Well, that all happened pretty fast, didn’t it?  Seems like just a few days ago we first heard that North Korea planned to test a nuclear bomb.  In a world accustomed to endless U.N. debate, threats of sanctions, back and forth diplomatic bargaining, etc., waking up on a gloomy Monday morning and seeing “N. Korea Claims Successful Nuclear Test” splattered across the front page of your local newspaper is pretty shocking.  And now, basically, we’re fucked.

In the days leading up to this test, it was a happy surprise to see China, of all countries, step up and demand that N. Korea not conduct the provocative test.  But China’s threats weren’t enough, and today CNN reports, “China, a close ally of North Korea, denounced the claimed test as “brazen…””  Well, it’s nice to see China using its influence for good, but it’s too little, too late, Beijing.

From here on out, an Asian arms race seems all but inevitable.  The U.S. is expected to encourage the pacifist Japanese military to go nuclear, and South Korea has hinted they’re going to start work on their own nukes; you can pretty much bank on 24-hour, Manhattan Project-like nuclear program ramping up in S. Korea, well, about 6-hours ago.  You can bet it won’t be long until they’re conducting their own underground controlled nuclear explosions.

So, should the Western world just leave it to the Asians?  Given the current state of N. Korea’s dysfunctional long-range missile program, it’s unlikely their nukes will be able to reach mainland U.S. for at least a couple of years.  With the U.S. military spread so incredibly thin right now, it’s temping to say, “China, S. Korea, Japan: this is your backyard, you’re the ones in immediate danger; get proactive, take care of it.”  But is that really a “solution?”  How can any plan in which more states go nuclear be considered logical?  That means more nukes which terrorists may get their hands on, more scientists who know how to produce nukes, more countries who, in the next 50, 100 years may no longer be allies of ours. No, every country that goes nuclear has to be seen as a direct threat to U.S. long-term goals (and the goal of world peace in general).

So then, should we, as a Democrat suggested at the time, have blasted North Korea’s long-range missiles off their launching pad when we had the chance, accomplishing the dual-goal of hindering their long-range missile capabilities and letting them know we would not tolerate their arms build-up?  I still can’t say if that act of aggression would have been wise, but God damn, it certainly would have been easier to fire a warning shot before the N. Koreans went nuclear.

It will be fascinating to see how the world handles this diplomatic fiasco.  And, oh yeah, the U.N. just nominated a S. Korean as their new secretary-general…  Things are a getting’ interesting.