China's strategy in Korean peninsula
- Thread starter Phead128
- Start date
One thing I worry about is the NK-US reapproachment. That's basically a nightmare scenario for China. If you look at the Chinese pattern and assume the North Koreans are just playing out of the Chinese script, this is basically cloning what the Chinese did to the Russians.
China goes nuclear, with the Americans implicitly backing a Chinese bomb, and then Sino-Russian tensions raise to an all-time high with skirmishes on the border. The Chinese then align with the Americans against the Soviet Union, helping hasten the Soviet Union's implosion.
Applied to North Korea, what we see instead is that the North Koreans go nuclear, and provoke crises with the Chinese. For instance, if the Chinese were to cut off the supply of crude to North Korea, the nuclear blackmail scenario would become manifest, being an analogue to the Sino-Russian border skirmishes, and send a signal to Trump that North Korea could be of assistance in containing China.
If there is a North Korean-US reapproachment for the same reasons, China now has the same problem as it would with Korean unification, with US troops now on its border defending Kim Jong Un, an aggressive and militarized state on its border, with nuclear weapons, and possibly aligned with South Korea and Japan.
China could potentially try to break this deadlock by aligning with South Korea, but what would SK-NK relations look like if NK was an American ally?
China goes nuclear, with the Americans implicitly backing a Chinese bomb, and then Sino-Russian tensions raise to an all-time high with skirmishes on the border. The Chinese then align with the Americans against the Soviet Union, helping hasten the Soviet Union's implosion.
Applied to North Korea, what we see instead is that the North Koreans go nuclear, and provoke crises with the Chinese. For instance, if the Chinese were to cut off the supply of crude to North Korea, the nuclear blackmail scenario would become manifest, being an analogue to the Sino-Russian border skirmishes, and send a signal to Trump that North Korea could be of assistance in containing China.
If there is a North Korean-US reapproachment for the same reasons, China now has the same problem as it would with Korean unification, with US troops now on its border defending Kim Jong Un, an aggressive and militarized state on its border, with nuclear weapons, and possibly aligned with South Korea and Japan.
China could potentially try to break this deadlock by aligning with South Korea, but what would SK-NK relations look like if NK was an American ally?
Would that lead to US allowing Korean reunification? And would a reunified Korea have more interest in enmity with China ( about what? ) or in economic cooperation with China and all of Asia?
North Korea would not want to reunify with South Korea. It'd have a position similar to China during the late Cold War--it'd be independent via its nuclear arsenal, but not inclined to, say, unify with its southern neighbor. Having North Korea as a wildcard is also useful for the United States, since North Korea's politics allow it to take aggressive action without taking South Korea down with it.
A more interesting question would be what level of liberalization North Korea would permit if it were US-aligned. Alternately, a nuclear North Korea could play all sides against the other; if the Chinese threaten to cut off crude imports, the US can supply it instead, and vice versa.
The problem with small communist states, however, is that they're much more unstable than large communist states. Note Vietnam's move to intraparty democracy, for instance. If the Kim regime's goal is to hold onto power and continue its effective monarchy, it would continue to stall liberalization to protect its politics. Unlike China, North Korea has little strategic potential, so it might prefer social stagnancy a la Saudi Arabia.
A more interesting question would be what level of liberalization North Korea would permit if it were US-aligned. Alternately, a nuclear North Korea could play all sides against the other; if the Chinese threaten to cut off crude imports, the US can supply it instead, and vice versa.
The problem with small communist states, however, is that they're much more unstable than large communist states. Note Vietnam's move to intraparty democracy, for instance. If the Kim regime's goal is to hold onto power and continue its effective monarchy, it would continue to stall liberalization to protect its politics. Unlike China, North Korea has little strategic potential, so it might prefer social stagnancy a la Saudi Arabia.
This is precisely the case and the failure to discount the blindingly obvious in favour of wishful thinking is sadly depressing.
If the armistice is breached and the Korean war restarts, Russia and China will simply look to win it, once and for all and that means the reunification of the peninsular under Pyongyang.
This is nothing to do with whether Moscow and Beijing like the Kims and nothing to do with whether or not they are seeking war. Clearly both countries would wish circumstances to be otherwise, but the overriding concern is and remains strategic security. Under such circumstances and despite every effort to avoid conflict, once conflict restarts, they would join it without restraint to achieve the earliest possible full and complete victory
I would go further and say that all sides would not assume that the conflict would remain locallised to the peninsular and would use the opportunity to resolve other local strategic irritants as well.
Janes is usually slow with China news but the trade off is it tends to be reliable.
Environmental hazards created by a US strike on NK nuclear infrastructure directly negatively impacting China and Russia could be just as bad or worse than any refugees from or state collapse in NK. If this happens there is no doubt that China and Russia will not let the US get away with it without or with minimal consequences.
Given this and other factors already stated in the thread if recent military movements by China and Russia are true then they are most likely aimed at the US rather than NK in case of hostilities.
This can result from even a limited strike. But in such a case it would also be an absolute PR disaster for the US, in addition to the hard escalation risks, so it is unlikely that the US would take such action the Trump administration's grandstanding notwithstanding.
Environmental hazards created by a US strike on NK nuclear infrastructure directly negatively impacting China and Russia could be just as bad or worse than any refugees from or state collapse in NK. If this happens there is no doubt that China and Russia will not let the US get away with it without or with minimal consequences.
Given this and other factors already stated in the thread if recent military movements by China and Russia are true then they are most likely aimed at the US rather than NK in case of hostilities.
This can result from even a limited strike. But in such a case it would also be an absolute PR disaster for the US, in addition to the hard escalation risks, so it is unlikely that the US would take such action the Trump administration's grandstanding notwithstanding.
A US strike would be a violation to the armistice of 1953 to which China is a party so of course China, and Russia, take visible measures to discourage US.
That basically opposes your proposed "NK-US approachment". I think SK would not want to take up the bill of reunification alone either, so US will have to choose between NK and SK when US considering approachment with NK. Then why should US give up SK just to approach NK? The end is nobody want that.
Why do they have to choose? What's SK gonna do, kick the Americans out?
Like I said, NK becoming more independent is not a welcoming development for China, it needs to be nipped in the bud before the Americans came around to this fact. I find it funny that some here accuse others of being indoctrinated by the MSM to consider NK a threat to China, when the exact opposite is happening. China's persistent posturing since the 50s have convinced many of you, including most of the MSM, that NK is a bigger threat to the US. It's a job well done by the CCP, but the time has come to reap the rewards.
Like I said, NK becoming more independent is not a welcoming development for China, it needs to be nipped in the bud before the Americans came around to this fact. I find it funny that some here accuse others of being indoctrinated by the MSM to consider NK a threat to China, when the exact opposite is happening. China's persistent posturing since the 50s have convinced many of you, including most of the MSM, that NK is a bigger threat to the US. It's a job well done by the CCP, but the time has come to reap the rewards.