• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "James M. Acton"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Korean Peninsula"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "NPP",
  "programs": [
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "North Korea",
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "South Korea",
    "China",
    "Japan"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Nuclear Policy",
    "Arms Control"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

How Did North Korea Get Nuclear Weapons?

North Korea’s motivations for pursuing nuclear capabilities have changed over time, but are rooted in a sense of existential threats coming from outside the regime.

Link Copied
By James M. Acton
Published on Aug 17, 2017
Program mobile hero image

Program

Nuclear Policy

The Nuclear Policy Program aims to reduce the risk of nuclear war. Our experts diagnose acute risks stemming from technical and geopolitical developments, generate pragmatic solutions, and use our global network to advance risk-reduction policies. Our work covers deterrence, disarmament, arms control, nonproliferation, and nuclear energy.

Learn More

Source: WAMU

Carnegie NPP co-director James Acton speaks with WBUR on the history of and motivation behind North Korea’s nuclear program. The program, Acton explains, dates back to the 1950s and 1960s, and experienced an acceleration in technology in the 1990s. The regime's motivations for pursuing nuclear capabilities have changed over time, but are rooted in a sense of existential threats coming from outside the regime.

Though North Korean scientists originally trained in the Soviet Union, North Korea has recently reached a high degree of indigenous capability in nuclear manufacturing. The reclusive state now has the ability to produce fissile material, extract plutonium from its own reactors, and enrich uranium. Acton further elaborates on the fact that nuclear weapons technology is 1940s technology; it will become increasingly accessible to an ever larger group of states. Both political and technical solutions are going to become more effecitve, though the international community must get more serious about nonproliferation rules and regulations.

Denuclearization, though desirable, is no longer a realistic outcome, Acton explains. The United States should attempt to offer a deal to North Korea, stipulating restrictions on missile tests over Japan and South Korea; in return, Acton says, the United States may offer a cessation of stategic bomber training flights near North Korea. Despite current high tensions, such a deal may help deter future crises.

Listen to full interview

About the Author

James M. Acton

Jessica T. Mathews Chair, Co-director, Nuclear Policy Program

Acton holds the Jessica T. Mathews Chair and is co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Recent Work

  • Other
    Unpacking Trump’s National Security Strategy
      • Cecily Brewer
      • +18

      James M. Acton, Saskia Brechenmacher, Cecily Brewer, …

  • Commentary
    Trump Has an Out on Nuclear Testing. He Should Take It.

      James M. Acton

James M. Acton
Jessica T. Mathews Chair, Co-director, Nuclear Policy Program
James M. Acton
Nuclear PolicyArms ControlEast AsiaNorth KoreaNorth AmericaUnited StatesSouth KoreaChinaJapan

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • China Financial Markets
    Commentary
    China Financial Markets
    Is China’s High-Quality Investment Output Economically Viable?

    China’s rapid technological progress and its first-rate infrastructure are often cited as refuting the claim that China has been systematically overinvesting in non-productive projects for many years. In fact, as the logic of overinvestment and the many historical precedents show, the former is all-too-often consistent with the latter.

      Michael Pettis

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Much-Touted Middle Corridor Transport Route Could Prove a Dead End

    For the Middle Corridor to fulfill its promises, one of these routes must become scalable. At present, neither is.

      Friedrich Conradi

  • Article
    The Iran War Shows the Limits of U.S. Power

    If Washington cannot adapt to the ongoing transformations of a multipolar world, its superiority will become a liability.

      Amr Hamzawy

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Where is the Groundwork for Lebanon’s Negotiations With Israel?

    A prerequisite of serious talks is that the country’s leadership consolidates majority national support for such a process.

      Michael Young

  • Woman standing amid debris from buildings
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Trump’s National Security Decisionmaking Is Broken

    Here’s why—and what the next president needs to do to fix the process.

      Daniel C. Kurtzer, Aaron David Miller

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.