The 57th ROK-US Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) joint press conference held at the Ministry of National Defense in Yongsan, Seoul on the 4th. Yonhap News. 

Guest Editorial Writer, Korea Military Academy Class of '84The ROK-US Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) joint statement was the official commitment of the ROK-US alliance and the basis of its articles. The phrase, which had been the strongest deterrent against nuclear use, "the end of the Kim Jong Un regime if North Korea uses nuclear weapons," has disappeared from the joint statement. Furthermore, the long-standing promise to "maintain the current level of US Forces Korea" has also vanished. While we don't know whose intention this was, it is not simply the disappearance of two lines of text. The crucial control mechanism for our strong nuclear umbrella and nuclear deterrence, which protected our survival, is gone. The deletion of the phrase serving as a deterrent to nuclear use is shaking our nuclear deterrence.

The nuclear button lies not in the hands of the military, but in the hands of politicians. It was President Truman, not a military commander, who dropped the first nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. He used the pretext of "ending the war quickly," but at the same time, he had a political calculation to check the Soviet Union. The button of war is always pressed by arrogant power. And the more precarious that power becomes, the more nuclear weapons become a forbidden temptation rather than a button.

1. Dictators of China and Russia will not hesitate to use nuclear weapons if they face a crisis of losing power.  

  Nuclear weapons have inherently maintained a balance of deterrence through the fear they instill in adversaries: "If you use nuclear weapons, we will both be destroyed." This deterrence against nuclear use has been fractured through Russia's Putin. Putin has repeatedly hinted at the possibility of using nuclear weapons whenever he was pushed back on the front lines during the war in Ukraine, defying the nuclear deterrence system.

The world is currently heading towards a confrontation between the free world and the totalitarian bloc. Russia has already used the mention of nuclear weapons on the Ukrainian battlefield as a weapon of "psychological deterrence." China is strengthening its military pressure on Taiwan and appears ready to use nuclear weapons if necessary. Desperate dictatorial power combined with deceptive peace and political objectives leads to various forms of war.

The logic of nuclear and war deterrence does not work on desperate dictators facing a crisis of losing power. The 7,000 or so nuclear weapons of irrational dictatorial states become a means of psychological escape rather than a strategy. If a dictator's malignant belief and resolve that "even if everyone dies, I will survive, and that is victory" takes hold, the nuclear deterrence system collapses instantly. After using nuclear weapons, they will likely blame malfunctions of artificial intelligence (AI).

2. The deletion of the phrase "the end of the Kim Jong Un regime if North Korea uses nuclear weapons" is a forbidden temptation.   

   The commonality among North Korea, China, and Russia is that regime survival is their national objective. For them, nuclear weapons are not a means of negotiation but a lifeline for regime maintenance. The more their regimes are shaken, the greater the possibility of nuclear weapon use. North Korea legally solidified its status as a nuclear power by enshrining its nuclear armament policy in its constitution in September 2023, and is strengthening its "no nuclear war" stance based on military solidarity with China and Russia. This can be interpreted as the institutionalization of brinkmanship tactics, and deleting the phrase "the end of the Kim Jong Un regime if North Korea uses nuclear weapons" is akin to allowing a murderer to use a firearm.

For dictators facing a crisis of their regime collapsing, nuclear weapons can be a forbidden temptation. When facing a crisis of losing power, instinct takes precedence over reason. Their minds are simplified to survival instinct and maintaining power. If the North Korean regime faces continuous economic sanctions, internal coups, widespread public discontent, and uncontrollable unrest, their calculations in the final moments cannot be rational.

When pushed to the brink of collapse, Kim Jong Un is highly likely to resort to extreme measures such as occupying parts of the Yellow Sea islands and threatening surrender with nuclear weapons, or using them if that fails. Nuclear deterrence is established on the premise of the opponent's rationality, but the moment a dictator's rationality breaks down, all deterrence equations are shattered. For such a Kim Jong Un, deleting the phrase "the end of the Kim Jong Un regime if North Korea uses nuclear weapons" is equivalent to loosening the reins on nuclear use.     

3. The history of war and ruin born from the goodwill and illusion of peace.  

  Wars arise from the delusion of rulers that peace politics can prevent war. Politicians want to be "protagonists of peace" that garner votes. However, the peace they offer is an illusion created by calculation rather than truth. The Treaty of Versailles, signed on June 28, 1919, disguised revenge as peace and nurtured Hitler, and the Munich Agreement of September 30, 1938, allowed World War II in the name of peace.

The Paris Peace Accords (1973) and the Panmunjom Declaration (2018) were both diplomatic agreements to end wars, but they failed to resolve substantive military threats. After the Paris Accords, peace did not last long due to the North Vietnamese counter-offensive, and South Vietnam fell in '74. After the Panmunjom Declaration, North Korea's provocations intensified, yet the current administration announced the revival of the September 19 Military Agreement, which was at the level of surrender, blindfolding military reconnaissance and surveillance and tying the hands and feet of combat power. Under the guise of peace, it made it difficult to detect North Korean provocations and weakened war deterrence. This is an act of treason that can only be committed by an enemy's subordinate.

Nuclear deterrence is not maintained by words. The government must immediately revive the phrase "the end of the Kim Jong Un regime if North Korea uses nuclear weapons," which was deleted from the ROK-US Security Consultative Meeting (SCM) joint statement. Once South Korea is normalized, core deterrence phrases like "the end of the regime upon nuclear use" should be elevated to treaties ratified by the National Assembly, not joint statements, so that they cannot be arbitrarily tampered with by politicians.

True peace can only be maintained not by words and ideological will, but by "prepared security" that can support it. If you desire peace, you must possess the strength that your enemy fears. As history shows, false peace has always been an invitation to war. Security should be recognized not as a spoil of war for a regime to carelessly handle, but as a promise of survival that extends to future generations.

To prevent the regime from intentionally weakening combat power and destroying security for ideological purposes, security roadmaps must be consistently pursued through the legalization of a "National Security Committee." While simultaneously enhancing multi-dimensional deterrence through the early acquisition of the Korean-style asymmetric response system, nuclear submarines, and reconnaissance satellites, we must check and punish anti-state and anti-national activities that are manipulated by the enemy through false peace, through citizen surveillance and the awakening of reservists. I convey my sincere foresight that war must be prevented at all costs.

Park Pil-gyu, Guest Editorial Writer