James M. Acton, Ankit Panda
{
"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
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.
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
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.
- Nuclear Weapons and the Future of American PowerPaper
- The Latest Iran Deal Ignores the Lessons of the PastCommentary
James M. Acton
Recent Work
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 Europe
- The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of TimeCommentary
The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.
Marc Pierini
- The Speech Ursula von der Leyen Can’t DeliverCommentary
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is about to give her annual address on the state of the EU. Here’s what she won’t—but should—say.
Rym Momtaz
- How Europe’s 2027 Elections Could Test EU GovernanceArticle
Radical-right parties are expected to do well in upcoming elections in four of the EU's biggest member states. If successful, they could prevent the union from addressing key challenges ahead.
Stefan Lehne
- Taking the Pulse: Is Canada Leading a Third Way?Commentary
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has twice inspired praise for standing up to U.S. President Donald Trump: at the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos and on Canada-U.S. trade negotiations. Is Carney showing a third way better than the EU has in dealing with the Trump administration?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Europe’s Overseas Countries and Territories as Geopolitical AssetsArticle
European states control several Overseas Countries and Territories around the world that carry strategic, economic, and environmental weight. As great powers challenge the rules-based order, defending them is a geopolitical imperative for Europe.
Marc Pierini