“A House of Dynamite” is the title of a new Netflix film that inspired an Oct. 29 column by Chosun Ilbo editorial board member Ahn Hye-ri titled “What if a nuke were 18 minutes away from hitting Busan?” As soon as I read the column, I made a beeline to the theater to watch the film.
Just like the anonymous blogger mentioned in Ahn’s column who said the film gave him “chest pain,” I too felt tense throughout my viewing and was perhaps inevitably reminded of the current nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula.
That’s how I found myself in front of my laptop. I strongly felt the film has a message for Korean society, which has grown inured to the nuclear threat posed by North Korea. I fondly hope this column will have a “butterfly effect” — the way a butterfly’s fluttering wings can arouse a typhoon halfway around the world.
As the title suggests, the film likens the world to a “house of dynamite” that could go off at any time. A ballistic missile, launched from an unknown part of the Pacific Ocean, is headed for the continental United States, and the White House and the U.S. government and armed forces respond according to predetermined protocols and manuals described in painstaking detail. Tears filled my eyes as I watched the president and other characters grapple with impossible dilemmas. The scene where (spoiler alert!) the secretary of defense leaps to his death was particularly moving.
Crisis response procedures matter
But what can the film teach us? While several lessons may be gleaned, the two I’d like to emphasize are the importance of crisis response manuals and the necessity of internalizing and practicing crisis response on an ongoing basis.
The Korean Peninsula is exposed to the threat of a preemptive nuclear strike by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. As such, the South Korean government should obviously prioritize resolving the North Korean nuclear threat with the cooperation of the international community, including the United States.
But the fact is that North Korea refuses to give up its nuclear weapons and, if anything, is making its threats more overt. To prevent a nuclear holocaust during a potential conflict, we need to make various preparations, such as updating and rehearsing our response manuals.
We must bear in mind that if we neglect these preparations simply because the threat is not immediately apparent, the consequences could far exceed the sinking of the Sewol ferry or the Itaewon crowd crush, as terrible as they were — indeed, they could jeopardize the very survival of the state. As part of those preparations, Koreans would need the mental fortitude to endure a certain amount of discomfort in their everyday lives.
But what, if anything, is actually being done? There are no nuclear drills worth mentioning. For fear of provoking the North Korean regime or offending the South Korean public, our government only preaches the correctness of peace on the Korean Peninsula and the need to resume inter-Korean cooperation and exchange.
To be sure, efforts to build a peace regime are of great importance. However, I cannot help but wonder whether Koreans would faithfully and resolutely carry out their respective roles as the American president, government officials, military officers and citizens did in this film if a similar crisis were to play out on the Korean Peninsula.
Two essential steps
North Korea, and the North Korean nuclear program in particular, are a complex equation that cannot be solved neatly, easily or quickly. Even if an agreement were reached through renewed dialogue, it would likely be breached, bringing us back to square one.
During the recent APEC summit, there was quite a stir about a potential meeting between Kim and U.S. President Donald Trump. But that sort of high-profile meeting is not a solution based on an accurate diagnosis of the problem. Our actions must be informed by a proper understanding of North Korea and its leader.
Furthermore, we must not be hasty. Rather than anxiously courting Kim or begging Trump to pull together a meeting, there are two more important steps we should be taking.
First, we need to take the time to reach an agreement with the U.S. about a strategic roadmap on our North Korean policy going forward. While we’ve cleared a major hurdle in the tariff talks, I haven’t heard anything about discussing a roadmap for bringing about change in North Korea or about holding regular deliberations about relevant strategies and tactics.
We must not overlook the fact that Trump is perfectly capable of taking actions that go against our national interest or compromise our national security if it serves U.S. interests, or even his personal interests.
Second, before going cap in hand to North Korea or the United States, we should swiftly do what can be done now without outside assistance. Since North Korea would never willingly give up nuclear weapons and is openly threatening the South with enhanced tactical nuclear capabilities, reviewing and drilling our nuclear response manual is a must.
After all, “A House of Dynamite” may as well be set in Korea, and it is we who must act on that stage.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: dailynk.com
