Note: This post has been updated with Nuclear Japan.

I wanted to wait and think a bit on the North Korea situation before I weighed in.  Here it goes.

There is a history of tension between Japan and North Korea.  North Korea is known to have kidnapped Japanese citizens before, and of course there is the fact that the recent flury of missiles is an expanded repeat of what happened prior to this (Kim Jong Il lobbed missiles over Japan in 1998).

I honestly believe that there is only one solution to Kim Jong Il: it is for Japan and/or Taiwan to go nuclear.  It would be very difficult for Taiwan to go nuclear.  China has too many eyes in Taiwan.  It would be quite easy for Japan to do it.

Japan has not gone nuclear before now because of a number of things (including but not limited to):

1. Being the first and only country ever to to be attacked with nuclear weapons, there is a psychological barrier with the citizens.
2. Japan believes (with good reason) that there is at least to some extent a blanket of protection from the U.S. just as there is with Taiwan.
3. The theory goes that if Japan went nuclear, it would start an arms race in the region.

I do not believe that any of these reasons are determinative.  Go do a Google search on “Japan go nuclear” and read for a while.  There is much discussion available on this subject, but most of it was written after 1998 and well before now (when Kim Jong Il fires more missiles over Japan and supposedly in the direction of the U.S.).  Some of the literature concludes that Japan will not go nuclear (for at least some of the reasons mentioned above).  But with the expanded missile program and several more years to work on nuclear weapons in North Korea, Japan might just be getting a little bit edgy.

It should be noted that there is some degree of enigma surrounding the Kim household and a line of succession.  There is also some speculation on potential mental illness that Kim Jong Il might be afflicted with.  So it is difficult to know exactly what is going on: Is this bluster to show the world that Kim Jong Il is still “the man,” and in charge of his country and that he will be around for some time?  Or is he trying to prepare the country for someone else in succession?

Either way, he cannot be trusted and he has shown that every time he has had opportunity.  Now back to Japan.  Japan knows this and must be thinking hard about the world reaction to the most recent blitz of missile launches.  Sure, the ICBM was a flop.  But all missile programs in history created flops before they created the real deal.

My position on Russia is that the reason for their reticence is that if they were to weigh in and begin to pressure North Korea, they know that they would be mostly ignored.  They are not the player on the world stage that they once were.  They weigh in on the same scales that Germany or France do, not on the scales that the U.S. and China do.  They know this, but it would be quite the public and international humiliation to weigh in and then be ignored.  It would announce to the world what they know but what they do not want the rest of the world to acknowledge; they have become mostly irrelevant.

No one else matters except China and the U.S.  China will not pull the reigns in because they are enjoying seeing the U.S., Japan and South Korea and Taiwan hand-wring over the shinanigans of Kim.  But this might just backfire on them.

The Google search you did above (“Japan go nuclear”) yielded many hits that opined in the negative due to such things as “they would have to reprocess their nuclear fuel to get the weapons-grade Uranium or the Plutonium.”  This objection is nonsense.  It amounts to no more than the objection for anyone going nuclear: you have to create the fissile material through reprocessing.  Okay.  So where is the problem?  This is just a technical issue.  Japan has good nuclear engineers.  Their commercial nuclear program demonstrates that.

Possibly the most interesting of the literature showing up from this Google search comes from a doctoral candidate at MIT, who authored a paper entitled “Why Japan Won’t go Nuclear (yet).”  “Yet” is the operative word here.  Once again, this paper was written prior to the recent spate of missile launches by Kim.

The weakness in this paper, I believe, is that it gives too much credit for public reaction, legislative gerrymandering, and world reaction to being able to stop Japan from going nuclear.  In fact, it seems to me that such a publicly stated intent would be profoundly unwise.  China probably would not allow it to happen.  If it is going to happen, it must do so discretely.  Then Japan would announce it to the world after it had happened — not before.

If Japan does go nuclear, it would signficantly change both the politics and the power balance in the region.  And this, to our favor and the benefit of democracies in the world.

Will they do it?  It is the perfect solution to Kim.  Will the U.S. discretely recommend to Japan that they be going in this direction?  How much backbone does the U.S. have on this matter?  As for an arms race in the region, this won’t matter much if Japan feels that their future existence is at stake.  What person would not run if his life was in danger?  The fact that running is hard work becomes irrelevant when your existence is at stake.