Nuclear Weapon Development Without Nuclear Testing?

2021 ◽  
pp. 213-242
Author(s):  
Richard L. Garwin ◽  
Vadim A. Simonenko
Author(s):  
Hendra Manurung

This article aims to analyze the implementation of Indonesia’s foreign policy towards North Korea over its approximately fifty-nine years of bilateral relations, since 17 June 1961. The arguments posited in this regard is that the implementation of Indonesia’s foreign policy towards North Korea has been counterproductive. Under the leadership of President Joko Widodo, Indonesia actually has great potential to influence North Korea’s conducts through the close diplomatic relations that the two countries have developed. The friendship between Indonesia and North Korea began since the two states conducted reciprocal official visits 1964 and 1965. Indonesia’s foreign policy towards South Korea has often been carried out to influence the offensive decisions of North Korean leaders, especially in relation to the issue of nuclear weapon development. The key question is what should and can Indonesia do next to help create peace and stability in the Korean Peninsula by adhering to the principles of a free and active foreign policy? Why is it necessary for Indonesia to do this and how can Indonesia carry out this foreign policy towards North Korea? After becoming President since 2011, Kim Jong-un had to weaken his father’s winning coalition to consolidate domestic political stability. However, North Korea’s domestic market reforms have had the effect of eroding the Kim family’s ideological appeal. This is relevant to the expansion of political influence from Pyongyang, which prioritizes the continuation of a fragile centralized authoritarian power while maintaining sustainable domestic economic growth.AbstrakArtikel ini bertujuan menjelaskan secara analitis bagaimana implementasi kebijakan luar negeri Indonesia terhadap Korea Utara selama 59 tahun sejak 17 Juni 1961. Argumen yang ingin disampaikan tentang implementasi kebijakan luar negeri Indonesia terhadap Korea Utara adalah kontraproduktif. Indonesia di bawah kepemimpinan Presiden Joko Widodo berpotensi besar untuk mampu memengaruhi perilaku Korea Utara melalui hubungan diplomatik. Persahabatan Indonesia dan Korea Utara dimulai sejak saling kunjung di 1964 dan 1965. Orientasi politik luar negeri Indonesia di masa lalu hingga saat ini, telah sering dilakukan untuk memengaruhi keputusan ofensif para pemimpin Korea Utara, khususnya terkait dengan isu pengembangan senjata nuklir. Pertanyaannya adalah apa yang harus dan sebaiknya dilakukan Indonesia selanjutnya untuk membantu menciptakan perdamaian dan stabilitas di Semenanjung Korea dengan tetap berpegang pada prinsip politik luar negeri bebas dan aktif? Mengapa hal tersebut perlu dilakukan oleh Indonesia dan bagaimana cara menjalankan kebijakan luar negeri terhadap Korea Utara tersebut? Kim Jong-un, setelah menjadi Presiden sejak 2011, harus melemahkan posisi koalisi pemenang ayahnya untuk konsolidasi stabilitas politik dalam negeri. Bagaimanapun, reformasi pasar domestik Korea Utara telah berdampak pada pengikisan daya tarik ideologis keluarga Kim. Hal ini relevan dengan perluasan pengaruh politik dari Pyongyang memprioritaskan pada keberlangsungan kekuatan otoriter terpusat yang rentan seiring bagaimana dapat mempertahankan pertumbuhan ekonomi dalam negeri berkelanjutan.


Advancement in technology and growth in human wisdom and knowledge has become a boom and at the same time, a bane to the continued survival of mankind. Despite been born free, mankind has become enslaved to the products of their hands. The invention of weapons of human destruction (nuclear weapons), which remains the most destructive form of armory ever created, with the capacity to inflict a large-scale disaster in the shortest time, in just a strike. These weapons and their mass destructive capacity were first experienced in the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombing in the year 1945, from that moment on the world, have seen an increase in nuclear testing, nuclear armory, and nuclear race among nuclear-weapon states. The mere presence of nuclear weapons poses a serious threat to the earth's environment and its inhabitants. Many islands have become inhabitable or declared a no-go zone due to the high presence of radiation and radioactivity in those places which is a direct result of years of nuclear testing. As a consequence, many people have been displaced from their ancestral lands, while some victims have lost their time to radiation-induced diseases such as cancer and its various variation. This article, therefore, will focus on the global threat to humanity posed by nuclear armament.


1997 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 269-280
Author(s):  
Huw Llewellyn

In 1954, following the US explosion of a large thermonuclear device in the South Pacific, Prime Minister Nehru of India led the first international call for a comprehensive ban on nuclear testing. It took until 10 September 1996 for the General Assembly of the United Nations to adopt the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). As at the end of April 1997, it had been signed by 142 states including the five nuclear-weapon states.


Asian Survey ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 342-359
Author(s):  
J. Enkhsaikhan
Keyword(s):  

2008 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-60
Author(s):  
Michael D. Walace
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Muzaffar Ganaie

<p><i>North Korea’s nuclear programme remains a key foreign policy challenge for United States. After its first nuclear test in 2006, Pyongyang has made an impressive progress in developing a credible nuclear deterrent through series of nuclear and missile tests. The diplomatic efforts to dissuade North Korea’s nuclear ambitions have not yielded positive results so far, as Pyongyang has not only developed a credible deterrent but continues to expand and strengthen it. The failure of Hanoi Summit, latest in the series of diplomatic initiatives to end the series has depended pessimism regarding future negations. Experts are skeptical about finding a diplomatic solution to the crises and the demand to explore other alternatives <sup>_____</sup> limited surgical strike, regime change, treating North Korea as de-facto nuclear weapon state <sup>_____</sup> to end the crises has intensified in recent years. However, dealing with the threat though these tools is highly risky and diplomatic outreach is the most preferred course to end the crises.</i></p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document