2006 North Korean nuclear test

None February 2013 2006 North Korean nuclear test 2006 North Korean nuclear test.png Graphic showing seismic activity at the time of the test North Korea Punggye-ri Nuclear Test Site, Kilju County 10:35:28 KST, 9 October 2006 1 Unknown Fission 0.48 ktonTNT TJ (Chinese academics) 0.55-12 ktonTNT TJ (Jane's Defence Weekly & South Korean estimates, but raised doubts on the lower end estimates because it does not correspond with the 4.2 Richter scale) 5-15 ktonTNT TJ 0.7-2 ktonTNT TJ(estimations from Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources) None 2009 test On 9 October 2006, North Korea performed its first nuclear test, detonating a plutonium-based device underground. The test made North Korea the tenth country to develop and the eighth to openly test nuclear weapons. On 3 October 2006, North Korea announced its intention to conduct a nuclear test. The blast is generally estimated to have had an explosive force of less than one kiloton, and some radioactive output was detected.https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101300576.html October 13, 2006 U.S.: Test Points to N. Korea Nuke Blast The Washington Posthttps://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aO7kW.RjqqaE&refer=japan North Korea Nuclear Test Confirmed by U.S. Intelligence Agency October 16, 2006 Bloomberg October 16, 2006 dead https://web.archive.org/web/20070930030836/http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601101&sid=aO7kW.RjqqaE&refer=japan September 30, 2007 mdy-all United States officials suggested the device may have been a nuclear explosive that misfired. An anonymous official at the North Korean Embassy in Beijing told a South Korean newspaper that the explosive output was smaller than expected.https://web.archive.org/web/20061028102616/http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/10/korea.building.bomb.ap/index.html October 28, 2006 http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/10/korea.building.bomb.ap/index.html Dud or deception? Experts examine N. Korea claims CNN October 10, 2006 Because of the secretive nature of North Korea and small yield of the test, there remains some question as to whether it was a successful test of an unusually small device (which would have required sophisticated technology), or a partially failed "fizzle" or dud. A scientific paper later estimated the yield as 0.48 kilotons.Lian-Feng Zhao, Xiao-Bi Xie, Wei-Min Wang, and Zhen-Xing Yao, "Regional Seismic Characteristics of the 9 October 2006 North Korean Nuclear Test https://web.archive.org/web/20150923195043/http://www.bssaonline.org/content/98/6/2571.short September 23, 2015 , Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, December 2008 98:2571–2589; 10.1785/0120080128 Reportedly the Chinese government was given a 20-minute advance notification that the test was about to occur. China sent an emergency alert to Washington, D.C., through the U.S. Embassy in Beijing at which time President George W. Bush was told by National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley "shortly after" 10 p.m. (UTC-5) that a test was imminent.http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/09/asia/web.1009korea.php Test follows warning from U.N. International Herald Tribune October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061009113311/http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/09/asia/web.1009korea.php October 9, 2006 live Background October 2017 North Korea and weapons of mass destruction North Korea had been suspected of maintaining a clandestine nuclear weapons development program since the early 1980sNuclear Weapons Program – North Korea Pike John GlobalSecurity.org 21 May 2020 https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/nuke.htm when it constructed a plutonium-producing Magnox nuclear reactor at Yongbyon, and various diplomatic means had been used by the international community to attempt to limit North Korea's nuclear work to peaceful and scientific means and encouraging North Korea to participate in international treaties. In 1994, the United States and North Korea signed the "Agreed Framework", whereby North Korea agreed to freeze its graphite moderated reactor program in exchange for fuel, moves toward normalization of political and economic relations, and the construction of two modern nuclear power plants powered by light-water reactors. Eventually, North Korea's existing nuclear facilities were to be dismantled, and the spent reactor fuel taken out of the country. However, in 2002, rumors circulated that North Korea was pursuing both uranium enrichment technology and plutonium reprocessing technologies in defiance of the Agreed Framework. North Korea reportedly told American diplomats in private that they were in possession of nuclear weapons, citing American failures to uphold their own end of the "Agreed Framework" as a motivating force. North Korea later clarified that it did not possess weapons yet, but that it had a right to possess them. In late 2002 and early 2003, North Korea began to take steps to eject International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors while re-routing spent fuel rods for plutonium reprocessing for weapons purposes. Throughout the course of 2003, North Korean and American officials exchanged harsh words and staged military exercises which were interpreted by the other party to be aggressive. As late as the end of 2003, North Korea claimed that it would freeze its nuclear program in exchange for American concessions – in particular a non-aggression treaty – but a final agreement was not reached and talks continued to be cancelled or fall through. North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003 after not receiving light-water reactors promised by the United States which were going to be delivered in exchange for North Korea not developing their own power plants, as understood in the "Agreed Framework". In early 2004 former Los Alamos National Laboratory director Siegfried S. Hecker, as part of an unofficial U.S. delegation, was allowed to inspect North Korea's plutonium production facilities. Hecker later testified before the United States Congress that while North Korea seemed to have successfully extracted plutonium from the spent fuel rods, he saw no evidence at the time that they had produced a workable weapon.Visit to the Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center in North Korea, Siegfried S. Hecker, January 21, 2004 In 2007, the former senior scientist of Pakistan, Abdul Qadeer Khan claimed that North Korea's nuclear program was well advanced before his visit in 1993 with Benazir Bhutto, former prime minister.https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4964884&page=1 ABC Exclusive: Pakistani Bomb Scientist Breaks Silence May 30, 2008 ABC NewsSelf-serving claims by AQ Khan should not be taken at face value September 2011 In September 2004, though, North Korean officials announced they had successfully processed Yongbyon plutonium into a workable nuclear deterrent. Through 2005 more diplomatic talks were attempted between the United States, North Korea, South Korea, China, Japan, and Russia (the six-party talks) but little concrete change occurred. Because North Korea had not conducted a successful test of a nuclear device, the extent of its nuclear weapons program remained ambiguous through 2005 and much of 2006. Though North Korea conducted numerous missile tests (some of which were branded failures by international expertsOctober 2014), the question of whether they had actually mastered all aspects of nuclear weapons technology – ranging from material production to complex nuclear weapon design needed to produce the final detonation – remained unanswered. 2013 there was agreement in the U.S. intelligence community that North Korea could build a "modest" bomb with a yield of between 6 and 10 kilotons, but disagreement between Defense Intelligence Agency, CIA and the United States State Department over whether it could deploy a miniaturized warhead on a missile.Sanger David Contrasting Views on North Korea Underscore Sensitivities and Lack of Evidence https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/13/world/asia/contrasting-views-on-north-korea-underscore-sensitivities-and-lack-of-evidence.html?_r=0 9 October 2014 New York Times April 12, 2013 North Korean statements Rumours of an impending nuclear test circulated during 2005 and early 2006, though none came to immediate fruition. On 3 October 2006, however, North Korea claimed that it would soon conduct a nuclear test,Q59596578. See also Medalia, Jonathan. "Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty: Background and Current Developments." Congressional Research Service. November 23, 2009. p. 9. 978-1-4379-2746-7. and on 9 October 2006, the state claimed to have successfully conducted a test. The Korean Central News Agency, the state's news agency, issued the following statement:http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2006/200610/news10/10.htm#1 DPRK Successfully Conducts Underground Nuclear Test Korean Central News Agency October 10, 2006 October 10, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061026061534/http://www.kcna.co.jp/item/2006/200610/news10/10.htm October 26, 2006 The field of scientific research in the DPRK successfully conducted an underground nuclear test under secure conditions on October 9, Juche 95 (2006), at a stirring time when all the people of the country are making a great leap forward in the building of a great, prosperous, powerful socialist nation. It has been confirmed that there was no such danger as radioactive emission in the course of the nuclear test as it was carried out under scientific consideration and careful calculation. The nuclear test was conducted with indigenous wisdom and technology 100 percent. It marks an historic event as it greatly encouraged and pleased the KPA and people that have wished to have powerful self-reliant defence capability. It will contribute to defending the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the area around it. Later, the North Korean envoy to the UN said it would be better for the Security Council to offer its congratulations rather than pass "useless" resolutions.US Asks for Tough UN Sanctions On North Korea https://web.archive.org/web/20061010173639/http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-10-09-voa41.cfm October 10, 2006 Voice of America October 9, 2006 Threats of war On 10 October 2006, an unnamed North Korean official was quoted as saying that North Korea could launch a nuclear missile unless the United States would sit down for face-to-face talks.http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/10/korea.nuclear.test/index.html North Korean test 'went wrong,' U.S. official says October 11, 2006 CNN https://web.archive.org/web/20061010185909/http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/10/korea.nuclear.test/index.html October 10, 2006 However, few, if any, military and defense experts believed that the North Koreans possessed the technology to mount a nuclear warhead to a ballistic missile.http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nuke/index.html Nuclear Weapons Program – North Korea October 11, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061009214347/http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/nuke/index.html October 9, 2006 live On 11 October the Associated Press reported that North Korea had threatened war if attempts would be made to penalize them through further sanctions.http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/K/KOREAS_NUCLEAR?SITE=CADIU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT North Korea threatens war over sanctions October 11, 2006 Greimel, Hans Associated Press October 11, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061011121312/http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/K/KOREAS_NUCLEAR?SITE=CADIU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT October 11, 2006 dead This statement occurred even as Japan moved to tighten sanctions on the country. South Korea said they were ensuring their troops were prepared for nuclear war. A U.S. Army major, stationed along the border between North and South Korea, said that the overall situation was "calm" but that "Communist troops were more boldly trying to provoke their southern counterparts: spitting across the demarcation line, making throat-slashing hand gestures, flashing their middle fingers and trying to talk to the troops." On the day of the test, the North Korean Foreign Ministry stated that "if the U.S. keeps pestering us and increases pressure, we will regard it as a declaration of war and will take a series of physical corresponding measures".North Korea: Increased U.S. Pressure Would Be 'Act of War' Fox News October 11, 2006 On 17 October, North Korea denounced UN sanctions over its nuclear test as a declaration of war and the United States and other nations suspected that North Korea was seeking to conduct a second nuclear test despite international pressure.North Korea Declares UN Scanctions As An Declaration Of warYahoo News October 17, 2006 Kim Jong Il's alleged apology On 20 October 2006, North Korean leader Kim Jong Il allegedly said that he was "sorry" over his country's nuclear test, and wished to return to talk with the United Nations. According to a Chinese envoy, Kim Jong-il said: If the U.S. makes a concession to some degree, we will also make a concession to some degree, whether it be bilateral talks or six-party talks Kim Jong Il also stated that he had no future plans to test another nuclear device; the U.S. State Department discounted this report.https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna15341349 Report: Kim 'sorry' about N. Korea nuclear test The Associated Press and Reuters October 20, 2006 October 30, 2006 mdy NBC News Return to six-party talks On 31 October 2006, North Korea agreed to rejoin six-nation disarmament talks. The agreement was struck in a day of unpublicized discussions between the senior envoys from the United States, China and North Korea at a government guesthouse in Beijing.https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna15494100 North Korea to rejoin 6-nation nuclear talks NBC News November 1, 2006 March 15, 2026 The talks resumed on 18 December 2006. Yield estimates and authenticity thumb|200px|The site vs. 50-year predictions, according to USGS, indicating the probability of the detected blast being due to natural causes. The low yield of the test initially raised questions as to whether it was a nuclear explosion but detection of airborne radioactive isotopes by a United States military aircraft confirmed that it was a nuclear explosion.https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6056370.stm US confirms N Korea nuclear test BBC News October 16, 2006 May 27, 2009 Radioactive isotopes of the element xenon are produced by the atom splitting that takes place in nuclear explosions and readily seeps out even from underground tests.Collins Graham P. Kim's Big Fizzle Scientific American January 2007 296 1 18–18B https://www.sciam.com/ 18 February 2014 10.1038/scientificamerican0107-18 17186822 2007SciAm.296a..18C subscription The advance warning of the test sent to the Chinese government reportedly said that the planned test yield was to be equivalent to approximately four kilotons in strength, but most outside estimates, based largely on seismic readings, put the yield at much less.cnn.com, U.S. official: 'Something went wrong' on blast https://web.archive.org/web/20061011115121/http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/10/11/korea.nuclear.test/index.html October 11, 2006 At a meeting with President Vladimir Putin, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov stated that "the power of the tests carried out was 5 to 15 kilotons",http://www.kommersant.com/p712035/r_539/North_Korea_Nuclear_Test/ North Korea's Power Checked October 11, 2006 dead https://web.archive.org/web/20061031131106/http://www.kommersant.com/p712035/r_539/North_Korea_Nuclear_Test/ October 31, 2006 though this early estimate is much higher than any other international estimate. An early report by the Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources of South Korea said the blast was equivalent to an earthquake registering 3.58 on the Richter scale,http://www.chosun.com/national/news/200610/200610090665.html 지진파가 나옵니다. 폭발입니다 Seismic waves. An Explosion. The Chosun Ilbo October 9, 2006 October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061027024737/http://www.chosun.com/national/news/200610/200610090665.html October 27, 2006 dead ko mdy-all which corresponds to the explosion of 100 tons of TNT. This was later revised to at least 800 tons,https://news.sbs.co.kr/section_news/news_read.jsp?news_id=N1000173833 북핵 실험의 규모와 의미 The Scale and Implication of North Korea's Nuclear Test SBS October 9, 2006 October 9, 2006 ko corresponding to a blast wave of 4.2. The U.S. Geological Survey also estimates the blast wave at 4.2.http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002832.html Defense Tech: NORK Nuclear Test: It's A Dud (Updated) usurped https://web.archive.org/web/20061017000534/http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002832.html October 17, 2006 (Note that 4.2 is considerably more powerful than 3.58 because the Richter scale is a logarithmic scale.) According to Jane's Defence Weekly, "initial and unconfirmed South Korean reports indicate that the test was a fission device with a yield of 0.55 kT ... The figure of 0.55 kT, however, seems too low given the 4.2 register on the Richter scale. This could suggest – depending upon the geological make-up of the test site – a yield of 2–12 kT".http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jdw/jdw061009_2_n.shtml North Korea claims nuclear test October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061016163754/http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jdw/jdw061009_2_n.shtml October 16, 2006 live mdy An official in France's Atomic Energy Commission reported that they estimated the blast was "about or less than a kiloton" and expressed uncertainty about whether or not the blast was actually nuclear.http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/10/09/europe/EU_GEN_France_Koreas_Nuclear.php France says North Korean blast 'about half a kiloton' October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061029174138/http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/10/09/europe/EU_GEN_France_Koreas_Nuclear.php October 29, 2006 liveScientists Probe North Korea Nuke Test https://web.archive.org/web/20190220085126/http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DETECTING_NUCLEAR_TESTS?SITE=PAYOK&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT February 20, 2019 October 9, 2006 There have been various large planned and unplanned non-nuclear explosions comparable in yield to small nuclear detonations, such as the U.S. "Minor Scale" explosion from 1985, which used conventional explosives to simulate a 4 kiloton detonation. According to the Washington Times anonymous U.S. intelligence sources speculated there "was a seismic event that registered about 4 on the Richter scale, but it still isn't clear if it was a nuclear test. You can get that kind of seismic reading from high explosives".Gertiz, Bill, U.S. doubts Korean test was nuclear, Washington Times, October 10, 2006 The Wall Street Journal explains that this blast was equivalent to the explosive force of about US$100,000 worth of ammonium nitrate.https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB116070423640191496?mod=opinion Commentary – Parody Physics Package? Seitz, Russel October 13, 2006 Wall Street Journal October 13, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20090111053508/http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116070423640191496.html?mod=opinion January 11, 2009 live International experts have said that it will take some time to confirm whether it was a successful nuclear test, as North Korea claimed, or an unsuccessful one ("fizzle"), or perhaps not even a nuclear test at all.http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2006/October/theworld_October303.xml&section=theworld Success, failure or bluff? Scientists pore over data October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061031071948/http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data%2Ftheworld%2F2006%2FOctober%2Ftheworld_October303.xml&section=theworld October 31, 2006 dead However 7 years later, after the 2013 nuclear test, the Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, a state-run geology research institute in Germany, estimated the yield ranging at minimum of 700 tons to the max of 2 kilotons and the 2009 test ranges from minimum of 5 kilotons to the max of 12 kilotons instead with relevant statistics.BGR registered putative third North Korean nuclear test http://translate.google.com.hk/translate?hl=zh-CN&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bgr.bund.de%2FDE%2FThemen%2FErdbeben-Gefaehrdungsanalysen%2FSeismologie%2FKernwaffenteststopp%2FKernexplosionen%2FKernex%2Fnordkorea_20130212.html 15 February 2013 2 March 2013 January 28, 2016 https://web.archive.org/web/20160128042837/http://translate.google.com.hk/translate?hl=zh-CN&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bgr.bund.de%2FDE%2FThemen%2FErdbeben-Gefaehrdungsanalysen%2FSeismologie%2FKernwaffenteststopp%2FKernexplosionen%2FKernex%2Fnordkorea_20130212.html deadBGR registriert vermutlichen dritten nordkoreanischen Kernwaffentest http://www.bgr.bund.de/DE/Themen/Erdbeben-Gefaehrdungsanalysen/Seismologie/Kernwaffenteststopp/Kernexplosionen/Kernex/nordkorea_20130212.html 15 February 2013 2 March 2013 March 18, 2016 https://web.archive.org/web/20160318025658/http://www.bgr.bund.de/DE/Themen/Erdbeben-Gefaehrdungsanalysen/Seismologie/Kernwaffenteststopp/Kernexplosionen/Kernex/nordkorea_20130212.html dead By comparison, the first plutonium core nuclear device tested by the United States (Trinity test) had a yield of 20 kilotons of TNT, and the first nuclear device detonated by India in 1974, though of primitive design, had a yield in the region of 8 kilotons of TNT. If the North Korean nuclear test was less than even a kiloton in yield, it would be a historically small inaugural nuclear test. Even if it were as many as the reported intentional yield of 4 kt it would be the smallest nuclear test ever conducted by a state as a first test. Some advanced nuclear powers have produced very small tactical nuclear weapons in the low-kiloton range, but their development is far more technologically challenging than that of weapons in the 15–20 kiloton range, requiring advanced weapons materials and core geometries.For general reference on the history of nuclear weapons and on general parameters of nuclear weapons design, see, for example, Carey Sublette's Nuclear Weapon Archive (esp. the Nuclear Weapons Frequently Asked Questions section). For detailed information, see Chuck Hansen, The Swords of Armageddon: US nuclear weapons development since 1945 (Sunnyvale, CA: Chukelea Publications, 1995). If the North Korean device was significantly short of its predicted yield, it could be classified as a "fizzle" indicating that some aspect of the nuclear weapon design or material production did not function correctly. In a fizzle the warhead blows itself apart too fast for the nuclear reactions to generate a large amount of energy, or fails to form a supercritical mass for some other reason. A fizzle can result from predetonation, insufficient precision in the explosive lenses used to compress the plutonium core, or impurities in the plutonium itself, among other factors. A fizzle can also result from the use of reactor grade plutonium rather than weapons-grade material.https://www.ccnr.org/plute.html Reactor-Grade and Weapons-Grade Plutonium in Nuclear Explosives On 13 October 2006, CNN reported that two U.S. government officials with access to classified information stated that the initial air sampling over North Korea shows no indication of radioactive debris from the event that North Korea says was an underground nuclear test. Some hours later, the report was reversed and stated there was evidence of radiation, though not enough data has been collected yet to be conclusive. The newspaper Hankyoreh reported an unnamed North Korean diplomat had acknowledged that the actual yield was smaller than expected. On 16 October 2006, the United States government reported that a test had found radioactive gas compatible with a nuclear explosion. The office of John Negroponte, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence confirmed that the size of the explosion was less than 1 kiloton. http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/37C567C3-7C0A-4454-92DA-8B6B961637FA.htm US confirms N Korea nuclear test October 17, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061027122608/http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/37C567C3-7C0A-4454-92DA-8B6B961637FA.htm October 27, 2006 dead mdy-all The explosion was also recorded worldwide by the global monitoring system operated by the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO). Two weeks after the detonation, a CTBTO radionuclide monitoring station in northern Canada detected traces of the radioactive noble gas xenon in the air. Backtracking calculations by analysts at the CTBTO indicated that the xenon particles originated from North Korea and that the explosion had been nuclear in nature. http://www.ctbto.org/press-centre/highlights/2007/the-ctbt-verification-regime-put-to-the-test-the-event-in-the-dprk-on-9-october-2006/page-1/ The CTBTO verification regime put to the test, CTBTO Press Centre 2007 2012-04-16 November 21, 2020 https://web.archive.org/web/20201121101337/https://www.ctbto.org/press-centre/highlights/2007/the-ctbt-verification-regime-put-to-the-test-the-event-in-the-dprk-on-9-october-2006/page-1/ dead Test site location 200px|thumb|A map of the Korean peninsula. The estimated location of the test (41.311°N, 129.114°E) is marked in red. 200px|thumb|left|NASA Blue Marble Image of estimated location of the test (41.2943° N 129.1342° E) According to initial reports from South Korean government sources, the test was carried out at a mountain in Musadan-ri in Hwadae-kun, near the city of Kilchu, in North Hamgyŏng province on the northeast coast.https://www.smh.com.au/news/world/n-koreas-nuclear-test-happiness/2006/10/09/1160246048496.html N Korea's nuclear test backlash October 9, 2006 The Sydney Morning Herald October 9, 2006 However, later reports from the state National Intelligence Service identified the site as being a place in Sangpyong-ri, about 15 km from the coastal city of Kimchaek and about 50 km west of Musadan-ri.http://home.kyodo.co.jp/modules/fstStory/index.php?storyid=275873 North Korean nuclear test site October 9, 2006 dead https://web.archive.org/web/20070929152532/http://home.kyodo.co.jp/modules/fstStory/index.php?storyid=275873 September 29, 2007 mdy-all The Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources reported seismic waves measuring 3.58 on the Richter scale. The United States Geological Survey reported that a seismic event occurred at 01:35:28 UTC (10:35:28 am local time, UTC+9) on 9 October 2006, and measured 4.3 on the Richter scale. It occurred at the geographic coordinates 41 17 38.4 N 129 08 2.4 E region:KP-HAB_type:landmark with a horizontal location uncertainty of ±9.6 km (6.0 miles). This is near Mantapsan, 73 km mi on north of Kimchaek, 90 km mi on southwest of Chongjin, 180 km mi on south of Yanji, and 385 km mi on northeast of Pyongyang.https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/2006/ustqab/ Magnitude 4.3–North Korea (2006 October 09 01:35:28 UTC) United States Geological Survey (USGS) October 9, 2010 December 11, 2010 dead https://web.archive.org/web/20140427050803/http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/2006/ustqab/ April 27, 2014 International reaction International condemnation of the tests by governments has been nearly unanimous, including from North Korea's close ally and benefactor, China.https://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-10-03-north-korea-nuclear_x.htm North Korea's neighbors caution it not to conduct nuclear test October 10, 2006 USA Today October 4, 2006 China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement October 9 calling the test a "flagrant and brazen" violation of international opinion, and adding that China "firmly opposes" North Korea's actions. The Ministry also stated "China strongly calls on North Korea to conform to its denuclearisation commitment, stop all the activities that might further de-stabilise the region, and back to the Six Party talks".Huang Kristin 2017-09-04 How China reacted to previous North Korean nuclear tests https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2109692/how-china-responded-previous-north-korean-nuclear-tests 2026-01-18 South China Morning Post en All five veto-wielding permanent members of the United Nations Security Council condemned the nuclear test. On October 10, however, South Korean Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook told Parliament that South Korea will not support any United Nations resolution containing military measures against North Korea in retaliation for its nuclear test.http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/234718/1/.html South Korea opposes any UN military measures against North October 10, 2006 October 1, 2007 https://web.archive.org/web/20071001030106/http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/234718/1/.html dead Economic impact Negative economic effects were seen throughout the region after the test. South Korea's KOSPI index fell 2.4% to 1319.4,http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B8416EB92-BEF2-4D62-A9C7-C886F283F75A%7D&siteid= Seoul stocks tumble after North Korea confirms nuke test October 9, 2006 forcing the Korea Exchange to suspend trading for five minutes upon receiving the news.https://www.ft.com/content/7c9f359a-5744-11db-9110-0000779e2340 N Korea says conducted nuclear test October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061014105413/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/7c9f359a-5744-11db-9110-0000779e2340.html October 14, 2006 live The Japanese and Taiwanese stock exchanges were closed for a market holiday on the day of the test.https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20602063&sid=a3VyBF9OeQ4Y&refer=movers_by_index Market impact October 9, 2006 Bloomberg October 9, 2006 The Japanese yen also fell to a seven-month low against the United States dollar while oil on the world market rose above US$60 a barrel.http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/848142 Nth Korea says nuclear test conducted October 9, 2006 March 5, 2026 https://web.archive.org/web/20260305032011/https://www.tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/848142 dead Gold prices rose 1% as a safe haven investment.http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/markets.aspx?ID=BD4A286371 Gold prices rise 1% October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20070929092910/http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/markets.aspx?ID=BD4A286371 September 29, 2007 Several stock markets in Asia from the Singapore Exchange to the Philippine Stock Exchange have traded lower, possibly due to the tests.http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/234563/1/.html Asian stocks tumble on North Korean nuclear test announcement October 9, 2006 October 1, 2007 https://web.archive.org/web/20071001061316/http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/234563/1/.html dead American stock markets were mixed, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average down at its open the next day; however, at 10:30 am EDT, the Dow rebounded and concluded the day with an increase of 7.60 points (+0.06%).https://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=%5EDJI Current Dow Jones Industrial Average trading October 9, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061006032136/https://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=%5Edji October 6, 2006 live NSE and BSE of India, however, showed some strength. United Nations' response United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718 On 14 October 2006, the UN Security Council unanimously approved limited military and economic sanctions against North Korea. All five permanent members stated that the sanctions, set out in UNSC Resolution 1718, were intended to penalize the country's regime, not inhabitants. They also stated that if North Korea were willing to cooperate and complied with all the measures contained in the resolution, the sanctions would be lifted. The United States compromised on its initial desire to block all imports of military equipment, and to have an unlimited reference to Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter so providing a legal justification for future military action, in order to gain full support for the resolution.Arms Control Today http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_11/NKTest.asp North Korean Test Provokes Widespread Condemnation November 5, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20061108201518/http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2006_11/NKTest.asp November 8, 2006 dead November 2006 mdy-all See also 2006 North Korean missile test Japan–North Korea relations Japan–North Korea Pyongyang Declaration (2002) List of nuclear weapons tests of North Korea 2009 North Korean nuclear test 2013 North Korean nuclear test January 2016 North Korean nuclear test September 2016 North Korean nuclear test List of states with nuclear weapons Mantapsan Milestone nuclear explosions North Korea and weapons of mass destruction North Korea–United States relations Six-party talks (2003–2009) United Nations Security Council Resolution 1718 References External links Feature: North Korean Nuclear Test, Arms Control Today, November 2006 UN-Resolution 1718 full text M 4.3 Nuclear Explosion – North Korea – United States Geological Survey Seismic data from Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology North Korea's nuclear facilities by Google Earth, including the site of the October 2006 test Position (according to USGS) at Google Maps Military history of the Chik-Tong area Newspaper article on reasons for conducting test Satellite Picture of test site on BBC News website CNN report on nuclear test CTBTO Press Centre, 'Infamous Anniversary': First DPRK nuclear test Wikinews story chronology 2005 February 10: "North Korea declares it has nuclear weapons; cancels talks" February 19: "North Korea has no further interest in negotiations with United States" May 11: "North Korea removes spent nuclear fuel rods" June 23: "No resolution in North Korean nuclear stalemate" September 19: "Nuclear arms agreement reached with North Korea" 2006 August 18: "North Korea reportedly planning nuclear bomb test" October 3: "North Korea says it will test a nuclear weapon in the future" October 9: "North Korea claims it has conducted a nuclear test" North Korea Politics Nuclear test Category:North Korean nuclear weapons testing Category:Underground nuclear weapons testing Category:October 2006 in Asia