Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

North Korean bomb test benefitting Bush?

By Peter Coates - posted Wednesday, 11 October 2006

North Korea’s announcement of its first nuclear test on October 9, 2006 has been expected for some time.

Seismic evidence at this point does not rule out that the “test” was a massive conventional explosion (in the manner of the planned US “Divine Strake” test). However satellite imagery and signals intelligence should provide a greater level of confidence, that the explosion was, in fact, nuclear.

In a February 28, 2006 global threat assessment before the Senate Armed Services Committee, John Negroponte, US Director of National Intelligence said unlike Iran, North Korea claims already to have nuclear weapons, “a claim that we assess is probably true”.


Assuming North Korea’s nuclear capability is as North Korean leader Kim Jung-il claims, Kim Jung-il had a choice of when to hold the test and when to announce it.

One limitation was that the test should be held at a time when the probability of a successful detonation was sufficiently high.

A test sooner or later was inevitable given Kim Jung-il tendency towards grandiose gestures. Furthermore (unlike Israel) North Korea is probably too backward (in some areas) to run a reliable computer simulation of a nuclear test, so a real test was necessary.

Testing of a nuclear weapon should not have greatly changed the strategic picture if the whole world knew North Korea had nuclear weapons, but public fears and politics have changed the picture.

The major reasons for the test and its timing are likely to remain unclear until a comprehensive statement from the North Koreans and (declassified) intelligence assessments clarify them.

Why test on October 9?

It was the ninth anniversary (and one day) since Kim Jung-il came to power. The extra day may have been due to technical delays.


On October 10, 2006, South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki Moon faced a vote on his bid to become the next Secretary General of the United Nations. He has just been nominated for that post.

It provides the Republicans with the necessary foreign policy crisis to have some hope of “winning” the mid-term elections on November 7, 2006, as in times of crisis Americans rally to the president, including his (Republican) Party.

Most Americans would have been unaware of North Korea’s previous ownership of nuclear weapons. An actual test provides a headline to allow the truth (and fear) to sink in. North Korea’s action provides Bush with a sound reason to make bold statesman-like speeches against North Korea. He may also launch some military action such as a stop and search “quarantine” of North Korean shipping and he will be seen to support UN sanctions.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

This article was originally posted by the author on Spooky Pete on October 9, 2006.

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

9 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Peter Coates has been writing articles on military, security and international relations issues since 2006. In 2014 he completed a Master’s Degree in International Relations, with a high distinction average. His website is Submarine Matters.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Peter Coates

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Peter Coates
Article Tools
Comment 9 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy