Most people cannot bring themselves to think about nuclear war, the spreading of nuclear arms or the chances of nuclear terror because the death and destruction in a nuclear conflict would be so awful that the human mind refuses to grasp it.
Yet the prospects are that a nuclear device in an oil tanker or cargo ship sailing into a large port, or on a medium sized truck driven into an athletic stadium or city hall, or in a suitcase left in a downtown bus depot could be detonated in the near future. Jonathan Medalia, a well-regarded specialist on nuclear issues, has estimated that a small bomb could kill half-a-million people and cause US$1 trillion worth of damage.
Even so, only 45 percent of Americans surveyed by the reputable Pew Research Center found the spread of nuclear weapons to be among the world’s greatest dangers. In a report last week, Pew found others willing to ignore the danger: Only 21 percent of the French, 29 percent of the Chinese, 31 percent of the Russians and 32 percent of the British, all citizens of nuclear powers, were worried.
Exceptions were Japan and Israel. The Japanese, with 68 percent anxious, are still dealing with the nuclear allergy arising from the 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the current nuclear threat from North Korea and possibly China and Russia. The Israelis, with 66 percent concerned, are confronted with the possibility of a nuclear attack from Iran.
Curiously, only 29 percent of the South Koreans queried said they were troubled by a nuclear threat from North Korea. Many South Koreans have argued that their North Korean cousins will never attack them. Besides, the government in Seoul has recently gotten a renewed pledge that the nuclear umbrella of the US still shelters South Korea.
All of this helps to explain why the nuclear summit called by US President Barack Obama in Washington last week seemed to drop like a pebble into a pond.
“The leaders of 47 nations came together to advance a common approach and commitment to nuclear security at the highest levels,” the State Department said.
A more skeptical view came from the Economist magazine, which called it an” eye-catching piece of nuclear theatrics.”
The summit did little about the most immediate nuclear threats, which are the nuclear arsenals being assembled by Iran and North Korea. President Obama had been hoping to persuade Chinese President Hu Jintao to go along with new sanctions against Iran but apparently was unsuccessful.
On the day the summit concluded, a spokeswoman for the Foreign Ministry in Beijing, Jiang Yu, told the press: “China has always believed that sanctions and pressure cannot fundamentally resolve the issue and dialogue and negotiation are the best ways.”
North Korea’s current diplomatic ploy is to insist on negotiating a peace treaty with the US, the Korean War of 1950-1953 having ended in a truce.
Pyongyang, through its official Korean Central News Agency, said last week: “There is no other alternative than to conclude a peace treaty if the vicious cycle of distrust between the DPRK and the US is to be removed and the denuclearization process is to be pushed forward.”
The US, under Republican and Democratic administrations, has asserted that North Korea must first give up its nuclear ambitions in an irreversible and verifiable manner. Then the US will talk about a peace treaty — and diplomatic recognition, trade, and other normal ties between sovereign nations.
Meantime, the Obama Administration, in its nuclear posture released earlier this month, has said that proliferating states, for which read North Korea, must understand that “any use of nuclear weapons will be met with a response that would be effective and overwhelming.”
Richard Halloran is a freelance writer in Hawaii.
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
In an eloquently written piece published on Sunday, French-Taiwanese education and policy consultant Ninon Godefroy presents an interesting take on the Taiwanese character, as viewed from the eyes of an — at least partial — outsider. She muses that the non-assuming and quiet efficiency of a particularly Taiwanese approach to life and work is behind the global success stories of two very different Taiwanese institutions: Din Tai Fung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). Godefroy said that it is this “humble” approach that endears the nation to visitors, over and above any big ticket attractions that other countries may have
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant