North-Korea as a 'Failed State' and the Bomb · 14 October 2006, 10:15 CET by Charles Vermeulen
In an op-ed in last Thursday’s edition of Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad entitled ‘Red de vrede, maak een atoombom’ (‘Save Peace, Make an Atom Bomb’) Israelian military historian Martin van Creveld states that the Bush administration overreacts on North-Korea’s recent nuclear test. Present-day Washington justifies its opposition to this by pointing at the threat that relevant nuclear technology might fall into the hands of terrorists. Van Creveld dismisses this as nonsense. First of all because no state would ever help terrorists to build a atom bomb, for the simple reason that it could be threatened itself by those terrorists. Secondly, it’s much easier for a small country with a small nuclear arsenal to prevent theft or abuse of its arsenal than for a great power, which possesses thousands of nuclear warheads spread all over the world. Van Creveld has a point here, but he wrongly doesn’t take into account the possibility that North-Korea, ranking 14th on the Foreign Policy and Fund for Peace Failed State Index in 2005, may very well collapse one day and fall into chaos. Who would control its arsenal in that case?
atom bomb,
bush,
failed state,
failed state index,
martin van creveld,
north-korea,
president bush,
van creveld,
washington
Good points but rational states are also not supposed to turn their embassies into drug manufacturing centers or counterfeit other nation’s currencies, both of which North Korea currently engages in. A desperate regime with its back against the wall would do anything to ensure its survival.
I read a report in The New York Times about it, that is about the counterfeiting part. Well in a way it’s rational. If you lack the currency to buy what you need, counterfeiting it’s a reasonable option. Leaving out of consideration the moral aspects of this behaviour, off course. But you're right, assuming that the allegations are correct, they put Pyongyang in a very unfavourable light and, once again, they show Kim Jong-Il's unreliability. Furthermore, whether he acts rational or not, the closed nature of his regime and, indeed, the fact that it stands with its back against the wall makes it very unpredictable. Able to surprise and embarrass even its last ally China. On the other hand, any North-Korean nuclear attack will inevitably lead to its own destruction and Pyongyang must know that. The North-Korean leadership isn't known for its believe in the hereafter and therefore it's probably eager not to waste its worldly possessions, which makes it a little less unpredictable.
Suicide District Nickerie (2) Division Among Darfuri Rebels Obstacle for Peace