How US Foreign Policy Encourages Nuclear Proliferation

by Dr. Gerard Emershaw

According to South Korean officials, North Korea is developing new missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads. These missiles, which North Korea has allegedly been test-firing since August, are said to have a range of 200 kilometers and can carry tactical nuclear weapons. Given how unstable the leadership in North Korea has traditionally been—Kim Jong un seems like a chip off the old block—this is troublesome. While the United States obsesses over groups like ISIS—which do not even have enough fighters to fill the typical major league baseball stadium—North Korea continues to become a real danger. It would not take much to set off a war between North and South Korea, and this could quickly turn into a nuclear version of World War I with the United States, NATO, China, and Russia being sucked into the apocalyptic vortex.

An important issue to consider is why nations like North Korea feel it is necessary to develop nuclear weapons. What is the incentive for North Korea, Iran, etc.? The answer is simple. The United States creates an intense and perverse incentive for allegedly “rogue” nations to seek nuclear weapons. Iraq and Afghanistan do not possess nuclear weapons. Because of this, the United States had no qualms about invading these nations, occupying them, and bringing about regime change. Iraq had not threatened the United States in any manner, so simply avoiding aggression is no guarantee that a nation will be safe from American military action.

In contrast, the United States avoided direct military confrontation with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Similarly, while the United States engaged in military action against China during the Korean War, after China developed nuclear weapons, the United States never again threatened it. And while the United States invaded Afghanistan, it did not invade Pakistan—where Osama bin Laden actually was hiding. Why? Pakistan has a nuclear arsenal. So what incentive do nations like North Korea, Iran, or any other nation that is not an American ally have not to develop nuclear weapons?

Neoconservative wars of aggression are expensive. While defense contractors and war profiteers such as Halliburton benefit when the United States turns nations into parking lots and then attempts to rebuild them, American taxpayers certainly do not. And neither do American servicemen who are killed or seriously wounded in action. In addition, these fascistic and imperialistic policies encourage nuclear proliferation.

Totalitarian collectivist nations like Iran typically have ruthless and paranoid leaders. There is nothing quite like a legitimate existential threat to make such despots even more desperate. Needlessly forcing these nations to seek nuclear weapons is foolhardy. Nations that do not sense a need to acquire nuclear weapons do not seek them. And nations which do not have nuclear weapons are not a legitimate threat to set off a nuclear war. The United States need to pursue a saner foreign policy which does not inspire unstable tyrants to seek weapons of mass destruction.

(For more about the dangerous collectivist nature of neoconservatism, read my new book The Real Culture War: Individualism vs. Collectivism & How Bill O’Reilly Got It All Wrong. Available now on Amazon in both print and Kindle.)