[Nuclear Security and Safety in Asia-Pacific: Old Issues and New Thinking]

Nuclear weapons are formidable weapons that can destroy a city, like Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thus, we should eliminate all nuclear weapons. All P5 countries should abolish their nuclear weapons. All other countries should not develop their nuclear weapons. North Korea should abandon its nuclear weapons development program.
Nuclear security involves unauthorized personnel with secret access to fissile material. They would acquire such a material for a dangerous purpose, such as to make a nuclear weapon or to threaten people—to disrupt the social order. This is why we want to keep fissile material within government control.
It is untrue that a nuclear weapon threat is more important than security threat, or that nuclear security threat is more important. There is the same threat if a government uses a nuclear weapon to threaten the world or a terrorist group uses a nuclear weapon to threaten the world. We should support all government efforts to restrict terrorists from access to fissile material. At the same time, we should push our governments to work toward a genuine multilateral nuclear weapons reduction, and North Korea should abandon all its nuclear weapons programs.


[On Peace]

Q1. How can scholars and researchers contribute to peace promotion?

We scholars should study why nuclear weapons still exist. The US government is unwilling to abandon its nuclear weapons, and China may be modernizing its nuclear weapons equipment. Now we see India, Pakistan, Israel, North Korea—they are making nuclear weapons.

The job of scholars is to have a mission for no nuclear weapons and analyze how to reach that goal. For North Korea, this means looking at how they can all be a responsible nuclear stakeholder with a no-first-use policy. The North Koreans want to keep a nuclear weapon for some time, but we scholars need to think about how to address North Korea at the UN Security Council. If the United States would be viewed by North Korea as less threatening, North Korea would be less inclined to keep a nuclear weapon. If North Korea would have a nuclear weapon, South Korea might also think about developing its own nuclear weapon, especially if the United States is less interested in defending against an attack on South Korea.

The Six Party Talks were organized to discuss first, no nuclear weapons for North Korea, and second, no nuclear weapons for the entire Korean peninsula. All the time we should address regional security for Northeast Asia. No one in the region should have nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons states may think that without nuclear weapons, they would not be secure.
More dialogues, such as the Jeju Forum, can work for the community to bring North Korea scholars to Jeju Forum. They may make sense or they may spread propaganda. But then we can ask them to invite us to North Korea to tell them we want to help them not with their nuclear weapons but with economic development.
In this way, Jeju Forum would be unique because it is inside the Korean peninsula. Similar forums could be held in Japan or China, but we are more distant. Korean people bringing people together to discuss the Korean nuclear issue—it’s most pertinent.


Q3. If you were an advisor on issues about the Korean peninsula, what areas of Inter-Korean relations would you try to improve?

I hope we would have the mission for peace and prosperity, which is the mission of Jeju Forum. The more nuclear weapons North Korea has, the worse their economy will be. The United States says first stop nuclear weapons development first, and then we’ll give you food aid. North Korea says first give us food aid, and then we’ll discuss the nuclear issue.
Personally, I think a measured and pragmatic approach is best: even if they have nuclear weapons, give them bread. Test the North Koreans. The United States should not insist on denuclearization first if they also will not give up their nuclear weapons. That’s too rigid. I hope we would have some flexibility. Instead, track food aid incrementally with gradual denuclearization. Upon demonstrating denuclearization, more aid can be given as a reward.
China and South Korea are friends and we’re both worried about the same security concerns related to North Korea’s nuclear weapons development. We, in China, think we should still give aid, for humanitarian reasons.


* Prof. SHEN Dingli is the associate dean of the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University.

China and South Korea are friends and we’re both worried about the same security concerns related to North Korea’s nuclear weapons development. We, in China, think we should still give aid, for humanitarian reasons. Scholars and think tanks have a role to play in reducing nuclear threats by government and by illegal organizations or persons. According to Prof. SHEN, they should push all governments to work toward a genuine multilateral nuclear weapons reduction, and North Korea should abandon all its nuclear weapons programs. The Six Party Talks were organized to discuss first, no nuclear weapons for North Korea, and second, no nuclear weapons for the entire Korean peninsula.
More dialogues, such as the Jeju Forum, can work for the community in the goal of denuclearization. Prof. SHEN suggests bringing North Korea scholars to the Jeju Forum. Jeju Forum would be unique in these efforts because it is inside the Korean peninsula. Similar forums could be held in Japan or China, but we are more distant. Korean people bringing people together to discuss the Korean nuclear issue—it’s most pertinent to the issue, says Prof. SHEN.

* Interviewed on May 25, 2016 (Jeju Forum 2016)