---

---

● K-Sub’s Devastating Power

U.S.-ROK Alliance and South Korea’s Nuclear Armament Debate: Denuclearization, Pressure, and Strategic Choices

With the U.S. demanding a 'denuclearization pledge' from South Korea while failing to denuclearize North Korea, it is inevitable that the Republic of Korea will reignite the nuclear armament debate.
This article systematically unravels all the key issues that must be addressed in South Korea's current economic and security strategy in chronological and contextual order: the conditions for nuclear armament under the U.S.-ROK alliance, the reality of North Korea's nuclear problem, the Republic of Korea's policy under the NPT regime, Trump's pressure on defense burden-sharing and the issue of U.S. Forces Korea (USFK), and the possibility of developing Hyunmoo missiles and nuclear-powered submarines.
In particular, we summarize both the safe path and the need for change, focusing on top keywords such as 'economic security', 'global economy', 'nuclear armament', 'defense industry', and 'geopolitical risk'.

Denuclearization Demands and South Korea’s Options

• U.S. Denuclearization Policy Demands
  The U.S. has been indirectly pressuring South Korea, saying, "We will denuclearize North Korea, so don't you develop nuclear weapons."
  However, in reality, the U.S. has been unable to solve the North Korean nuclear issue in the long term.
  From South Korea's perspective, it has secured international credibility by joining the NPT (Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) and declaring itself a 'nuclear-free state' for the sake of the global economic order and alliance.

• Policy Declarations and Realistic Capabilities
  It is not that South Korea absolutely cannot do it, but it 'does not do it politically' considering global economic norms and the U.S.-ROK alliance order.
  It emphasizes 'strategic ambiguity' that it is not that it cannot make them, but that it does not make them, and that it is technically possible at any time.

North Korean Variables and Geopolitical Risks

• Factors of Tension on the Korean Peninsula
  North Korea has the economic power of around 130th in the world, but it continues to pose military threats and conduct missile and nuclear tests.
  As a result, South Korea bears the burden of both economic stability and geopolitical risks.

• Failure to Achieve Denuclearization
  The denuclearization process under U.S. coordination has continued for more than 30 years, but there have been no tangible results.
  South Korean citizens and the government have experienced diplomatic and military frustrations.

Trump’s Defense Burden-Sharing Pressure and the U.S. Forces Korea Issue

• Unreasonable Demand for Increased Defense Burden-Sharing
  The Trump administration demanded an extreme increase in the cost of stationing U.S. Forces Korea in South Korea.
  It attempted to undermine the credibility of the alliance by exposing the 'withdrawal of U.S. Forces Korea' card in the media in the event of a failed negotiation.

• Emergence of Security Autonomy Theory
  When the threat of withdrawal of U.S. Forces Korea became serious, the 'nuclear armament theory' and 'independent national defense theory' suddenly emerged in domestic public opinion.
  The desire for change in the existing U.S.-dependent economic security system became clear.

Economic/Security Implications of Developing Korean-Style Strategic Weapons

• Possibility of Developing Hyunmoo Missiles & Nuclear-Powered Submarines
  South Korea has indicated that it can deter North Korean threats by significantly upgrading the performance of the Hyunmoo missile.
  If equipped on modern submarines such as the Dosan Ahn Changho, it is expected to enhance the defense industry and geopolitical competitiveness.

• Discussions on Developing Nuclear-Powered Submarines
  Possessing nuclear propulsion technology enables long-range strikes and long-term submersion ⇒ Remarks looking ahead to striking the North Korean leadership, directly linked to actual economic and military power growth.

Strategic Ambiguity and the Future of Economic Security

• The Meaning of "We Can Do It But We Are Not Doing It"
  It politically respects the NPT regime, but maintains potential nuclear development capabilities and secures future options.
  It considers domestic and foreign economies, global supply chains, and investor confidence, and internalizes the flexibility to change policies in extreme situations.

• Strategic Choices in the Event of a Security Crisis
  In the event of unexpected situations such as the withdrawal of U.S. Forces Korea, the need for self-nuclear armament or full-scale independent military²⁰³⁰ platforms may emerge.
  It emphasizes concentrating on technological capabilities and economic power internally, and promoting a defense industry internalization policy rather than publicly arguing with the U.S. side.

< Summary >
The U.S. demanded denuclearization to prevent South Korea from developing nuclear weapons, but the failure to denuclearize North Korea is strengthening South Korea's demand for an independent security strategy.
If Trump's defense burden pressure and the withdrawal of U.S. Forces Korea card become reality, the need for South Korean nuclear armament and the development of independent strategic weapons will increase.
It is key to maintain a balance between 'not making it politically' and 'securing technological capabilities' in consideration of the South Korean economy, the global supply chain, and geopolitical risks.

[Related Articles…]

• U.S.-ROK Alliance and Changes in Korea's Security Strategy
• North Korea Risk and Korea's Economic Outlook

*YouTube Source: [달란트투자]

– 현무 넣으면 큰일난다. 순식간에 중국 북한 초토화시키는 K-잠수함 위력｜문근식 교수 2부