With his big fat face baby fed rice cake, Kim Jong-un defies the United States and worried neighbors. Third member of the Kim dynasty to lead - martyr would be more accurate - the North Korea , it has just announced a return to a state of war with South Korea .
March 30, Mao jacket cinched up double chin, Kim ordered his troops to prepare a strategic missile strike against the United States and U.S. bases in the Pacific. Ranting?
In Washington, Tokyo and Seoul, we are accustomed to the provocations of national-communist regime in Pyongyang. They take them for what they are: blackmail to ensure survival of a dictatorship disaster.
Year after year, belching North Korean war, however, take a turn more daunting. For one thing, the country is poised to control "the" bomb. Three weeks before the last bluster Kim Jong-Un , North Korea proceeded on his third attempt nuclear .
If North Korea over the issue of stability in Asia. It illustrates the dangers of proliferation. A growing number of countries are familiar with the technology and the nuclear missiles.
Since 1968 and the conclusion of a treaty of non-proliferation, UN divided into two nuclear countries: the China , the United States, France, Great Britain and Russia , form the group of "authorized" those who had the bomb before the mid-1960s, those who have gained since - the India , Israel , the Pakistan and possibly North Korea - represent one of the "unauthorized".
Any of its owners would be crazy enough to use
Question: deterrence, which marked the era of the Cold War, can it work in the world today? The doctrine of deterrence is a matter of rationality. It raises the nuclear weapon weapon of non- employment . Any of its owners would be crazy enough for use : he faces a likely strikes back to destroy his country. It is a means of sanctuary, not aggression. It deter war because since Hiroshima and Nagasaki, nuclear war would be unthinkable - too terrible.
Kim Jong-un accessible is this reasoning? Polytechnique, former socialist minister of defense (1985-1986), Paul Quiles doubt. With two experts - General Norlain Bernard and Jean-Marie Collin - it calls for a debate in a book-injunction: Stop The Bomb! (Looking South, 220 p., 16, 50 euros). Paul Quiles question the relevance of the doctrine of deterrence in the beginning of the XXI th century. It recognizes that the "balance of terror" could contribute to the maintenance of peace between the United States and the USSR in the early 1950s to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. It was the world of yesterday, "divided into two blocks, where the strategic chessboard contained essentially two players" . There are several nowadays and no one knows if the new players are unanimously convinced of the merits of deterrence.
The group of countries with "the" bomb expands and improves it. It gains in miniaturization and precision, which resembles a weapon employment observed Quiles. But "the more nuclear countries is high, he writes, the greater the risk is great that nuclear weapons are used " . He finds the need to move towards multilateral nuclear disarmament and controlled.
If it is not listened to Paris, the French socialist is in good company in the United States. Scarred veterans of the Cold War, four American practitioners of strategic issues - George Shultz , William Perry , Henry Kissinger and Sam Nunn - say the same thing: " There is no guarantee that today's world can successfully replicate what deterrence theory has during the Cold War, " they wrote.
Their thesis is exposed on March 7 in the Wall Street Journal : " When a growing number of countries consider nuclear face multiple threats (...) greatly increases the risk that deterrence does not work and that nuclear weapons are used ". It's always the same question: the possession of "the" bomb is compatible with hot paranoid of Kim Jong-un?
Since his famous speech in Prague in April 2009, Barack Obama takes the same line. He wants to reduce the country's nuclear arsenal - it is not at all clear that the Chinese and the Russians are willing to follow . Nor François Hollande . The president said again, March 27, the commitment to nuclear weapons, "our warranty, our ultimate protection."
It has some strong arguments to make claims . As explained by one of the experts most familiar file at the Foundation for Strategic Research (FRS), Bruno Tertrais, deterrence has proven. There was no direct conflict between the great powers for decades, "unique in history" , there has never been open conflict between States nuclear deterrence limits the extent and intensity of disputes between major powers - nuclear forbidden to go to war.
To date, there is no evidence, says Mr. Tertrais, the "unauthorized" nuclear club have not integrated the singularity of "the" bomb, a weapon of non-employment. Deterrence work eight or nine, as she walked two. Why? Because " there is no reason to believe " that the "unauthorized" are "irrational" , explains Bruno Tertrais .
In short, the weapon would be inseparable from its doctrine. Miniaturized and even more precise, it is the "weapon of mass destruction the most" . It does not trivialize. The possibility of its use is still afraid, referring to images of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In a document of the FRS in May 2011, Bruno Tertrais do not judge unless deterrence is not guaranteed forever. If only because the images of the atomic bombings in Japan will "'s fade from the collective memory. " And that the young Kim?
http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2013/04/04/la-coree-du-nord-secoue-l-equilibre-de-la-terreur_3154037_3232.html
Share This Article
