Well, well, well… looky what we have here:
SEOUL, South Korea - The UN nuclear watchdog is investigating a secret nuclear fuel experiment conducted four years ago by South Korean scientists, South Korea’s science agency said Thursday.
The one-time experiment that took place in early 2000 was revealed in a report South Korea presented last month to the Vienna, Austria-based International Atomic Energy Agency, the Science and Technology Ministry said in a statement.
“The government will take measures to prevent similar things from happening in the future,” the statement said, adding that a small group of scientists conducted the experiment on their own initiative.
An IAEA investigating team arrived Sunday in South Korea to conduct a weeklong probe into the program, the ministry said.
Hey, it can get boring down in Daejeon. There ain’t much to do besides hiking Mt. Gyeryong and fucking around with weapons-grade uranium.
The experiment, conducted in a facility dedicated to research into nuclear fuel, involved separating a small amount - 0.2 grams - of uranium, the statement said. The experiment was immediately terminated after it was conducted and the equipment scrapped, according to the ministry.
Well, nice to know you got the skills.
South Korea said it revealed the experiment because a new nuclear safeguard agreement it signed in February with the IAEA required the government to report activities in the fuel research centre.
“The fact that we have decided to report this faithfully and transparently to the IAEA reflects our commitment to nuclear non-proliferation,” the ministry said.
South Korea said it remains committed to keeping the Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons.
Vienna-based diplomats close to the agency, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the experiment was focused on enriching uranium. Highly enriched uranium can be used to make nuclear warheads.
See, that’s why they can’t find any HEU facilities up North — they’re looking in the wrong Korea!
Frankly, the Koreans are going to need this technology sooner or later — interesting to see some guys were apparently thinking along those lines, government-sanctioned or not.
15 Comments
Well this is only logical and inevitable. Anonymous posters show up here occasionally to jeer at we despised Americans about how Korea can brandish nukes now. I always assume they are anti-American ROK citizens, due to lack of internet access in NorK, though I suppose that favored citizenry up North have internet access and can indulge themselves here on occasion.
When the two nuclear powers ROK and DPRK eventually confront each other, there’s only one place for the US to be and that is well away from the peninsula. Japan and China are unable to enjoy the luxury of distance, though, which is why I’m amazed that they just can’t get excited about the six-power talks. But I suppose it’s a universal failing of mankind that short-term consequences always look bigger to political leaders that long-term ones.
The nuclear non-proliferation treaty has held up remarkably well. I’m old enough to remember a common assumption of the early 60’s — that by this time in world history there’d be as many as 20 nations with nuclear weapons. But now I think in the next few years we’re finally going to see the breakout in the number; I don’t believe the other Security Council powers will do anything substantial to stop it, and I don’t see the US using military power either.
I used to think that even an assembled nuke would have to be tested by NorK and Iran for them to be sure of it, and that such a test would provide an final impetus for world/UN action.
But I reckon with AQ Khan providing the exact specs for a tested Pakistani nuke, it looks like all they have to do is assemble an exact copy and Bob’s your uncle.
I wonder if ROK was one of Khan’s customers for plans and specs?
Off topic Paul, but I think “Bob’s your uncle” is the most hilarious colloquial saying from the UK, but you may wish to define it for the rest of the English speakers out here.
I don’t think anyone should doubt that our South Korean friends can develop nuclear weapons in short order. The same can probably be said for Japan and Taiwan.
ROK didn’t and doesn’t need Pakistan’s Khan to leak the secrets to develop the specs, Paul. ROK can develop the weapons in very short order if it wants to. The only reason why ROK hasn’t developed a nuclear weapons by now is because of the IAEA charter and the opposition from the United States. I don’t think the United States will not and should not oppose the South Koreans going nuclear as a self defense measure, especially as the US gradually disengages from the Korean peninsula. South Korea’s nuclear motto will be self defense, deterrence, and non-proliferation.
I have to agree with KimBob here Paul. The proliferation of nuclear weapons is a serious problem for our generation as well as the next, and on. But to suspect a tie between the South Korean government and the pseudo-Islamic regime of Pakistan is ridiculous. On two fronts, South Korea’s technological capability and knowledge does not require the aid of some AQ Khan; plus, to even think that a legitimate state such as SK would deal with a Dr. Evil type character as Khan, again, seems pure conjecture—and a very baseless one bordering on tabloid hysteria.
Second, whether the SK government has voluntarily come out to the IAEA (perhaps a reflection of their honesty or some may state naivete), and are working to prevent future workings towards an active nuclear deterrant, they are definitely feeling the fire burning on their tails. If the US is going to shift its focus away from countering communism in East Asia by deploying its troops the Middle East and pretend that the Cold War is completely over all over the “world,” then it doesn’t leave much “choice” for the South Korean government. Nor does it leave much choice for the Japanese and eventually the Chinese attitude regarding the very possible use of a nuclear deterrant. Overall, if we are really concerned about the proliferation problem, then the redeployment plan is the deadly mistake. Sure the NK regime is ugly as it is; but, I believe it is best to let sleeping dogs lie and die away in their sleep and continue on the path that the Cold War strategists believed in—maintain a unified Allied pressure on NK by means of an overpowering military presence in E. Asia. Modern wars aren’t solely won by air power nor missiles shot from the distance; armed forces on the ground level, as archaic as they may seem are also necessary. This is one of the criticisms that Rumsfeld receives both from the liberal and conservative front, especially from experienced military generals, for not taking seriously Powell’s emphasis on actual presence by numbers.
Good and thoughtful comments. I have no on-ground experience of Korea nor any Asian language skills, so my remarks should be judged in that light. Just have a standard historical interest from knowledge of military history of the Korean war and from being in the military.
A Khan-ROK connection was just a random thought and I wouldn’t care to dispute with those more knowledgeable than I. But I think the “barriers of civilized behavior” that have restrained a first strike use of nukes so far in world history are going to be a lot lower in NorK (and Iran). Those boys up there have got to be hardened to mass death in a way that chills the blood, and makes me think of the mindset that must have pervaded the Nazi and Soviet Stalinist regimes.
I really don’t want the US involved on the ground if the NorK regime decides to go out with a bang, and it will surely “go out” in our lifetimes. If their collapse involves a lift-off of NorK nuclear missiles I don’t want US troops lost and for the US to be under pressure to respond in kind. Is it worth risking nuclear war over Korea and having the death of thousands laid at our feet? Frankly no. A distressing idea to many perhaps, but the US will be blamed by many in the world unless we’re gone from there if / when it happens (many would blame us even then). Nukes change everything.
I wouldn’t have felt this way a few years ago but the recent anti-Americanism demonstrated by many South Koreans has been an eye-opener. It’s why I began reading these Korean expat blogs — fascinating, as Mr. Spock used to say. 50 years on the ground is long enough; I wish devoutly to unilaterally withdraw our guys and let the Koreans solve their problems for themselves. Both sides profess to want that anyway and if we’re gone I think there’s a good chance the North will eventually let itself be bribed out of them by the South, Japan, and China. Why should it be our problem anymore?
Some of you might be interested in this article about Iranian nuclear threat, from the autumn 2004 edition of the US Army War College Journal “Parameters”.
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/u.....ussell.htm
Reading the article, and others on this news, I was struck by this thought: how the South Koreans had deliberately set up a situation where they would be caught.
I think the South Korean government planned this, and it is a very smart move for them. It serves two purposes: it sends a signal to the United States that they will develop nuclear weapons if the US falters in it’s defence commitment, and it sends a subtle message to North Korea too - with a few months work, we can annihilate you back brothers, so just keep your distance.
A deft political move by the Roh admin. Strange as that sounds, that’s how I see it.
Some South Koreans told me they are actually happy that North Korea has a nuclear weapon. They assume that once they reunite that Korea (under a capitalistic democracy) will be a nuclear power able to defend itself and not depend on a foreign power-the US to defend itself. I don’t blame many of them wanting the bomb since it would help insure its survival from its bigger and more powerful neighbors. The hitch is that North Korea with a nuke might be the victor in any reunification and Korea just might be a communist dictatorship.
One of the big problems of Korea having a nuke is Japan would be scared of the ultranationalists in Korea. Should they then count on America to defend them against a possible Korean strike? Korea by this time would probably quickly stop being good allies with the US because they no longer depend on the US to defend them. Or should Japan develope a bomb dispite the painful history of being the only country to have suffered from a nuclear bomb? Also, there is always a chance of some Kahn like figure from Korea selling nuclear information to rogue nations.
If Korea and Japan both develope weapons the one good thing is the US would be able to get out of the region.
Ever since I’ve found this expat blog sites in Korea, I’ve always been surprised at the state of defensiveness from the blog hosts and participants. Now I do understand the natural reactions to “anti-American” demonstrations, but don’t you think you’re mistakening these incidents as being singularly Korean? These conjectures about the severing of ties between Korea and US seems baseless. I am aware of some of the justifications, but what makes Japan more of a legitimate domcratic ally than South Korea, to ask as one example?
One more thing, the presence of the US in the Korean peninsula was not a project in itself. It was part, a crucial one at that, to an overall deterring presence to contain communism to its restrictive areas. Most people today seem to forget that and simplify the Korea debate as some patron-client relationship.
And please no more references to Khan-like characters in South Korea; this is insulting. If we really want to look respectively at the proliferation issue and tie it to our (US) concern over terrorism, then the 180 degree turn of Pakistan should be placed under heavier study. But of course we don’t subject them to that nor do we demand much from Musharaf—as if he was our ally all along.
but what makes Japan more of a legitimate democratic ally than South Korea, to ask as one example?
Here is the answer: South Korean citizens regularly burn, spit on and attack America. Japanese citizens do not.
It’s that simple!
regularly burn spit and attak? really?
Zdunk,
some South korean citizens burn regularly the DPRK flag. So, what does it mean?
Superficially the Japanes are a polite and harmnoy-orientated people as a insular society, but under the polish, there’s as much violence, hipocracy and sillyness like in Korean society. No, wonder, they’re distant cousins.
Koreans: very bad ally.
Japanese: very good ally.
Americans: don’t give a rat’s ass about both people.
Ain’t it funny?
HA HA HA. Nice to see you back, Sugar!
Asia by Blog
Today’s edition of Asian blogging’s best: Hong Kong, Taiwan and China Myrick says here today, gone tomorrow, or why is it Communists like Photoshop so much? Western cultural imperialism is helping China earn more. I’m just not sure that this is a “…
hweld. I see your point with America’s stance on Pakistan. But what to do. Sometimes in war the enemy of my enemy is my ally. The US needs Pakistan’s help now.
Anyways I would just be afraid that some Korean would sell the technology for large amounts of money. Hey America is very guarded about the technology as well and keeps tabs on people. I don’t mean only a Korean would do such a thing. But Korea is generally much more relaxed with security measures and I could see it happening.
Eyes on Korea: 2004-09-10
New SK uranium program; Charles Jenkins interview; NK’s new missiles; Moonies helping NK?; Chinese maneuvers on NK border, dispute with SK; Insults R Us; Pizza for Kim; More defectors; Engagement vs. human rights; US Troop withdrawal; USFK Korean so…