Connect with us

News

Is it time to accept North Korea is a nuclear power? | CNN

Published

on

Is it time to accept North Korea is a nuclear power? | CNN


Seoul, South Korea
CNN
 — 

As a press release of intent, it was about as blunt as they get.

North Korea has developed nuclear weapons and can by no means give them up, its chief, Kim Jong Un, advised the world final month.

The transfer was “irreversible,” he mentioned; the weapons signify the “dignity, physique, and absolute energy of the state” and Pyongyang will proceed to develop them “so long as nuclear weapons exist on Earth.”

Kim could also be no stranger to colourful language, however it’s value taking his vow – which he signed into legislation – severely. Keep in mind that this can be a dictator who can’t be voted out of energy and who typically does what he says he’ll do.

Advertisement

Keep in mind too that North Korea has staged a report variety of missile launches this yr – greater than 20; claims it’s deploying tactical nuclear weapons to area items, one thing CNN can not independently affirm; and can be believed to be prepared for a seventh underground nuclear take a look at.

All this has prompted a rising variety of consultants to query whether or not now could be the time to name a spade a spade and settle for that North Korea is the truth is a nuclear state. Doing so would entail giving up as soon as and for all of the optimistic – some would possibly say delusional – hopes that Pyongyang’s program is someway incomplete or that it would but be persuaded to provide it up voluntarily.

As Ankit Panda, a Stanton senior fellow within the nuclear coverage program on the Carnegie Endowment for Worldwide Peace, put it: “We merely should deal with North Korea as it’s, quite than as we want it to be.”

From a purely factual standpoint, North Korea has nuclear weapons, and few who observe occasions there intently dispute that.

A current Nuclear Pocket book column from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists estimated that North Korea might have produced sufficient fissile materials to construct between 45 and 55 nuclear weapons. What’s extra, the current missile checks recommend it has quite a lot of strategies of delivering these weapons.

Advertisement

Publicly acknowledging this actuality is, nonetheless, fraught with peril for nations equivalent to the US.

Probably the most compelling causes for Washington not to take action is its fears of sparking a nuclear arms race in Asia.

South Korea, Japan and Taiwan are just some of the neighbors that will doubtless wish to match Pyongyang’s standing.

However some consultants say that refusing to acknowledge North Korea’s nuclear prowess – within the face of more and more apparent proof on the contrary – does little to reassure these nations. Somewhat, the impression that allies have their heads within the sand might make them extra nervous.

Advertisement

“Let’s settle for (it), North Korea is a nuclear arms state, and North Korea has all crucial supply techniques together with fairly environment friendly ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles),” mentioned Andrei Lankov, a professor at Kookmin College in Seoul and a preeminent tutorial authority on North Korea.

A greater method, some recommend, is likely to be to deal with North Korea’s nuclear program in an analogous strategy to Israel’s – with tacit acceptance.

That’s the answer favored by Jeffrey Lewis, an adjunct professor on the James Martin Middle for Nonproliferation Research on the Middlebury Institute of Worldwide Research in Monterey.

“I believe that the essential step that (US President Joe) Biden must take is to clarify each to himself and to the US authorities that we aren’t going to get North Korea to disarm and that’s basically accepting North Korea as a nuclear state. You don’t essentially have to legally acknowledge it,” Lewis mentioned.

Each Israel and India provide examples of what the US might aspire to in coping with North Korea, he added.

Advertisement
North Korea held what it called

Israel, broadly believed to have began its nuclear program within the Nineteen Sixties, has all the time claimed nuclear ambiguity whereas refusing to be a celebration to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, whereas India embraced nuclear ambiguity for many years earlier than abandoning that coverage with its 1998 nuclear take a look at.

“In each of these instances, the US knew these nations had the bomb, however the deal was, if you happen to don’t speak about it, if you happen to don’t make a difficulty out of it, if you happen to don’t trigger political issues, then we’re not going to reply. I believe that’s the identical place we wish to get to with North Korea,” Lewis mentioned.

At current although, Washington reveals no indicators of abandoning its method of hoping to steer Pyongyang to surrender its nukes.

Certainly, US Vice President Kamala Harris underlined it throughout a current go to to the DMZ, the demilitarized zone between North and South Korea.

“Our shared objective – the US and the Republic of Korea – is a whole denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula,” Harris mentioned.

Advertisement

That could be a worthy objective, however many consultants see it as more and more unrealistic.

“No person disagrees that denuclearization could be a really fascinating consequence on the Korean Peninsula, it’s merely not a tractable one,” Panda mentioned.

One downside standing in the way in which of denuclearization is that Kim’s doubtless greatest precedence is making certain the survival of his regime.

And if he wasn’t paranoid sufficient already, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (wherein a nuclear energy has attacked a non-nuclear energy) can have served as a well timed reinforcement of his perception that “nuclear weapons are the one dependable assure of safety,” mentioned Lankov, from Kookmin College.

A TV screen at a railway station in Seoul, South Korea, shows an image of a North Korean missile launch on October 10, 2022.

Attempting to persuade Kim in any other case appears a non-starter, as Pyongyang has made clear it is not going to even think about partaking with a US administration that wishes to speak about denuclearization.

Advertisement

“If America desires to speak about denuclearization, (North Korea is) not going to speak and if the People aren’t speaking, (North Korea) will launch increasingly missiles and higher and higher missiles,” Lankov mentioned. “It’s a easy alternative.”

There’s additionally the issue that if North Korea’s more and more involved neighbors conclude Washington’s method goes nowhere, this would possibly itself deliver in regards to the arms race the US is so eager to keep away from.

Cheong Seong-chang, a senior researcher on the Sejong Institute, a Korean assume tank, is among the many rising variety of conservative voices calling for South Korea to construct its personal nuclear weapons program to counter Pyongyang’s.

Efforts to forestall North Korea creating nuclear weapons have “resulted in failure,” he mentioned, “and even now, pursuing denuclearization is like chasing a miracle.”

Nonetheless, nonetheless distant the denuclearization dream appears, there are those that say the choice – of accepting North Korea’s nuclear standing, nonetheless subtly – could be a mistake.

Advertisement

“We (could be) principally (saying to) Kim Jong Un, in spite of everything of this tug of warfare and rustling, (that) you’re simply going to get what you need. The larger query (then) after all is: the place does that depart the whole area?” mentioned Soo Kim, a former CIA officer who’s now a researcher at US assume tank RAND Company.

That leaves one different possibility open to the Biden administration and its allies, although it’s one which will appear unlikely within the present local weather.

They might pursue a deal wherein Pyongyang presents to freeze its arms improvement in return for sanctions aid.

In different phrases, not 1,000,000 miles away from the deal Kim supplied then US President Donald Trump at their summit in Hanoi, Vietnam, in February 2019.

This selection has its backers. “A freeze is a extremely stable strategy to begin issues out. It’s very laborious to do away with weapons that exist, however what is feasible … is to forestall issues from getting worse. It takes among the strain off and it opens up house for different kinds of negotiations,” mentioned Lewis of the James Martin Middle.

Advertisement

Nonetheless, the Trump-era overtones would possibly make this a non-starter. Requested if he thought President Biden would possibly think about this tactic, Lewis smiled and mentioned, “I’m a professor, so I specialise in giving recommendation that nobody is ever going to take.”

However even when the Biden administration was so inclined, that ship might have sailed; the Kim of 2019 was way more prepared to interact than the Kim of 2022.

And that, maybe, is the largest downside on the coronary heart of all of the choices on the desk: they depend on some type of engagement with North Korea – one thing solely missing at current.

Kim is now targeted on his five-year plan for army modernization introduced in January 2021 and no presents of talks from the Biden administration or others have but turned his head within the slightest.

As Panda acknowledged, “There’s a set of cooperative choices which might require the North Koreans being prepared to take a seat down on the desk and speak about a few of these issues with us. I don’t assume that we’re even near sitting down with the North Koreans.”

Advertisement

And, in equity to Kim, the reticence will not be all right down to Pyongyang.

“Massive coverage shifts within the US would require the President’s backing, and I actually see no proof that Joe Biden actually sees the North Korean situation as deserving of large political capital,” Panda mentioned.

He added what many consultants imagine – and what even some US and South Korean lawmakers admit behind closed doorways: “We will likely be residing with a nuclear armed North Korea in all probability for a couple of a long time to come back no less than.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Video: Our Photographer’s Look Inside New York’s Migrant Shelters

Published

on

Video: Our Photographer’s Look Inside New York’s Migrant Shelters

Just over 225,000 migrants have entered New York City since 2022, and more than $6 billion has been spent on a hodgepodge of shelters that morphed into the largest system of emergency housing for migrants in the country. Todd Heisler, a photographer for The New York Times, gained exclusive access to shelters across the city, documenting the experience through the eyes of those living there.

Continue Reading

News

Russia aims to be global leader in nuclear power plant construction

Published

on

Russia aims to be global leader in nuclear power plant construction

Stay informed with free updates

Russia is building more than 10 nuclear units abroad as it looks to tap into rising energy demand driven by artificial intelligence and developing markets, according to an envoy of President Vladimir Putin.

Moscow is doubling down on efforts to boost its global influence by expanding its nuclear fleet, with plants under construction in countries including Bangladesh, China, Egypt, India, Iran and Turkey. Russia has enhanced its role as a major nuclear energy provider even as the oil and gas sector has faced heavy sanctions after its invasion of Ukraine.

Boris Titov, the Kremlin’s special representative for international co-operation in sustainability, said the country wanted to cement its position as “one of the biggest builders of new nuclear plants in the world”. 

Advertisement

He said Russia expected strong demand for nuclear power from developing countries eager for cleaner sources of energy, as well as from technology companies harnessing AI in data centres. The International Atomic Energy Agency forecast this year that world nuclear generating capacity would increase by 155 per cent to 950 gigawatts by 2050.

“We are building more than 10 different units around the world,” Titov told the Financial Times. “We need a lot of energy. We will not be able to provide this energy without using . . . nuclear. We know that it’s safe . . . it’s not emitting [greenhouse gas emissions], so it is very clean.”

Boris Titov, the Kremlin’s special representative for international co-operation in sustainability © Maksim Konstantinov/SOPA/LightRocket/Getty Images

Russia’s growing overseas nuclear portfolio, including reactor construction, fuel provision and other services, spans 54 countries, according to an article published last year in the journal Nature Energy by the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. 

Titov pointed to Hungary’s Paks 2 plant as well as units in Bangladesh and Turkey. Russia is also expected to build a plant with small modular reactors in Uzbekistan, while it signed an agreement with Burkina Faso’s ruling junta in 2023. The FT reported this year that Russia was involved in more than a third of new reactors being built worldwide.

Western governments have attempted to push back against Russia’s nuclear prominence, with the US banning imports of Russian-enriched uranium this May. 

Advertisement

With the exception of Hungary, most eastern European countries have signed contracts for fuel developed to fit Soviet-era reactors by US company Westinghouse since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. 

As part of a wider push to meet an indicative target of being free from Russian fuel imports by 2027, Dan Jørgensen, the new EU commissioner for energy, said that he wanted to examine the “full nuclear supply chain”. 

But Hungarian premier Viktor Orbán and Slovakian prime minister Robert Fico have said they would block any steps to restrict Russia’s civilian nuclear energy industry.

After meeting Putin on Sunday, Fico said in a post on Facebook that potential sanctions against Russia would be “financially damaging and endanger the production of electricity in nuclear power plants in Slovakia, which is unacceptable”.

But fears that Russia could create critical nuclear fuel shortages for the bloc, as it did for gas in 2022, are overstated, one senior EU official said.

Advertisement

“Rosatom has a vested interest to be reliable,” they added.

A more immediate problem is US sanctions on Gazprombank, a major conduit for energy payments to Russia. The measures exempted civil nuclear energy except for Hungary’s Paks 2 plant. Hungary’s foreign minister Péter Szijjártó has called the singling out of the new plant an “entirely political decision”.

Many developing countries are looking at nuclear to meet clean energy requirements, offering more potential markets for Russia.

Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, Malaysia’s natural resources and environmental sustainability minister, told the Financial Times that the country was “studying the introduction of nuclear”. 

He said all the “major players” were “talking to the [Malaysian] government” on potential projects, without referring to specific countries.

Advertisement

Speaking at the UN COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in November, Jake Levine, senior climate and energy director at the US National Security Council, said Washington was concerned about countries turning to China or Russia for nuclear power.

Global competitiveness in the industry was a “huge issue”, he added.

Additional reporting by Anastasia Stognei, Polina Ivanova and Raphael Minder

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here.

Are you curious about the FT’s environmental sustainability commitments? Find out more about our science-based targets here

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Why Trump's tariffs on Mexico would mean higher avocado prices at the grocery store

Published

on

Why Trump's tariffs on Mexico would mean higher avocado prices at the grocery store

Avocados grow on trees in an orchard in the municipality of Ario de Rosales, Michoacan state, Mexico, on Sept. 21, 2023. Tariffs on Mexican imports would have a big effect on avocados in the U.S.

Alfredo Estrella/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Alfredo Estrella/AFP via Getty Images

Of all the products that would be affected by President-elect Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs on Mexico, avocados stand out: 90% of avocados consumed in the U.S. are imported. And almost all of those imports come from Mexico.

Trump has said he plans to impose a blanket tariff of 25% on imports from Mexico and Canada, along with an additional 10% tax on goods from China.

It’s unclear whether the tariffs will be implemented or if they will serve merely as a negotiating tactic.

Advertisement

If enacted, they could have multiple effects on the avocado industry.

“Broad tariffs, like what’s being proposed, is not something that we’ve seen” before, says David Ortega, a food economist and professor at Michigan State University. “We had the trade war with China back in 2018 that affected steel and aluminum, but when it comes to food, these types of policy proposals are not something that are very common or that we’ve seen recently.”

With one of the biggest guacamole-eating events of the year — the Super Bowl — approaching in February, here’s what to know about avocados, tariffs, and why so many avocados are grown in Mexico.

Prices will rise

Avocados are displayed in a grocery store in Washington, D.C., on June 14, 2022. Experts predict avocado prices will rise in the event of tariffs on Mexican imports.

Avocados are displayed in a grocery store in Washington, D.C., on June 14, 2022. Experts predict avocado prices will rise in the event of tariffs on Mexican imports.

Stefani Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Stefani Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

First, a 25% tariff on imports from Mexico would lead to higher avocado prices at the grocery store.

Advertisement

But estimating just how much higher is hard to say. It’s possible that producers and importers will absorb some of the costs to keep prices down and stay more competitive.

Ortega says there could be “pretty significant increases in the price of avocados. Maybe not the full 25%, but pretty close, given that there’s very little substitute ability with regards to where we would source avocados.”

But he cautions that because the tariffs apply only to the product’s value at the border, and not to other costs like transportation and distribution within the U.S., prices may not go up by the full 25%.

Regardless of these potential price increases, however, people in the U.S. love their avocados and they’re willing to pay more. Avocado consumption tripled in the U.S. between 2000 and 2021.

“Given that avocado is a staple of our consumption here, I would say that the elasticity is not very high, meaning that even with a big increase in price, consumption is not going to change that much,” says Luis Ribera, a professor and extension economist in the agricultural economics department at Texas A&M University.

Advertisement

Why Mexico

A farmer works at an avocado plantation at the Los Cerritos avocado group ranch in Ciudad Guzman, state of Jalisco, Mexico, on Feb. 10, 2023. Mexico provides 90% of the avocados consumed in the U.S.

A farmer works at an avocado plantation at the Los Cerritos avocado group ranch in Ciudad Guzman, state of Jalisco, Mexico, on Feb. 10, 2023. Most of the avocados consumed in the U.S. are grown in Mexico.

Ulises Ruiz/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Ulises Ruiz/AFP via Getty Images

Advertisement

Mexico is the biggest producer of avocados in the world and exported $3.3 billion worth of avocados in 2023. A study funded by the industry estimated that avocado production supports 78,000 permanent jobs and 310,000 seasonal jobs in Mexico.

“It’s a very important business in Mexico, very lucrative,” Ribera says.

Mexico emerged as the largest foreign supplier of fruits and vegetables to the U.S. for a few reasons, he says. One: Its proximity to the U.S. market. With a perishable product, closer is better. Peru is the second-largest source of foreign avocados in the U.S., but its greater distance means avocados need to be shipped farther.

The other reasons for Mexico are favorable weather that allows for year-round production of avocados and access to cheap labor, according to Ribera.

Advertisement

Avocados are grown in the U.S. too, mostly in California and to a lesser extent Florida and Hawaii, but U.S. growers can’t meet Americans’ big appetite. Avocado production in the U.S. has declined, even as Americans grew fonder of the green fruit, according to the USDA.

California avocado growers have faced droughts and wildfires in recent years, making it difficult to offer the year-round availability that American consumers crave, Ortega says. In addition, land is expensive and water is limited.

If the goal of implementing tariffs is to force avocado production to move somewhere besides Mexico, that isn’t easy.

It takes about eight years for avocado trees to produce fruit, according to the USDA. “This is not a product that you can just simply plant more of this season and you get more of in a few months,” Ortega says.

Other countries where the U.S. sources avocados — Peru, the Dominican Republic and Chile — “just simply don’t have the production capacity to replace Mexico’s supply,” he says.

Advertisement

Tariffs could impact the organic avocado market

Tariffs could also alter the market dynamic when it comes to organic vs. conventional foods.

If prices rise across the board, consumers who typically buy organic avocados might switch to conventional ones to save money. Organic produce makes up about 15% of total fruit and vegetable sales in the U.S., according to the Organic Trade Association, which represents hundreds of organic businesses and thousands of farmers.

“My hypothesis is that the price of conventional products would increase more than the premium organic product,” Ortega says. He reasons that because people who are used to buying organic avocados would move to buy conventional ones, “that in turn increases the demand and would make prices rise more for that category.”

Matthew Dillon, co-CEO of the Organic Trade Association, says those in the organic food industry are looking at diversifying their supply chains away from Mexico, but there’s a three-year transition period required for farmers to switch from producing conventional to organic produce.

“Supply chains are not incredibly elastic in organic. It takes more time to pivot and change when there’s a supply chain disruption. And tariffs are in some ways a form of supply chain disruption for a company, because it creates unpredictable pricing,” he says.

Advertisement

Together with grocery prices that have gone up more than 26% since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump’s plans for tariffs on Mexico, along with mass deportations, could create “a perfect storm of high inflationary pressure on the organic sector,” Dillon says.

Furthermore, retaliatory tariffs from Mexico could have their own impacts.

Avocado producers face uncertainty as Trump’s return looms

Avocados in boxes are pictured at a packing plant in the municipality of Ario de Rosales, Michoacan state, Mexico, on Sept. 21, 2023.

Avocados in boxes are pictured at a packing plant in the municipality of Ario de Rosales, Michoacan state, Mexico, on Sept. 21, 2023.

Alfredo Estrella/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Alfredo Estrella/AFP via Getty Images

Aside from the threat of tariffs, the avocado industry has other challenges to deal with: climate change presents several problems, and avocados require a large amount of water to grow. Meanwhile, environmentalists say some avocado growers are cutting down forests to plant avocados.

Producers also face extortion from criminal gangs in Mexico.

Advertisement

And now with Trump’s tariff threats, producers are left to wonder about their next steps.

“Producers, they react to market fundamentals,” Ribera says. For example, people can foresee how bad weather in Mexico would affect avocado prices. Producers and retailers will adjust to higher and lower demand.

“The issue with a tariff is it’s not a market fundamental — it’s a policy. It’s a political move,” he says. “It could happen or it could not happen, or it could be increased or it could be decreased, you know. So it’s hard for the whole supply chain to adjust.”

Continue Reading

Trending