I mean they were invented over 60 years ago. Who do so few countries have them? What is the main reason they are so hard to develop – is it money? Lack of scientists? Some secret know-how that the major powers wouldn’t share?
As a side question, how did Nоrth Kоrea then manage to develop nuclear weapons?
Edit: since a lot of people say this is more pоlitical – is it not possible to develop nuclеar weаpons whilst keeping it top secret?
In: 5
There is no “secret,” and while nuclear weapons are expensive they are within the purchasing power of even poor states. The reason fewer countries do not have them is because they have made the political decision, with political agreements to back them up, not to have them. There are pressures on countries not to develop them, especially from countries (notably the US) who already have nuclear weapons. The countries who have agreed to these agreements (like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty) also have agreed not to help other countries get the materials and machinery necessary to manufacture them.
North Korea worked around these agreements over the course of many decades, slowly acquiring the materials and know-how.
The fundamental answer to this is political, not technical.
The cost of infrastructure for producing nuclear weapons is extraordinarily high. India and Pakistan focused on developing ones at great cost to their civilian population. If you have no concern about your populace and aren’t worried about being cutoff from international trade ad development, then it’s fairly “easy” to develop nuclear fuel. The means for deliver them is another expensive undertaking
The great powers implemented an international treaty in 1970 (Non-proliferation treaty) that basically said there would be serious political/economic repercussions for countries that developed nuclear weapons after ratifying it. The only exceptions were the US, USSR, France, UK and China which already had nuclear weapons at the time.
North Korea indigenously developed their own nuclear weapons in the 2000s. They may have had assistance from outside entities (China, Russia, Pakistan are usually named). They developed nukes at a great cost to their people (famines, harsh economic conditions brought on by sanctions, forced labor).
Developing a nuclear arsenal basically puts a giant target on your back for big nations like China, US and Russia… most countries without nuclear weapons have no interest in developing them because they don’t feel the risk is worth the reward. Best to fly under the radar unless you’ve got big plans or big balls
[removed]
– Nuclear weapons are expensive and require heavily specialized production systems and an industrial and research infrastructure which not every country have or wants to pay for it. And of course there is a gigantic difference between a small dirty 5kt case and a 50mgt bomb. Everyone can build a simple rifle. Even low tech countries. Building an 16inch radar guided triple barrel cannon turret for a battleship (Iowa in WW2) able to sustain long periods of fire is a completely different beast. And high-end nuclear weapons are not only a different beast, they are on a completely different plane of existence.
– Nuclear weapon in itself are almost useless. Only with the corresponding delivery system (missile, bomber, submarine etc) they can be used on a tactical or strategic level. These delivery systems, especially for strategic systems, can be extremely expensive. While a small nuclear weapon can be fired by artillery or dropped by small strike aircrafts, larger systems like ICBMs or submarines easily go into the multi-billions. There is a Scottish independent movement. Should Scotland leave the UK it is estimated that the removal of the UK nuclear weapons and infrastructure from the Scottish bases would cost a double-digit billion amount. Which would mean that the UK government would perhaps abolish their nuclear weapon program as it has become too expansive.
– You need a corresponding plan for your war, society, diplomacy & strategy to be able to utilize them. Simply having them is useless. Then they are big city busters in a bunker. And now? When do you use them? What are the international consequences? What is the reaction of your potential or direct enemies? You mentioned North Korea: what would be the consequences if North Korea (under the protection of Ahina) would use nuclear weapons against South Korea (under the protection of the US), perhaps considering that China is not (yet) interested in a nuclear exchange directly at their borders?
> how did Nоrth Kоrea then manage to develop nuclear weapons?
By getting support from other nations and by starving their own population to get resources. And of course there is a difference between the *assumed* warheads and their capability and what, as an extreme example, the US can produce as nuclear weapons.
SYL
There’s no real secret to making a nuclear weapon, the principals are quite well understood to anyone with a physics degree.
The problem is you need the manpower and cash to develop one, and you need the nuclear material which isn’t easy to get.
Countries like North Korea first need to acquire the right kind of Uranium, and then spend significant effort to refine it and separate out the isotopes they need before they can build a bomb. This part is very difficult.
Then you need a launch vehicle, a suitable missile or bomber and that’s not easy either.
Then you have the political considerations
The *Have* countries that have access to the Nuclear material and weapons make it their business to not allow it to get into the wrong hands because of the potential dangers involved.
The US for example won’t just sell nuclear weapons to anyone, and they are very careful who they ship refined nuclear material too.
Making a nuclear weapon is also a huge investment, and smaller nations have to sacrifice a lot to be able to get one. So your population will suffer while you spend their tax dollars on making a bomb.
Nuclear weapons also attract a lot of negative attention. Canada for example doesn’t want any nuclear weapons even though it is well within our ability to make one because there are ramifications to sitting at the nuclear table.
There is no Secret about it.
there are a number of issues in creating a nuclear arsenal.
Prelude: in 1970 most nations signed into the non proliferation treaty and the nations that signed it agreed to not develop or assist others in developing a nuclear arsenal(you’ll notice some nations abused some loopholes), violating this has significant political and economic punishments.
1: if the nation doesn’t already have a Nuclear program(for energy) they need to create one 1st in order to have the capacity to build these things “inhouse”, this has a HUGE upfront cost financially ad politically as unless you are an autocratic regime your people will want to know where all this money is going to. this is not accounting that you also need to develop a delivery system(missile, bomber, submarine etc)
2: the facilities required to enrich nuclear material to weapons grade immediately give away the intentions of the nation pursuing them(a nuclear program for energy purposes doesn’t need these)
3: unless you have the nuclear material locally to mine, sending for it also rings alarm bells as this type of fuel is a controlled material so any movements are heavily scrutinized.
4: at some point you’ll have to test the viability of what you developed, its very difficult to get these tests done in secrecy.
5: going this route means you also need to develop a nuclear strategy, just having the nukes is useless.
6: lastly if any of the major powers catch wind of this you can be sure they ll go to any lengths to not allow another nuclear Adversary to show up.This is because even a single operational nuke give a nation a huge chip they can play in the geopolitical stage.not many nations have the capacity to sit at that table(its arguable if even the current nuclear powers should be there).
There will be nuclear war at some point and it will be over something really, really stupid.
I just want to go in my sleep I don’t want to die
Latest Answers