Nukes + Nuttiness = Neanderthal Deterrence (VDH)

[endicom]

National Review
Victor Davis Hanson
Apr. 25, 2017

Acting crazy has worked for rogue regimes, but Western appeasement is not a long-term solution.

How can an otherwise failed dictatorship best suppress internal dissent while winning international attention, influence—and money? Apparently, it must openly seek nuclear weapons.

Second, the nut state should sound so crazy and unpredictable that it might just use them, regardless of civilization’s deterrent forces arrayed against it.

Third, it must welcome being “reluctantly” pulled into nonproliferation talks to prolong the farce and allow its deep-pocket enemies to brag of their diplomatic “strategic patience” and sophistication.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/447013/madmen-nukes-deter-western-actions-north-korea

[r9etb]

A good one from VDH. One thing struck me:

It will remind Beijing that if Taiwan, Japan, or South Korea chooses to go nuclear as did North Korea, its nukes would work like Hondas and Kias and not implode on the launching pad.

I've long thought that for those particular countries, there's little or no difference between "choosing to go nuclear" and "admitting they've already been nuclear for a long time." 

Certainly there's no question of their technical abilities to create nukes in very short order.  But also, for all of them, there's long been a serious incentive to be able to deploy nukes without significant delay. 

For Japan in particular, I recall during a previous period of concern about North Korea they issued a veiled threat that "going nuclear" was mainly a matter of assembling existing parts.  (See, e.g., http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/fukushima-anniversary/japan-has-nuclear-bomb-basement-china-isn-t-happy-n48976)

Israel is another such country -- and I'm pretty sure they already have a credible nuclear arsenal in place.

[endicom]

A good one from VDH. One thing struck me:

I've long thought that for those particular countries, there's little or no difference between "choosing to go nuclear" and "admitting they've already been nuclear for a long time." 

Certainly there's no question of their technical abilities to create nukes in very short order.  But also, for all of them, there's long been a serious incentive to be able to deploy nukes without significant delay. 

For Japan in particular, I recall during a previous period of concern about North Korea they issued a veiled threat that "going nuclear" was mainly a matter of assembling existing parts.  (See, e.g., http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/fukushima-anniversary/japan-has-nuclear-bomb-basement-china-isn-t-happy-n48976)

Israel is another such country -- and I'm pretty sure they already have a credible nuclear arsenal in place.

I think that's a given for Israel. The other countries could probably do it quickly but that would be harder to do after being hit with nukes.