Nuclear Weapons and North Korea

Nuclear bombs are still a source of contention today. Despite the fact that some may regard them as a regrettable relic or remnant of the Cold War. Nuclear-weapons states are clinging to them as tightly as they can, inventing new designs and functions for them. They’ve also proposed tiny arms for these weapons in the past. Much of which exists amid legally binding conventions, speeches, and promises to get rid of them (Sauer, p. 246).
The threat of nuclear weapons has been even more unpredictable in recent years, as the world’s leading states; China, Russia, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States which have nuclear weapons have broken the promises they made to disarm. Countries like North Korea, Pakistan, India, and Israel have also teamed up on this ‘club’ which deals with nuclear weapons. Following the prevalent use of atomic energy, around 40 more countries can advance in nuclear weapons because they have access to these materials (Gilpin, p. 65).

Sauer, Tom. “Just Leave It: NATO’s Nuclear Weapons Policy At the Warsaw Summit.” Arms Control Today 46.5 (2016): 16.

This article discusses a treaty that banning the bombs could lead to actual progress. According to Tom Sauer, most states that deal with nuclear weapons are afraid. It is not because of the nuclear weapons owned by their enemies but rather the likely commencement of multidimensional dialogues for the ban of nuclear weapons. In the foreseeable future, the odds indicate that these weapons might be declared illegal.

Due to the moderately slow rate in the stalemate of traditional mutual diplomacy and nuclear decreases, such as the repeated failures of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and UN Conference on Disarmament, a group of NGOs and middle powers have launched a Humanitarian Initiative. This initiative has succeeded in the last few years in inspiring diplomacies of nuclear dialogues. It has also sparked the interests of new participants in the decommissioning of nuclear within the civil societies globally comprising of continents like Africa and younger generations. When the nuclear weapons ban gets signed, civilian communities worldwide will be more empowered with added resources which leads to accumulation of the speed needed to tackle tasks like climate change.

I am not accustomed to Tom Sauer, the author. However, this newsletter is highly valued by readers because it tackles all topics including politics and religion. Also, following the fact that it was on the internet, it is safe to say that this piece contains current info. Also, the issue of nuclear weapons has become rampant, so this study is relevant to us.

During World War II (WWII) two main cities; Nagasaki and Hiroshima in Japan were hit by a nuclear weaponry, which resulted in dire consequences. These effects are still seen up to today. Countries rather than ceasing the production of nuclear weapons they even seek ways in which they can advance them. Can nuclear weapons put an end to the whole humanity? Are they significant in fostering peace internationally? Should they be outlawed? Do we know the effects bombing has on Japanese community up to date? The relevance of these questions is not overrated because different people have different views on the impact of nuclear weapons in the current world. Most individuals think that these arsenals can kill life as well as destroy the planet.

Being an invention of WWII, the main effects of nuclear bombs were witnessed in 1945 in Japan. Thousands of humans were victims of the terrible bombing. Also, we should look at the pollution effects, price and dangers that are brought about by nuclear weapons (Simpson, p. 113).

For starters, weapons of mass destruction are normally aimed at demolishing infrastructure, buildings and people of a particular territory. Also, for the next few years, life will be unbearable because of pollution and radiation. Deaths will be as a result of cancer and other diseases which are related to the nuclear elements. It, therefore, means that a bomb does not only cause harm during explosion but also after its blast. When one country chooses to launch their nuclear weapons, other countries will be forced to do the same to defend themselves. These conflicts result in the total damage to our globe (Kihl, Young, and Hong Kim, p. 21).

These weapons are costly. The states linked to these nuclear weapons have to devote a considerable amount of money to keep their weapons in an excellent working condition. It is somewhat apparent that the spent money on these weapons could be diverted to more peaceful commitments such as developing the economy, medicine, and education (Leeper, p. 81).

On the other hand, nuclear weapons are necessary to us. Despite them being exceedingly hazardous and unsafe, they help in maintaining peace on the planet. No one risks disturbing states which possess nuclear weapons for the reason that everybody is terrified of the dangers and risks of these explosions on their lands. Subsequently, possessions of these weapons provide people with confidence and assurance in their futures.

In summary, these weapons should be banned, but it is impossible to ban them internationally. Countries like China, Iran, Russia or North Korea might never dispose of their nuclear weapons. A majority of dictators envision having weapons so that they can impose their points of view on other states and threaten them. Therefore, if ‘good’ countries utilize and ban their nuclear weapons, they become defenseless. They then receive threats from malicious states and become targets of attacks by terrorists.

Should North Korea have more sanctions?

Sanctions are understood to be restrictions or constraints that get enforced on activities which relate to specific services, goods, and countries, entities or persons. They are used to restore or maintain international security and peace plus they do not encompass the use of armed forces. Sanctions aim at:

a. Penalizing.

b. Modification of behavior.

c. Limiting the access to an outstanding service or good that gets used in a situation of international concern.

Alexandra Wilts Washington DC. “North Korea says Sanctions Will Only Encourage It to Speed up Nuclear Programme.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 18 Sept. 2017,

As far as North Korea is concerned, sanctions only encourage it to speed up a nuclear programme. The more the sanctions get enforced by the United States and its allies in North Korea, the faster it will work to developing its plans on nuclear weapons. The new penalties include the sale of natural gas to North Korea and bans on imports on textiles. Also, they limit the volume of sales of refined petroleum to the country to two million containers yearly. Both China and Russia, chief economic associates of North Korea, opposed the call by the United States for an oil restriction and more extensive sanctions. In August, Donald Trump, the U.S. president stated that “North Korea would face fire and fury like the world has never seen if it keeps being a threat to the people.” According to this latest report by Alexandra Wilts, the ambassador of US to the United Nations, Nikki Haler, said that the U.S takes no pleasure in strengthening these sanctions further.

The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media is a renowned source of unbiased data hence the reports above are credible. Also, Mr. Wilts has many followers in the social media making this news sound and reliable. He goes further to declare that the state media of North Korea said that the goal of the country is to get to “equilibrium” of the military force with the United States.

Young, Leslie. “Sanctions Alone Won’t Change North Korea’s Behavior, Say Experts.” Global News, 20 Sept. 2017,

Whether or not more sanctions should be put against North Korea depends on if they will have any impact on the country. Conferring to international security experts nonetheless, these economic sanctions set against North Korea will not be enough to discontinue it from growing its nuclear strike ability.

Sanctions alone thus, are not the answer. As per the director of the Centre for Defense and Security Studies at the University of Manitoba, Andrea Charron, “I think a lot of people have the impression that we should be able to put on sanctions and instantaneously this is going to compel Kim Jong Un to rethink his life.” There has also been an imposition of one sanction after the other by the United Nations on North Korea since 2006, hence setting a limit to states from sending their valuable goods. Included in these sanctions was the freezing of government assets and not permitting nations to purchase North Korean minerals and coal.

Leslie Young is a National Online Journalist who deals with Investigative Global News. powers this news and her honesty rely on the word of her audience. Also, it is a part of Corus Entertainment Inc. which is globally known for reliable reports and do not merely focus on rumors.

Should North Korea be liberated?

There have been sprouting of several markets since Kim Jong-un arose to authority in North Korea. Instead of putting an end to them, he has permitted markets to regulate the prices by proliferating their existence. These markets are not only selling a majority of foreign goods and accepting electronic payment and foreign currency by pay card but also becoming the “new normal” and also offer financing privately as an option of payment. These liberties will lead to industries spreading like fire and 90% of the problems being faced by North Korea to end. This has made Jong-un not only to be a liberator above being a reformer. The United States has blocked these liberations in North Korea in condition that it must abandon its programme in nuclear weapon.

China is thought to be North Korea’s principal associate. Nevertheless, if a war were to break out between North Korea and the United States, the Chinese government would not be too fast to support their Korean friends as this would buffer their trade relations. They value their productive and profitable trade with South Korea, the West, and the Japanese more than the existing regime with the North Koreans.

North Korea can be liberated, South Korea and China will let this happen because:

a. Both states would not take the risk of their cities being attacked with weapons from North Korea because they are neighbors.

b. They do not wish to deal with a sudden or unexpected inflow of uneducated and unskilled refugees due to increase in North Korea crises.

The best chance the North Koreans have at the moment is for China or South Korea to influence them to stop what they are up to currently. It will make them broker unification between the United States and North Korea.

This information from Quora news is to be depended on because the site has a comments section from its addressees. These onlookers can comment on if a point has been mentioned that do not lie well with them. Also, by use of all that information, they have a wide variety of content that can be used to broaden one’s knowledge on the liberation of North Korea.

North Korea needs to be liberated because it has experienced eras of stagnation in their economy. In the 90’s, the country underwent a significant period of famine and up to date, receives food relief (Blenchman, p.54).

“[Serious] Why Hasn’t the World Liberated North Korea? • r/AskReddit.” Reddit,

According to individuals from Reddit, North Korea has some strong trade connections with South Korea. The president of South Korea, has been making contributions totaling of up to $63 billion annually to denuclearize matters of the country.

This web page deals with the views and comments of individuals on the chances and reasons of liberating North Korea. Also, on the question of if North Korea should be liberated or not, even though it is overall a developing and a dictatorship nation there are no significant crimes cited against humanity. So, it is rather easy to come up with reasons which are valid enough to liberate it.

Works Cited

Alexandra Wilts Washington DC. “North Korea Says Sanctions Will Only Encourage It to Speed up Nuclear Programme.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 18 Sept. 2017,

Blechman, Barry M. “Why we need to eliminate nuclear weapons-and how to do it.” Retrieved on 20th October (2015).

Gilpin, Robert. American scientists and nuclear weapons policy. Princeton University Press, 2015.

Kihl, Young Whan, and Hong Nack Kim. North Korea: The Politics of Regime Survival. Routledge, 2014.

Leeper, Steve. “Education for peace and human sustainability–The abolition of nuclear weapons-• DOI: http://dx. doi. org/10.15599/0104-4834/cogeime. v23n45p79-92.” Revista de EDUCAÇÃO do Cogeime 23.45 (2014): 79 -92.

Sauer, Tom. “Just Leave It: NATO’s Nuclear Weapons Policy At the Warsaw Summit.” Arms Control Today 46.5 (2016): 16.

Sauer, Tom, and Joelien Pretorius. “Nuclear weapons and the humanitarian approach.” Global Change, Peace & Security26.3 (2014): 233-250.

“[Serious] Why Hasn’t the World Liberated North Korea? • r/AskReddit.” Reddit,

Simpson, Erika. “Towards a World Free of Nuclear Weapons.”Peace Review 28.3 (2016): 309-317.

Young, Leslie. “Sanctions Alone Won’t Change North Korea’s Behavior, Say Experts.” Global News, 20 Sept. 2017,

Deadline is approaching?

Wait no more. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Receive Paper In 3 Hours
Calculate the Price
275 words
First order 10%
Total Price:
$10.99 $35.97
Calculating ellipsis
Hire an expert
This discount is valid only for orders of new customer and with the total more than 25$
This sample could have been used by your fellow student... Get your own unique essay on any topic and submit it by the deadline.

Find Out the Cost of Your Paper

Get Price