Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
     While some observers claim that Yoon’s comments in the newspaper interview didn’t reveal much about new developments on the issue, Moon said that Yoon might have attempted to emphasize efforts to boost the effectiveness of the U.S. extended deterrence because N.K. is escalating its nuclear threats against S.K. In the interview, Yoon said that he finds it difficult to assure his people of a security guarantee with the apparent levels of U.S. security commitment.
     Park Won Gon is a professor at Ewha Womans University. He said, “This is an unnecessary dispute. Neither side was talking inaccurately. The extended deterrence is a commitment and a promise but not a treaty or a binding one. For S.K., they trust the U.S. but think there should be ways to institutionalize it because North Korea’s nuclear threats are rising. To do so, (the joint) planning and execution are the key.”
     S.K. has no nuclear weapons and is under the protection of a U.S. “nuclear umbrella.” This guarantees a devastating U.S. response in the event of an attack on S.K. However, some experts question the effectiveness of such a security commitment. They say that the decision to use U.S. nuclear weapons lies entirely with the U.S. president.
     Last year, N.K. test-launched over seventy ballistic and other missiles capable of reaching S.K., Japan, and even the U.S. mainline. Last September, N.K. also adopted a new law that authorized the preemptive use of nuclear weapons in a broad ranges of cases, including non-war scenarios.
     During a recent ruling party meeting, N.K. leader Kim Jong Un ordered the “exponential” expansion of his country’s nuclear arsenal. The new law also provides for the mass-production of tactical nuclear weapons for use in an attack on S.K. Kim also mentioned the development of a new ICBM capable of a “quick nuclear counter strike”.
     Last Wednesday, Yoon ordered S.K. officials to consider cancelling a tension-reduction deal with N.K. if the North launches provocations that violate S.K.’s territory. A report on Yoon’s orders said that he issued the instructions during a meeting to discuss N.K.’s recent flying of drones that Yoon says crossed the DMZ for the first time in five years.
     Yoon’s office did not provide many details about his government’s discussions with the U.S. Some observers say that S.K. is trying to obtain a greater role in the U.S. decision-making process on the deployment of its nuclear assets in times of tension with N.K.
      Kim Taewoo is the former head of S.K.’s Korea Institute for National Unification. He said that the reported S.K-U.S. discussion probably “benchmarked a NATO-style nuclear-sharing arrangement” that allows NATO member states’ warplanes to carry U.S nuclear weapons. He also remarked that the discussion still appears to be falling short of the NATO arrangement because possible nuclear exercises between the two countries would probably be S.K. Air Force aircraft escorting U.S. aircraft simulating nuclear strikes on N.K. during joint drills. Taewoo said, “North Korea would take this sensitively. (South Korea and the U.S.) are discussing this to get North Korea to take this sensitively … because that can be a deterrence against North Korea.”