As speculation mounts that Kim Jong-un and Trump could meet this month, analysts say Pyongyang will continue to see nuclear weapons as a matter of survival

As speculation mounts that Kim Jong-un and Trump could meet this month, analysts say Pyongyang will continue to see nuclear weapons as a matter of survival

North Korea’s launch last week of a missile from a naval destroyer elicited an uncharacteristically prosaic analysis from the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un. The launch was proof, he said, that arming ships with nuclear weapons was “making satisfactory progress”.

But the test, and Kim’s mildly upbeat appraisal, were designed to reverberate well beyond the deck of the 5,000-tonne destroyer-class vessel the Choe Hyon – the biggest warship in the North Korean fleet.

His pointed reference to nuclear weapons was made as the US and Israel continued their air bombardment of Iran – a regime Donald Trump had warned, without offering evidence, was only weeks away from having a nuclear weapon.

  • jdr8English
    12·
    13 days ago

    If you read my very first comment on this, I didn’t even talked about deterrence.

    I mentioned the consequences that if someone (attacked or attacker) uses a nuclear weapon.

    The actual nasty effects, like radiation.

    I don’t care about deterrence at this point. I care about people. People that will die if this is carried out.

    Sure if someone says “I have nuclear weapons so you will obey me.”, of course others will also have nuclear weapons so they don’t get bullied.

    But my point is way past that.

    • clean_anion@programming.devEnglish
      3·
      13 days ago

      The point of having nukes is to threaten destruction of an enemy even at the cost of one’s own destruction. Analysts understand that actually using nuclear weapons benefits no one. Nukes don’t benefit the party that launches nukes upon event X taking place, the party that causes event X, or most bystanders. Saying that any party responsible for event X will be nuked is intended to ensure that event X doesn’t occur. Threats are not reality: threatening retaliation is not the same as actually retaliating.

      Some facts have been simplified in this reply. Reality is more complicated but these basic principles do seem to hold most of the time.