China's strategy in Korean peninsula

Phead128 said:

China will NOT willing to bear it's full might on NK within the narrow confines of deniclearization unless it's part of a wider "Grand Bargain" that includes full scale complete withdrawal of US troops/bases from Korean peninsula and a peace treaty to end Korean war.

It is the same demand Ming Emperor Wanli gave to Hideyoshi Toyotomi in 1596: the full scale withdrawal of all Japanese troops from Korea before diplomatic talks on tribute trade can resume.

In China's view, the nuclear issue is 80% US-NK issue, 20% CHN-NK issue.

Therefore, US has to give massive concessions for China to act on the nuclear issue, because the threat of a pro-US unified Korean proxy on Chinese border is far more threatening to Chinese fundamental security interests than what NK has done or will do. In other words, China is willing to risk a trade war with US over stable unified NK rather than a real real war with US over destabilized sanction-induced collapsed NK since we all know US-SK will swoop into annex the dead carcass, thus activating Chinese intervention.

In short, what is needed is a covert behind-the-door negotiation on a "Grand Bargain" on the date of Korea and East Asia/SCS/Taiwan in general between the Two Superpowers only. The Fate of Korean peninsula will once again be determined by foreign actors.

Click to expand...

No bargain. China is getting stronger and one day, will take all; Taiwan province, Korea, SCS, ECS issues must all resolve on Chinese terms fully. For China to bargain with the US in Asia is for a homeowner to bargain with a thief which things are to be stolen and which things left in the house. We can "bargain" when it comes to South America and Africa.

Korean people's opinions, will, and desires have not decide the Fate of the Korean peninsula since 1910, nor 2010, or 2110.

What US and China must do is allow China to roll back NK nukes inexchange for recognizing Chineses sphere of influence in East Asia that includes Korea, Taiwan, ECS, and SCS. Only then can US gain verfiable deniclearization of NK with Chinese help.

Otherwise China can just grow and take the whole lot when it's strong enough.

Phead128 said:

Korean people's opinions, will, and desires have not decide the Fate of the Korean peninsula since 1910, nor 2010, or 2110.

What US and China must do is allow China to roll back NK nukes inexchange for recognizing Chineses sphere of influence in East Asia that includes Korea, Taiwan, ECS, and SCS. Only then can US gain verfiable deniclearization of NK with Chinese help.

Otherwise China can just grow and take the whole lot when it's strong enough.

Click to expand...

What makes you think China would trust such a deal even if the US offered it given their persistent habit of going back on agreements and commitments with every new administration? Just look at Trump with the climate accord, the Iran deal, NAFTA and TPP etc.

Here is real hero of Korean war Liu Yudi

Force first grade hero who shot down and damaged eight US military planes during the Korean War, former Beijing Army Air Force Command · Liu Yudi. A bit similar?
What a progress from J-7 to J-20. Love looking at the old photos. From grandfather to grand son guarding China's sky

J-16、J-20のパイロット・陳瀏の外祖父は朝鮮戦争で8機の米軍機を撃墜・損傷した空軍一級戦闘英雄、元北京軍区空軍司令・劉玉堤である。ちょっと似てる？





[/QUOTE]

Remember this guy Liu Yudi Here is the video about his exploit shooting down 4 USAF in single engagement outmatch by 20 to 100 USAf fighter he still manage to shoot down 4
Interesting video It give a tidbit how unprepare China was at the onset of Korean war they only have 200 fighter vs 1200 US fighter and only 100 air time vs 1000 for the us pilot with many of them veteran of WWII
With english subtitle

So much for shooting down Noko ballistic missile
U.S. missile defense test unsuccessful: official
Reuters 2 hours 18 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military carried out an unsuccessful test to shoot down an incoming dummy missile from Hawaii on Wednesday, a U.S. official said, amid heightened concerns about North Korea's developing missile and nuclear program.

The official, speaking on the condition, said a SM-3 Block IIA missile was launched from an Aegis Ashore test site in Hawaii, but failed to hit another missile launched from an aircraft.

The missile, which is being developed by Raytheon Co, is used to target intermediate range missiles and is being developed with Japan.

The Missile Defense Agency did not comment on the outcome of the test, but confirmed that one had taken place.

"The Missile Defense Agency and U.S. Navy sailors manning the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex (AAMDTC) conducted a live-fire missile flight test using a Standard-Missile (SM)-3 Block IIA missile launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Kauai, Hawaii, Wednesday morning," Mark Wright, a spokesman for the agency, said.

An intercept test for the missile last June also failed, but there was a successful test in early 2017.

The last year has seen ramped-up North Korean missile launches, some of them over Japanese territory, and its sixth and most powerful nuclear test. These actions have prompted a stepped-up U.S.-led campaign to toughen U.N. sanctions, which Pyongyang has called an act of war.

(Reporting by Idrees Ali; Editing by Alistair Bell)

Phead128 said:

In short, what is needed is a covert behind-the-door negotiation on a "Grand Bargain" on the date of Korea and East Asia/SCS/Taiwan in general between the Two Superpowers only. The Fate of Korean peninsula will once again be determined by foreign actors.

Click to expand...

The US is at least 15 years away from being prepared psychologically for such a discussion, and indeed it may never be prepared.

As a rule, great powers do not surrender their prerogatives willingly, and the United States is probably more resistant to such voluntary change than most given its national mythologies of redemptive moral violence (War of Independence, Manifest Destiny, Civil War, WW2, Cold War).

If China seeks to create a new status quo on the Korea peninsula and/or throughout the broader Asia Pacific as you describe, it will more likely than not require war.

Op-ed by the recent candidate for US ambassador to South Korea Victor Cha related to the latest rumors of US consideration of a pre-emptive strike on North Korea, take it as you will.

Victor Cha: Giving North Korea a ‘bloody nose’ carries a huge risk to Americans
By Victor Cha January 30 at 8:28 PM


Fears of US ‘bloody nose’ attack on North Korea on the rise
Dropped US ambassador designate publishes scathing attack on limited strike option just prior to Trump’s State of Union address
By ANDREW SALMON JANUARY 31, 2018 1:14 PM (UTC+8)

Phead128 said:

China will NOT willing to bear it's full might on NK within the narrow confines of deniclearization unless it's part of a wider "Grand Bargain" that includes full scale complete withdrawal of US troops/bases from Korean peninsula and a peace treaty to end Korean war.

It is the same demand Ming Emperor Wanli gave to Hideyoshi Toyotomi in 1596: the full scale withdrawal of all Japanese troops from Korea before diplomatic talks on tribute trade can resume.

In China's view, the nuclear issue is 80% US-NK issue, 20% CHN-NK issue.

Therefore, US has to give massive concessions for China to act on the nuclear issue, because the threat of a pro-US unified Korean proxy on Chinese border is far more threatening to Chinese fundamental security interests than what NK has done or will do. In other words, China is willing to risk a trade war with US over stable unified NK rather than a real real war with US over destabilized sanction-induced collapsed NK since we all know US-SK will swoop into annex the dead carcass, thus activating Chinese intervention.

In short, what is needed is a covert behind-the-door negotiation on a "Grand Bargain" on the date of Korea and East Asia/SCS/Taiwan in general between the Two Superpowers only. The Fate of Korean peninsula will once again be determined by foreign actors.

Click to expand...

I agree with the rest except the "bargain" part. In geopolitical arena, one only force the other to bag for bargain. Never initiate a bargain when one is not able to grab everything at will. In another word, strategic bargain is just cover word of diplomacy (with a freaking big stick behind one's back). If one is not ready, one just wait and drag on. True bargain only exist in pure market sell and buy.

Remember the words of Marshal Chen Yi?

Some saying goes like this "nothing can be gained from the negotiation table if one can not get it from the battle field".

Insignius said:

It's the same shit as with the South China Sea ruling. China doesn't care, but it has still emboldened totally unrelated actors, such as France and Britain, to sail in the SCS and declare those things FON ops.

A Chinese loss at the WTO will invite half ( the western half) of the EU to slap sanctions on China, because they all hate China's rise to a power that isn't just selling cheap plastic toys and electronics, but increasingly high tech products that threatens them. The West will only be satisfied if China became a third world crap hole that can't produce anything of worth and only exists as a market for the West to conquer. Be it militarily or economically, the West will use any means to turn China into what they desire.

Click to expand...

No, not the loss of a WTO case, but failing or unwilling to deliver equal or more damaging retaliation will invite further assults.

It was not China's non appealing to the SCS "ruling" invited France and Britain's advanture. They would have done that regardless any rulings just like they invaded China for their opium trade in 1800s when opium trade within their own countries were illegal. No laws stopped them. So forget about these manipulated rules, big freaking stick is the only thing count, if one does not have it yet, just ignore the noise and beat back when ready.

taxiya said:

No, not the loss of a WTO case, but failing or unwilling to deliver equal or more damaging retaliation will invite further assults.

It was not China's non appealing to the SCS "ruling" invited France and Britain's advanture. They would have done that regardless any rulings just like they invaded China for their opium trade in 1800s when opium trade within their own countries were illegal. No laws stopped them. So forget about these manipulated rules, big freaking stick is the only thing count, if one does not have it yet, just ignore the noise and beat back when ready.

Click to expand...

A minor point, I am not sure about France, but in the UK, Opium only started to be controlled in 1868 with the introduction of the pharmacy act, which really only meant people bought their opium from a pharmacists rather than a general merchant. The aim was to reduce opium deaths by regulating those selling it rather than outlawing it.

Opium only became illegal in the UK in 1916 when the defence of the realm act was passed, and that was done because there were concerns that drug abuse was adversely affecting UK troops’ fighting abilities and the quality and suitability of new recruits during the war; and also ironically, because of good old fashion xenophobia and racism, since opium consumption in the UK at the time was strongly associated with the Chinese immigrants.

Sale of opium in China only really stopped after the British outlawed it themselves.

There are plenty of evil things the UK has done, but forcing opium on China while banning it in their own country was not one of them.