North Korea announced yesterday that it had conducted a second nuclear test, drawing heavy criticism from around the globe (see GSN, May 22).
(May. 26) -
South Korean President Lee Myung-bak today discusses North Korea's latest nuclear bomb test in a telephone call with U.S. President Barack Obama (Getty Images).
"The Democratic People's Republic of Korea successfully conducted one more underground nuclear test on May 25 as part of the measures to bolster up its nuclear deterrent for self-defense in every way as requested by its scientists and technicians," the North's state-run news agency reported.
"The current nuclear test was safely conducted on a new higher level in terms of its explosive power and technology of its control and the results of the test helped satisfactorily settle the scientific and technological problems arising in further increasing the power of nuclear weapons and steadily developing nuclear technology," it added (Korean Central News Agency, May 25).
Pyongyang alerted the United States of its intentions about an hour before detonation, Agence France-Presse quoted a U.S. State Department official as saying (Agence France-Presse/Google News, May 25).
Seismic monitors at the U.S. Geological Survey registered a tremor that hit 4.7 on the Richter scale, the Washington Post reported. The North's first nuclear blast, an October 2006 test that has been seen as largely a failure due to its low explosive yield, was measured as producing a 3.58-magnitude earthquake (Blaine Harden, Washington Post I, May 25).
The quake registered at nearly twice as many seismic stations than the "signal" caused by the 2006 explosion, according to the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization.
It added, though, that "only after further analysis at the International Data Center in Vienna, using data from the 16 auxiliary seismic stations that recorded the event as well, will it be possible to confirm that the signal was man-made and not an earthquake" (Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization release I, May 25).
Yesterday's explosion is believed to have originated on the northeast tip of the Korean peninsula, the same location as the previous test.
Stanford-based nuclear expert Siegfried Hecker said the blast was between two and five times more powerful than its predecessor, the Post reported. However, that is still relatively weak by atomic-bomb standards, said Theodore Postol of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
"You would expect 10 to 20 times that yield," he said. "These guys have not solved the problem."
Postol added that the North Koreans do not appear to have mastered the geometric nuances necessary to trigger an optimal blast. "It means they are not yet able to confidently build an experimental weapon and they may not be able to determine what they did wrong," he said.
One former intelligence official warned, though, that "without question, it's a step forward."
Pyongyang is estimated to possess enough plutonium for several additional weapons, though observers do not yet believe it has produced nuclear warheads that could fit on missiles.
U.S. President Barack Obama, who has made nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament a priority of his administration, led a chorus of international condemnation that included China and the United Nations.
"By acting in blatant defiance of the United Nations Security Council, North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community," he said yesterday. "North Korea's behavior increases tensions and undermines stability in Northeast Asia. Such provocations will only serve to deepen North Korea's isolation."
China, North Korea's top friend, declared itself "resolutely opposed to" the test.
Some experts believe this latest affront might prompt China to distance itself from Pyongyang. "There is every reason to think they might shut down food or communications links," said Christopher Hughes, an international relations professor at the London School of Economics (Blaine Harden, Washington Post II, May 26).
The U.N. Security Council, following a brief emergency session yesterday, called the test a "clear violation" of a 2006 resolution issued in response to the first nuclear trial, Reuters reported. The 15-nation group intends to "start work immediately on a Security Council resolution on this matter," according to a statement.
Washington plans to press for a "strong resolution with strong measures," said U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice (Louis Charbonneau, Reuters/ Yahoo!News, May 25).
"We will take steps ... to convey the message to North Korea that the path it's on doesn't serve its long-term interests, and is not acceptable to the international community. They'll pay a price for the path that they're on if they don't reverse," Rice said today (Agence France-Presse/Spacewar.com, May 26).
Representatives from member nations to the test ban treaty today also gathered today to express their displeasure with Pyongyang. "States signatories conveyed a clear message of condemnation of the claimed nuclear test by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (D.P.R.K.). Such a test would contravene United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718 and the norm enshrined in the CTBT," according to a press release (Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization release II, May 26).
U.S. officials have been happy with the widespread condemnation the test has attracted, the Los Angeles Times reported.
"What's important is not as much what's in the sanctions as the fact that there is unity," said one official.
However, some remained pessimistic about whether additional punishment would move Pyongyang to alter its behavior (Baum/Richter, Los Angeles Times I, May 26).
A North Korean diplomat stationed in Moscow told a Russian news agency that Pyongyang might conduct further nuclear tests unless the United States ceases its "policy of intimidation" toward the Stalinist state, Asian News International reported (Asian News International/Yahoo News, May 25).
This latest test might reflect an urgent desire by North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il to secure his family's position of leadership in North Korea, the Los Angeles Times reported.
Kim, who is believed to have suffered a stroke and undergone surgery last year, might be trying to firm up the backing of the military before one of his sons takes power, said Moon Hong-sik, a South Korean academic.
"Because of his declining health, Kim now feels he must be on a faster timetable," Moon said. "The U.S. has ignored him. He feels the pressure and he's upping the odds" (John Glionna, Los Angeles Times II, May 26).
"Hard-liners, represented by the North Korean military junta, are taking over domestic politics and the reformists have been completely marginalized," Choi Jong-kun, a South Korean academic, told the Sydney, Australia, Morning Herald. "The major audience [for this test] was North Korean domestic politics" (John Garnaut, Sydney Morning Herald, May 26).
Other observers said the test might have been aimed more directly at the United States, the Times reported.
"Last year, a lot of people from Seoul and Washington visited Pyongyang telling Kim and his people that once Obama was in the White House, the U.S. was going to be a totally different entity to deal with," said Lee Dong-bok, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "But it's not working out that way. That's the reason North Korea is acting in such an erratic manner" (Glionna, Los Angeles Times).
In any case, yesterday's events do not bode well for a speedy return to the six-party denuclearization talks, the Christian Science Monitor reported. The negotiations produced a 2007 agreement that moved Pyongyang to take steps toward dismantling its nuclear infrastructure, including disabling key facilities at its plutonium-producing Yongbyon complex. However, the process stalled late last year and North Korea said it would reverse course after being condemned for its April 5 rocket launch.
"North Korea's first demand at any resumption of the six-party talks would be political recognition as a nuclear power," said Chinese academic Yan Xuetong. "What will the six-party talks discuss if denuclearization is not a goal anymore?" (Peter Ford, Christian Science Monitor, May 25).