, after firing a missile over Japan, Kim Jong Un has gotten the world’s attention.

What else does he want?

Almost surely not war with America. For no matter what damage Kim could visit on U.S. troops and bases in South Korea, Okinawa and Guam, his country would be destroyed and the regime his grandfather built annihilated.

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting,” wrote Sun Tzu. Kim likely has something like this in mind.

His nuclear and missile tests have already called the bluff of George W. Bush who, in his “axis of evil” speech, declared that the world’s worst regimes would not be allowed to acquire the world’s worst weapons.

Arguably the world’s worst regime now has the world’s worst weapon, an H-bomb, with ICBMs to follow.

What else does Kim want? He wants the U.S. to halt joint military maneuvers with the South, recognize his regime, tear up the security pact with Seoul, and get our forces off the peninsula.

No way, says President Trump. Emerging from church, Trump added, “South Korea’s … talk of appeasement with North Korea will not work, they only understand one thing!”

On Monday, South Korea was accelerating the activation of the high-altitude missile defense implanted by the United States. Russia and China were talking of moving missile forces into the area. And Mattis had warned Kim he was toying with the fate of his country:

“Any threat to the United States or its territories, including Guam or our allies, will be met with a massive military response.”

As the United States can only lose from a new Korean war in which thousands of Americans and millions of Koreans could perish, the first imperative is to dispense with the war talk, and to prevent the war Mattis rightly says would be “catastrophic.”

China has declared that it will enter a new Korean conflict on the side of the North, but only if the North does not attack first.

For this and other reasons, the U.S. should let the North strike the first blow, unless we have hard evidence Kim is preparing a pre-emptive nuclear strike.

But if and when we manage to tamp down this crisis, we should ask ourselves why we are in this crisis. Why are we a party to this frozen conflict from 1953 that is 8,000 miles away?

The first Korean War ended months into Ike’s first term. Our security treaty with Seoul was signed in October 1953.

That year, Stalin’s successors had taken over a USSR that was busy testing missiles and hydrogen bombs. China was ruled by Chairman Mao, who had sent a million “volunteers’ to fight in Korea. Japan, still recovering from World War II, was disarmed and entirely dependent upon the United States for its defense.

What has changed in six and a half decades?

That USSR no longer exists. It split, three decades ago, into 15 nations. Japan has risen to boast an economy 100 times as large as North Korea’s. South Korea is among the most advanced nations in Asia with a population twice that of the North and an economy 40 times as large.

Since the KORUS free trade deal took effect under President Obama, Seoul has been running surging trade surpluses in goods at our expense every year.

The world has changed dramatically since the 1950s. But U.S. policy failed to change commensurately.

The basic question that needs addressing:

Why do we still keep 28,000 troops in South Korea as a trip wire to bring us into a second Korean war from its first hours, a war that could bring nuclear strikes on our troops, bases, and, soon, our nation?

We cannot walk away from our Korean allies in this crisis. But we should look upon the North’s drive to marry nuclear warheads to ICBMs as a wake-up call to review a policy rooted in Cold War realities that ceased to exist when Ronald Reagan went home.

Consider.

North Korea devotes 25 percent of GDP to defense.

 

South Korea spends 2.6 percent,

 

Japan just 1 percent.

Yet these mighty Asian allies, who run annual trade surpluses at our expense, require us to defend them from a maniacal little country right next door.

After this crisis, South Korea and Japan should begin to make the kind of defense effort the U.S. does, and create their own nuclear deterrents. This might get Beijing’s attention, as our pleas for its assistance with North Korea apparently have not.

Already involved in land disputes with a nuclear-armed Russia and India, China’s dominance of Asia - should Japan and South Korea acquire nuclear weapons - begins to diminish.

“As our case is new,” said Abraham Lincoln, “we must think anew and act anew.”

Comments

WernerHeisenberg skbull44 Tue, 09/05/2017 - 18:38 Permalink

The most deadly period in the history of nuclear weapons was when only one nation had them.  That nation nuked two population centres to punish an already defeated nation.  That stopped when a second nation got nukes.FYI, ground zero at Nagasaki was the Christian cathedral, the biggest in Asia.  The Luciferians are to blame for one of the most cowardly and evil acts in history.

In reply to by skbull44

EddieLomax WhyDoesItHurtW… Tue, 09/05/2017 - 19:11 Permalink

No, he's talking sense.  Rather than the US burdening itself with the commitment to defend prosperous nations, step back and allow them to take whatever measures they need to defend themselves.This is not what the deep state wants, the deep state want a massive military-industrial complex with fat paychecks to pay out to thousands of very wealthy Americans.  If this sort of policy was allowed to prosper the US defence bill would drop and they'd have to earn their money honestly.

In reply to by WhyDoesItHurtW…

FreddieX JamesBond Tue, 09/05/2017 - 20:05 Permalink

Peter Lee nailed this last year:https://chinamatters.blogspot.com/2016/08/nuclear-blackmail-and-america…"If everybody’s got nukes, they not only don’t need the US nuclear umbrella; they’ve got their own defense and security policies and the US, instead of acting as the maestro of the China-containment orchestra, is just the fat guy with the tuba in the back row who provides some extra oompah to support the front line players."Andrew Cockburn hints at the "truth":https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/missile-gap-north-kore… the world of threat inflation, none of this really matters.  Instead we have the logic of the Marx Brothers. In “Animal Crackers” Chico suggests that a stolen painting might be in the house next door. “Suppose there isn’t any house next door,” says Groucho. “Well,” replies Chico, “then of course, we gotta build one.”Instant karma:http://thediplomat.com/2011/03/ishihara-japan-should-have-nukes/Ishihar… Japan Needs NukesOutspoken Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara calls for Japan to build nuclear weapons to counter a rising China.March 08, 2011https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disasterDate 11 March 2011 

In reply to by JamesBond

Slack Jack FreddieX Tue, 09/05/2017 - 21:07 Permalink

Pat Buchanan Asks "Should Japan And South Korea Go Nuclear?"

Yeah, sure. The Japs were stupid enough to fall for the Pearl Harbor Trap (for those who don't already know the US essentially forced the Japs to attack the US by cutting off their supply of oil etc).

Since they have a history of being easy to fool, why not give them nuclear weapons so that they can attack North Korea (for the US) and get fried in return.

Look, no US casualties.

Only ten, twenty, million dead Japs. Evil plan.

In reply to by FreddieX

SoDamnMad JamesBond Wed, 09/06/2017 - 03:23 Permalink

The June 2008 agreement made by the US, Russia, China, Japan, S Korea and N Korea to give up their nuclear development program is just an example of why agreements don't work. Since 2008 we have been feeding them (the military mostly). The UNWFP is to end in November (why not right NOW).Let Russia and China feed them if they want to piss their money away. I guess those two countries will get more of the lackeys at the UN to continue feeding them though we are the biggest contributor.

In reply to by JamesBond

Mike in Tokyo Rogers Tue, 09/05/2017 - 18:41 Permalink

Most Japanese and South Koreans would be perfectly happy to get the US troops out of their countries. Few entertain the illusion that Kim Jung Un is any more dangerous than any US president. North Korean weapons programs are a rational response to historical US actions and current saber rattling.

Herodotus Tue, 09/05/2017 - 18:42 Permalink

Japan should militarily reoccupy the Korean pennisula and rule (as they did from 1910 to 1945) until such time as the Koreans are capable of ruling themselves.