When a nation or country develops offensive chemical and biological weapons this is not an admittance of intention to use them of threaten other nations and countries with the weapons. (1) The involvement in chemical and biological warfare program in most countries is aimed at developing a defensive capability for the defense forces of that country. The true grey area lies in the facts that to have a productive defensive CBW program it requires the same expertise and resources as a well productive offensive CBW program. If there ever was to be a country that is truly questionable of their underlying mission of offense or defense would be Korea.
In 1954 the Soviet Union and China moved many unique technologies with chemical agents and the necessary requirements and measures to become protected from capture by the Japanese in World War II to the Korean People’s Army [KPA]. During the next five years Korea formed a chemical industry the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), this program developed rather quickly and continued to expand. In the beginning it seemed from the outside looking in the Korea had a vast deposits of natural and raw materials, but developing domestic capabilities had become to a certain extent a quite complicating task for Korea to produce chemical weapons.
The DPRK decided to join with Japan in 1964, in a contract that would allow the Japanese to deliver agricultural chemicals to Korea. Japan began initially bringing in materials to make mustard gas and tabun, but quickly increased to chemicals such as chlorine and phosphorous amongst many organic compounds. This contract with Japan allowed Korea to have the materials they needed to begin production of chemical and biological weapons without hesita...
... middle of paper ...
...Korea and the United States forces. The important aspect of the DPRK is the leadership, and its incentive and power to the first CBW. (1)
Works Cited
(1997. May. 21 ). In â– South Korea: Daily Urges Removal of DPRK Chemical Weapons Threat . (chap. North KoreaChemical Weapons Program) Retrieved Jan. 20, 2012, from www.fas.org
Bermudez Jr., J. S. (1998). Chemical and Biological Weapons Deterrence North Korea. The Deterrence Series, 5 pp. 1-44.
International Institute of Strategic Studies,. (2006, Mar. 1 ). In A Unit Assessment. (chap. North Korea's Chemical and Weapons (CBW) ProgrammesNorth Korea's Weapons Programme) Retrieved Jan. 20, 2012, from www.iiss.org
Patten, L. C. (2009, Jun. 18). North Korea's Chemical and Biological Weapons Program. International Crisis Group Reports and Briefings 1-28. Retrieved Jan. 20, 2012, from www.nautilus.org.
Guillemin, J. (2005). Biological weapons: From the invention of state-sponsored programs to contemporary bioterrorism Columbia University Press.
History has proven the use of chemical weapons ranging back for decades. From the Greeks in ancient Europe using Greek fire to South American tribes using a form of tear gas made of grounded up hot chili peppers to scare away enemy tribes. As well as dipping the tips of spear heads with a poisonous toxin. Poisonous toxins used from live reptiles like frogs and venom from the snakes found from whichever region had enough potency venom to exterminate. The past has proven, that in order for Armies to survive and win, it relied on out smarting the enemy. New technologies and the evolution of weaponry were left to the brightest minds from those eras to develop.
Miltner, A. L. (2012). Technical Escort: Countering WMD for 70 Years. Army Chemical Review, 41-44. Retrieved from http://chemical.epubxp.com/i/98296/45
Salter, Christopher L., and Charles F. Gritzner. "Introducing North Korea,." North Korea. 2nd ed. New York: Chelsea House, 2007. . Print.
Chemical warfare is the use of chemical agents to injure, incapacitate, or kill enemy combatants. First seen during World War I (WWI), the devastating effects of widespread chemical warfare were eventually deemed inhumane by an international consensus and chemical agents were subsequently banned from use. Still, despite the tendency of the modern warrior to overlook antiquated tactics, the threat of chemical agents in the theater of war cannot be entirely discounted by today's Soldier. By analyzing the application, evolution, and overall legacy of chemical weapons in the Great War we can work to minimize the danger they pose in current conflicts and those of the near future. For it is only by understanding the past that we can understand the present and shape tomorrow.
North Korea Comments. N.p., n.d. Web. The Web. The Web. 02 Apr. 2014.
方玥雯[Fang Yue Wen] (2009). 北韓核武研發與東北亞安全：2002-2007. [The North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons and the Security in Northeast Asia: 2002-2007] in台灣[Taiwan]: 國立政治大學[National Cheungchi University] Retrieved 18 July, 2013 from http://nccuir.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/37029
Since the end of the Korean War, the United States has enacted policies to isolate and undermine the Kim Dynasty in North Korea. A key development took place in the past several decades where North Korea broke away from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to develop their own nuclear weapons and while lacking launch capabilities, they have been successful in their development. During this process, the United States took active policies to deter the North Koreans in pursuit of their goals. It is easy to assume that the United States took this stance in order to maintain a military edge in the region. But under closer examination, this neo-realist perspective does not explain why the United States pursued this policy.
The use of chemicals in weapons dates back thousands of years, from poison arrows to poisonous fumes. However chemical warfare took a new approach during World War I. The first large scale attack was chlorine in april 1915. World War II brought on a entire new spectrum of chemical weapons and many countries obtained large stockpiles.1There are four different categories in which chemical weapons are organized based on what the effects are. The first category is blister agents which cause blistering of the skin. The second category is choking agents which cause the airway passages in the victim's throat to close resulting in death. The third category is nerve agents which causes damages to the victims nerves. The most recent uses of chemical weapons was on august 21, 2013 in Damascus ,Syria which resulted in numerous casualties.2
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, chemical warfare is “tactical warfare using incendiary mixtures, smokes, or irritant, burning, poisonous, or asphyxiating gasses.” (Chemical warfare, 2011) It is a temptingly appealing way to dispose of one’s enemies without drawing a sword or lifting a gun. Chemical weapon agents, or CWAs as they are more commonly referred, are classified in five main groups: riot control agents, nerve agents, blister agents, blood agents, and choking agents. Each is devastating on those caught in their paths and, for decades, scientists have worked on creating easier to wield, more lethal types. Today, there are eight countries known to possess chemical weapons (OPCW) but, according to new archaeological discoveries, this may not only be a cause for concern prevalent in the modern world.
Unconventional warfare by means of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) methods have existed for millennia. Dating as far back as the Hellenistic Age, this means of lethality has been evidenced through textual findings where Alexander the Great and his Army sustained poisoned arrows from Indian rivals. With the evolution that comes with time, the extensive use of chlorine and mustard gas were introduced by Germans during World War I (Landau, 1991). More recently in 2013, the confirmed stockpile and use of chemical weapons in Syria and North Korea has threatened the safety of the global community with terrorism and tactics of surprise. In order to combat this resurgence of CBRN warfare, the United States Army developed and continuously adapts to these types of threats by employing CBRN Defense. Under this system, CBRN reconnaissance operations were established to observe an area to locate and identify any possible contamination. Managed by CBRN reconnaissance platoons, these operations remain one of the most important defense principles of contamination avoidance.
Since its origin in 1948, North Korea has been isolated and heavily armed, with hostile relations with South Korea and Western countries. It has developed a capability to produce short- and medium-range missiles, chemical weapons, and possibly biological and nuclear weapons. In December 2002, Pyongyang lifted the freeze on its plutonium-based nuclear weapons program and expelled IAEA inspectors who had been monitoring the freeze under the Agreed Framework of October 1994. As the Bush administration was arguing its case at the United Nations for disarming Iraq, the world has been hit with alarming news of a more menacing threat: North Korea has an advanced nuclear weapons program that, U.S. officials believe, has already produced one or two nuclear bombs. As the most recent standoff with North Korea over nuclear missile-testing approaches the decompression point, the United States needs to own up to a central truth: The region of Northeast Asia will never be fully secure until the communist dictatorship of North Korea passes from the scene. After threatening to test a new, long-range missile, Pyongyang says it is willing to negotiate with "the hostile nations" opposing it. But whether the North will actually forgo its test launch is anyone's guess. North Korea first became embroiled with nuclear politics during the Korean War. Although nuclear weapons were never used in Korea, American political leaders and military commanders threatened to use nuclear weapons to end the Korean War on terms favorable to the United States. In 1958, the United States deployed nuclear weapons to South Korea for the first time, and the weapons remained there until President George Bush ordered their withdrawal in 1991. North Korean government stateme...
Through the years the countries continue to take steps forward toward peace by allowing families to unite from the North and South. Then North Korea will make a decision with their threat of nuclear weapons that will separate the countries from one another and they are pulled away from each other again. The only solution to the political differences and to eliminate the threat of weapons of mass destruction not only to kill and injury the people of North and South Korea, but also of neighboring countries due to chemical and nuclear fallout that will have years of lasting negative health impact to the world. Not only on land, but our valuable resources in the ocean. If we reflect on our history with this type of nuclear destruction such as in Japan or in Russia we see how this impacts the immediate areas, people and for generations. The world needs to agree that the political leadership in North Korea should be moved. The options for removal are limited and pose significant risks for not only the Koreas’, but for the
John F. Kennedy once noted: “Mankind must put an end to war before war puts an end to mankind.” Rising tensions between two opposing forces can lead to intense conflict. Provided that China and Japan have struggles of their own, North and South Korea have had struggles since 1950 (“Korean War”, 1) and continue to hold their conflicts, which seem to be increasing. South Korea, a democratic nation, is the exact opposite of North Korea; a hyper-nationalist nation - seemingly creating a “personality clash” between the two. Much like World War I, there may be, sometime in the future, a full blown war because of North Korea’s hyper-nationalist secretive rule. North Korea’s isolation, internal struggles, and Kim Jong-un’s intention of proving leadership will increase tensions between North and South Korea and may result in an outbreak of war in the near future.
Kim, Yongho and Yi, Yurim “Security Dilemmas and Signaling during the North Korean Nuclear Standoff”, Asian Perspective, Vol. 29, No. 3, 2005, pp. 73-97