By: Aasi Ansari, Research Analyst, GSDN

Due to recent changes in the United States nuclear policies, many countries have started doubting America’s nuclear umbrella and thinking of having their own nuclear weapon. The distrust was visible in Former President Joe Biden and it is worsening in the Trump administration. Although the calls for nuclear armament had already been rising in both Japan and South Korea before Trump’s return to office, Trump.s new approach towards nuclear policies of Japan and Republic of Korea in his second presidency have forced both countries to start think seriously and urgently about developing their own Weapon of Mass Destruction instead of relying on America’s Nuclear Umbrella.

South Korea & Japan – Pursuit for Nuclear Weapon

The biggest threat both Japan and South Korea have is the increasing number of North Korea’s nuclear potential. Even though America assured to deter the Korean peninsula, the history has shown otherwise. North Korea has not only developed but increasingly expanding its nuclear arsenal and also become more provocative, testing missiles powerful enough to reach the United States. Which has triggered Japan and South Korea to lean towards the idea of nuclear option.

South Korea abandoned its nuclear weapons program in the 1970s, as Washington pushed non-proliferation, and chose to rely on the United States to defend it against the North. The pursuit of nuclear weapons in South Korea is an old debate that triggers every once in a while, especially since 2006 when North Korea tested its first bomb. However, in the last few years, the call for South Korea to have nuclear weapons has increased significantly. Public opinion polls have shown that a majority of South Koreans over 70% support the development of indigenous nuclear weapons.

Right now, South Korea is under the protection of United States Nuclear Umbrella which they signed with Washington in 1953. North Korea has a long history of pursuing nuclear capabilities since the 1960s, even before it initiated its nuclear programme around 1993. But America already withdrew all American tactical nuclear weapons from South Korea in 1991, with Seoul’s consent, and the joint declaration of the de-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Japan’s former Prime Minister Eisaku Sato gave the “Three Nonnuclear Principles” in December 1967, that later became the foundation of Japan’s nuclear policy. The policies are that “Japan would not develop nuclear weapons; It would not possess nuclear weapons; It would not allow nuclear weapons to be stationed on its territory.” Later he added the fourth principle that Japan would adhere to the three Principles as long as it retained confidence in America’s nuclear umbrella.

The concept of developing a nuclear weapon is long opposed by the people of Japan. However, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe deeply resented the Americans imposing this constitution on them. Japan wants the alliance with America, since 90% of energy requirement is imported in Japan. Mr Abe was supporting the idea of going nuclear, although it is believed that he was suggesting to borrow some nuclear weapons from U.S. instead of Japan build its own.

Why going nuclear is important now more than ever?

Just days into Trump’s second presidency, his secretaries of defence and state referred to North Korea as a “nuclear power.” This could potentially imply that U.S. has accepted North Korea as a nuclear-armed state. In addition, Trump said he would “reach out” to Kim Jong-un, raising speculation that Washington might pursue arms control with North Korea instead of denuclearization, leaving South Korea vulnerable to nuclear threats. Recently, the US administration’s attempts to withdraw the US Forces in Korea (USFK) from South Korea. Trump also has indicated that he wants the ROK to contribute US$ 10 billion every year in order to deploy of U.S. troops in South Korea, which will be a big impact on South Korean economy and gives one more region to strengthen their own military and to consider nuclear option.

All this has increased the security anxiety of both Japan and South Korea. This shift of America’s approach to Pyongyang, all while North Korea’s increasingly belligerent behaviour, the Russia-Ukraine war, China expanding its territory and another critical factor are the reasons for the increasing distrust of Japan and South Korea with the United States. Regardless of its growth in soft and hard powers, being a non-nuclear state, South Korean has question that why would the US sacrifice New York for Seoul?

It’s no coincidence this call-to-arms in Japan came just as Russia has invaded Ukraine. Since than Japan has started thinking seriously and urgently about nuclear weapons. In 2022 Shinzo Abe got security anxiety by watching the invasion of Ukraine serves as a useful example of what can happen to countries that don’t defend themselves properly against bigger, better armed and more aggressive neighbours.

China hasn’t launched any major attacks yet, but it does seem to be moving in a bit of a Russia-like direction. China has been trying to slowly slice off bits of territory from India, the Philippines, and Bhutan, and it’s also now pushing a claim to the Japanese island and South Korea. This pattern shows that the China wouldn’t be satisfied with the conquest of Taiwan, they are more likely to have plans to claim Japan’s island of Okinawa, and might support a North Korean takeover of South Korea in order to turn the whole peninsula into a Chinese satellite state.

Many researchers believe that Mr. Kim Jong Un would no doubt use the nuclear arsenal in case it becomes clear they are about to lose any war. In that case, any non-nuclear country has only two options to defend their country, either by asking for help from the nations like U.S. and U.K. or to develop your own nuclear power if their policies are not reliable enough. 

Impact on Proliferation

Majorities of nuclear experts believe that the existing nuclear policies are discriminative and overly-exaggerated. A breach in the Non-Proliferation is undesirable, but no sanctions were applied against the United Kingdom, France, or Israel. Similarly, U.S. had futile attempts to prevent India and Pakistan from joining the nuclear club and eventually accepting them as nuclear state. India gave the reasoning to deter from nuclear armed China, similarly Pakistan wanted to deter from India. Japan and South-Korea has the same reason to deter from North-Korea and potentially from China and Russia as well. South Korea’s nuclear weapons would let the state take a more responsible role on the global stage as a key U.S. ally and that such a change of national status would upgrade the ROK-US alliance, as well. From the view point of Seoul, South Korea is already more than justified to go nuclear.

But if Japan and South Korea get nukes, the other neighbour countries might consider to do the same such as Indonesia, Vietnam, and Malaysia. This will promote the normalization of development of nuclear weapon. This will have a big impact on Proliferation by increases the probability of use of a nuclear weapon. The world needs non-discriminative proliferation regime, at the time America is showing less interest in being world leader, decreasing world’s trust in American nuclear umbrella even more.

Former Prime Minister of Japan Mr. Shinzo Abe suggested to share the U.S. nuclear weapon similarly current Prime Minister debated to have Asian version of NATO, a nuclear consulting body with U.S. to share the nuclear arsenal. South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s diplomatic conversations in the initial years, culminating with the signing of the Washington Declaration in 2023, where both sides agreed to “commit to engage in deeper, cooperative decision-making on nuclear “deterrence”. However, whatever approach America might take, it must ensure that its decision is a well-considered policy considering all the consequences.

The political pressure on the U.S. will be too huge to respond with nukes in retaliation, putting the U.S. President in a dilemma: whether to put the US cities, innocent civilians, and worldwide US bases at risk or sacrifice them to defend an ally which is not a part of the US territory. Seoul also considers that “We cannot expect — and should not ask — the American president to use his nuclear weapons to defend an ally at the risk of sacrificing his own people.” This idea gives Japan and South Korea full right to consider nuclear option. Japan and South Korea are under direct threat of nuclear-armed neighbours, while neighbours continue to enhance their nukes, US allies remain without. Both Japan and ROK are aware of the U.S. decisions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The majority of Koreans and Japanese think nuclear armament is not the best option, but it is inevitable.

Conclusion

Eventually, the President of America has to make a decision on nuclear talks for both Japan and South Korea. There are many reasons why Japan and South Korea have all the right to consider nuclear option. But this will lead in breach in existing Proliferation regime. The increase in number of nuclear states will also increase the probability of using it. But that cannot be allowed due to the devastating effect on that detonated land far worse than Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In order to prevent that from happening, a strict non-discriminatory Proliferation regime has to be enforced thought out the world. For that, the leading global powers have to take the lead and responsibilities to make all the nuclear countries and many non-nuclear countries to comply with that regime.

By: Anushka Khatri, Research Analyst, GSDN

The Trans-Caspian International Transport Route (TITR) also known as the Middle Corridor is quickly progressing as an important link in the world trading chain. It opens Asia to Europe through Central Asia, the Caspian Sea, and the South Caucasus. A multi-form trade route, it defines itself inevitably as an alternative to trade routed through the Northern Corridor (through Russia). As tensions, vis-a-vis wars such as those in Russia and Ukraine, build up in the geopolitics of the world, as economic sanctions continue to heap on Russia, trade routes become more diversified, secure, and increasingly important. The TITR not only provides other ways out of the Northern Corridor, particularly the one run by Russia, but also strengthens economic linkages in major global regions, and enhances connectivity with global trade as well. This extended study is based on an analysis of the geographic, economic, and political importance of the TITR. It analyzes the current developments in infrastructure investment, considers economic impacts on the parts concerned, challenges in reaching its full potential, and its prospects.

Geographical Scope

The Trans-Caspian International Trade Route spans multiple countries across Asia, Central Asia, the South Caucasus, and Europe. These regions are linked by a corridor that connects various markets and enhances their trade worldwide by rail, road, and maritime routes. The TITR now become a fundamental transportation complement for international goods travel between continents. The geographical dimension of the corridor is segmented into crucial phases:

Asia: Moving through the western provinces of China, the TITR serves as a passageway through which goods produced in Asia can access logistics hubs, Xi’an, Lianyungang, and Urumqi.

Central Asia: With its splendid rail network and close proximity to the Caspian Sea, Kazakhstan serves as a central node along the route. China is linked to Caspian ports like Aktau and Kuryk through this country, both of which have been outfitted with modern infrastructure for the effective transshipment of cargo.

Caspian Sea: The route crosses the Caspian Sea, enabling maritime transport linkages between Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, with Kuryk and Baku ports as major intersection points. Although the Caspian Sea crossing is essential, it is considered a bottleneck because of limited ferry capacity and unpredictable weather conditions.

South Caucasus: The underpinning of the South Caucasus segment of the route is made possible by Azerbaijan and Georgia. Baku Port in Azerbaijan is becoming increasingly important as it possesses an increasingly important capacity to handle containers and is a traffic hub for goods flowing to Europe. Furthermore, the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars (BTK) Railway provides vital rail connectivity from Azerbaijan through Georgia to Turkey.

Turkey and Europe: Finally, goods are shipped from Georgia to Turkey and then into Europe through the advanced Turkish railway and road systems, whose networks extend into Romania, Bulgaria, and beyond.

The geopolitical scope of the TITR positions it as a crucial artery for trade connecting some of the world’s most dynamic and growing economies across Asia, the Caucasus, and Europe.

Strategic Importance

There are various reasons for the strategic importance of the Trans-Caspian International Trade Route.

Trade Route Diversification: With rising geopolitical tensions especially after the Russian attack on Ukraine and consequent Western sanctions, the TITR is seen as an alternative to the main trade routes, especially those that run via Russia. By providing safer, more diversified trade alternatives to reduce dependency on politically sensitive routes, the TITR attempts to diminish supply chain vulnerabilities.

Link Between Asia and Europe: The TITR is an important link from the major manufacturing areas of Asia to the consumer markets of Europe. When compared to the traditional maritime routes, which require long shipping times via the Suez Canal or other routes, the TITR allows the faster delivery of cargo, with considerably reduced transport times. This is more appealing to industries that are under time constraints in the timely and reliable transport of their goods.

Energy Transport: The energy-rich lands of Central Asia include oil, gas, and minerals. The TITR serves to transport energy commodities from Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan into the larger European markets. The TITR, as Europe diversifies energy sources, is one important means of accessing Central Asian energy with reduced dependence on Russian energy supplies.

Regional Economic Cooperation: The TITR promotes cooperation among countries in the region including Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey, and overseas. This type of cooperation contributes to regional economic development, implementation of trade agreements, and strengthening of political ties. Also, it is in support of projects such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in strengthening Eurasian connectivity.

Infrastructure Development

The spine of successful TITR is its proper and solid infrastructure. Project countries have significantly invested in developing transportation features, streamlining logistics operations, and enhancing overall connectivity.

Kazakhstan: Kazakhstan has made great progress in developing and modernizing its railway network and new port infrastructures. The hub is considered Khorgos Dry Port, a border facility along China and Kazakhstan with a view for transiting cargo from China to Kazakhstan. Moreover, the Caspian Sea Kuryk Port was upgraded entirely with two additional ferry terminals built to accommodate increasing freight volumes. Operational efficiencies have also been increased by the incorporation of digital technologies such as blockchain for cargo tracking.

Azerbaijan: Azerbaijan has increased its investment in maritime infrastructure, focusing on the Baku International Sea Trade Port. This port will now serve as an essential transit hub for goods travelling across the Caspian Sea. In addition, the expansion of railways now extends to the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars, which increases connectivity for Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey. Also, the Alat Free Economic Zone is being developed in the country to promote logistics and further encourage trade.

Georgia: Georgia has invested in ports like the renovations of Poti and Batumi ports, scaled up for more containerized cargo, and even further enhanced with the Anaklia Deep Sea Port project to ensure Georgia remains the key logistics hub along the TITR. Modernizations are also being expected along the Georgia-Azerbaijan rail corridor that connects to Turkey.

Turkey: Its advanced transport infrastructures, such as the Marmaray Tunnel under the Bosphorus Strait, tie Turkey’s Asian and European sides by rail and thus facilitate a smoother transition of goods to Europe. It also runs an efficient trucking system to support its rail and maritime networks.

Such infrastructure improvements constitute a crucial link in reducing the time of transit, increasing the volume of handling capacity of cargo, and eventually making the TITR more competitive in global trade.

Economic Impact

The economic repercussions of the TITR are very far-reaching and encompass the entire world beyond the countries directly involved in the initiative.

Increased Trade Volumes: More countries are trying to diversify their supply chains, and this has brought a significant increase in trade volumes for TITR. For example, in 2022 alone, about 1.5 million tons of cargo moved through the TITR, and forecasts project this amount to increase to 5 million tons by 2030. Some of the important commodities carried through TITR corridors comprise electronics, automotive parts, textiles, and other agricultural products.

Job Creation and Regional Economic Growth: Many jobs are being created in these countries related to construction, logistics, and transportation on infrastructure works associated with the TITR. The jobs to say much of the industry itself entered into boosting larger industrial growth in logistics hubs, thereby adding to the economic development at the local/regional level.

Post-Pandemic Recovery: The most important and endangering collapse of existing global supply chains by COVID-19 wasn’t built up within the area but rather through the use of the TITR corridor for speedy goods movement from Asia to Europe. It fills this gap by preventing a very serious hindrance due to the pandemic situation.

Environmental Benefits: Compared to water routes, the TITR has shorter transit, resulting in lesser carbon emissions. Moreover, the increasing possibilities in green logistics initiatives, for example, electrified rail sections, are expected to even further lower the environmental impact of trade carried out along the route.

Challenges

While the TITR outlines serious advantages, yet there are challenges that remain to be addressed for its future success.

Geopolitical Pertinences: The TITR passes through quite different political atmospheres of instability. For example, the tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan can interrupt the trade flow. Russian and Chinese geopolitical interests, which are mutually competing, could create friction along the route.

Infrastructure Gaps: The pace of development may have been quite rapid, but there is a need for bridging several infrastructure gaps. Limited ferry services on the Caspian Sea, for instance, are causing delays. Also, the physical border crossing procedures are painstaking, which spawns some logistical inefficiencies.

Demand and Sustainability: The TITR’s future livelihood depends on the sustained high demand for goods along the trading routes. European markets will have to continuously increase imports from Asia, and conversely, Asian markets will have to import European products to facilitate a more balanced two-way trade flow.

Environmental Concerns: The TITR shortens the transit time, but the environmental concern stemming from maritime transit across the Caspian Sea exists. Pollution and ecological damage need to be prevented in such a way that these do not lead to generating a long-standing environmental problem.

Future Prospects and Recommendations

International investment and continued infrastructure innovation are critical for the promise of the future of the TITR. Some of the interesting ways to take route effectiveness further include the following:

Expansion of Maritime and Port Capacity: More ferries and enlarged port facilities along the Caspian Sea can reduce bottlenecks and ensure the smoothest possible transit of goods. Investment in sustainable port infrastructure will mitigate environmental concerns.

Digitalization: The introduction of digital technologies such as blockchain for cargo tracking and automated customs procedures will also help address bottlenecks in the corridor to enhance operational efficiency, reduce delays, and increase transparency.

Regional Cooperation and Trade Agreements: Multilateral cooperation of participating countries must be strengthened at the regional level. Extending trade agreements and harmonizing customs procedures, as well as cutting tariffs, will make TITR more efficient and attractive for global trade flows.

Energy Exports: The TITR has the potential to become a major transport route for various energy exports from Central Asia to Europe, such as liquefied natural gas (LNG). This would give the route even more geopolitical significance.

Conclusion

The Trans-Caspian International Trade Route (TITR) is becoming a key factor in transforming global trade dynamics. It grants the landlocked countries of Central Asia vital access to global markets by offering a direct and cost-effective link between Asia and Europe. The establishment of this corridor is not only encouraging regional integration but also turning Central Asia into a more strategically important trade centre.

With investments in infrastructure, technological advancements, including AI and Blockchain integration, stand to ensure its efficiency and competitiveness in a fast-changing global market. Economically, the TITR is a serious game changer; it is set to grow the region, attract investments, and assist in energy security, more so for Europe.

That said, regional tensions and security concerns, coupled with minimal backing for further infrastructure investment, will require a concerted region-wide effort and commitment to the environmental dimension of sustainability. If those challenges are handled successfully, the TITR can become a vital cog in the global trade wheel, provide development opportunities, and foster regional cooperation.

Even though challenges are bound to arise along the way, their effort to pre-determine Eurasian trade, help economic integration, and thereby give a boom to global connectivity makes it an extremely powerful force in the transforming global economy.