And then there were nine. Nine nuclear powers, that is, including North Korea. There will be more.

(Editor’s note: While most news accounts say North Korea brings the number of nuclear powers to eight, they do not include Israel which is widely believed to have nuclear weapons.)

Four points to make:

First, there will be much hand-wringing here in the United States about what the American president – Bill Clinton, George W. Bush – did or did not do to stop the North Koreans from ramping up their nuclear program over the past dozen years or so.

Yes, it is true the Clinton administration did not bargain effectively with the North Koreans. And, yes, it is true the Bush administration mostly ignored North Korea as it focused its attention on the Middle East.

And, yes, it is further true the Bush Doctrine of “regime change” for rogue nations probably cemented the desire of rogue nations to develop nuclear weapons, for reasons of self-defense, as well as national aggrandizement. What dictator wants to end up like Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia or Saddam Hussein of Iraq – who were non-nuclear, and thus weak, and who ended up in jail cells? Far better to be a dictator with a nuclear weapon, such as Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan or, now, Kim Jong-Il of North Korea.

It would have been nice if the American president had been “working” on this problem, if he had convened an emergency summit of the relevant powers. But let’s be honest: The most Herculean diplomatic efforts probably wouldn’t have made any difference to the North Koreans.

The simple reality is that nuclear weapons are an important emblem of national power – arguably the emblem of national power. And so leaders want them, and international opinion, as well as international law, be damned. Indeed, the United States has been actively exploring new kinds of nukes for new uses, such as “bunker busting.” And, no doubt, other members of the nuclear club are pursuing their own “improvement” programs as well.

That’s the dangerous world we live in, where nuclear know-how is widespread and spreading ever wider. Until such time as the lamb lies down with the lion – and the lamb survives the experience – there will be arms races, and nuclear arms races.

Which leads us to the second point: We should assume that other countries in Asia will also “go nuclear.” Even before the North Korean nuke, the South Koreans have had the capacity to “become” a nuclear power at the issuance of an order and the flick of a switch. After all, if deterrence is a good idea for Washington, it is surely a good idea for Seoul, confronting nearby threats not only from Pyongyang, but from powerful neighbors China and Russia.

And elsewhere in Asia a newly assertive Japan is eager to develop a military equal to its economy. Taiwan, for its part, knows that nuclear weapons are an “equalizer” in its struggle to stay separate from China.

Third, the same brutal logic holds true for the rest of the world. Nuke-hungry Iran must be feeling good right now; it stands to benefit if the international community is distracted by developments in East Asia. Indeed, show me a big country that wants to be a bigger country, and I’ll show you a nuclear wannabe, including Egypt, South Africa, Brazil and Venezuela.

Fourth, and finally, what should America do? Missile defense is obviously a good idea, as is improving port and border security. But beyond improving our defenses, we don’t have many cards to play. Yes, we are the world’s only superpower, but our power is not so great that we can thwart other countries, even rinky-dink countries, from mastering technology that has been around, after all, for 60 years.

Oh, maybe there is one thing to be done: Looking ahead to the nuked-up future, urban dwellers might conclude that it’s not such a good idea to be living or working in a high-profile downtown area.