Symposium discusses nuclear threat

A symposium addressing the proliferation of nuclear capability in Asian countries pushed for more debate on the issue Thursday. The forum, sponsored by the Committee on Asian Security in the Persimmon Room of the Indiana Memorial Union, focused on the nuclear aspirations of North Korea, South Korea, China, India and Pakistan, as well as reasons for the continuation of the conflict. \nJ. Peter Scoblic, executive editor for The New Republic, stated that nuclear proliferation in Asia has not yet been addressed, seriously, as a problem.\n"It doesn't just mean boosting the arms control framework," he said.\nScoblic argued that the United States should pursue the possibilities that are currently available. \n"At least North Korea has a set of demands, unlike Iran ... We should exploit these options," he said. "When you can't get an immediate solution, as in the case of North Korea ... in the short term, we may have to settle for a short-term solution."\nBill Finan, editor for Current History, agreed that it was a pressing issue.\n"The question of nuclear proliferation is an urgent one," Finan said. \nFinan suggested intelligence failures as partly responsible for the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region. \nThe concept that countries assume a higher status in the international community after acquiring nuclear capability is one that should not be perpetuated, Finan said.\n"(It should be) a mark of shame rather than a mark of progress," he said. \nOne of the more prominent views expressed by most of the speakers was that the spread of nuclear weapons is inevitable. Many proposed that "management" was better than containment. \n"At best, one can manage proliferation," said IU Professor Sumit Ganguly, director of the India Studies Program. "We can come back in 50 years and (nuclear weapons) will still be around."\nGanguly noted that countries look to acquire nuclear weapons for a number of reasons. Nuclear capability conveys prestige and also deters potential threats, he argued. \n"The (nuclear capabilities) of the U.S. ... arouses concern (among other countries)," he said.\nDinshaw Mistry, associate professor of political science at the University of Cincinnati, stated that current attempts at controlling nuclear proliferation have not been effective in stopping the production or testing of nuclear weapons. \n"Have these countries stopped testing missiles? No. They've developed new missiles," Mistry said.\nIU Professor of East Asian Languages and Culture Michael Robinson addressed the issue as a "world crisis." \n"We don't have the Cold War relationships ... that locked the region," he said. "Unlike the last 50 years ... this one is a real crisis."\nDespite three separate six-party talks aimed at resolving North Korean nuclear policy, each has failed in reaching a compromise or solution to the conflict. North Korea chose not to participate in a fourth round of talks in September.\n"This agreed framework never worked, but it was a tacit agreement that (encouraged) engagement," Robinson said. "I always think of parenting when I think of North Korea," Robinson said. "Who is the parent here?"\nFollowing China's involvement in holding the six-party talks and fostering dialogue between the United States and North Korea, Robinson said he was hopeful about the possible outcome.\n"I remember hearing about the talks and being very optimistic," Robinson said. \n-- Contact staff writer Obaid \nKhawaja at okhawaja@indiana.edu