| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
brento1138
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
|
 Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 6:47 am Post subject: The Chinese Role with North Korea |
 |
|
I have to say, I am a bit confused with China these days. I find it a bit of a mystery that they still bother to support North Korea in any way. Lots of people say that "China wants stability in North East Asia" but I am not so sure about that. Why would China want South Korea to do well? Isn't South Korea a huge competitor to the Chinese? Wouldn't they be happy to see South Korea in financial ruins? Then more investment would come to the Chinese. Perhaps the Chinese automobile industry could take South Korea's place.
Personally, I think China likes North Korea as a buffer state between South Korea (a US ally) and itself. I can't imagine North Korea becoming "part" of China, as that would go against Koreans want for independence and China wouldn't have a whole lot to gain. The Chinese do not seem to want to join in with the world / the USA on North Korea, even though I believe it makes more sense for China to be a bigger ally with its best-ever trading partner: the USA.
So people, what's up with China? Curious what you have to say. Here's a quote from CNN to get you thinking a little. No comment on the article.
| Quote: |
CNN: And what about the role that China is playing?
Zakaria: That, to me, is the greatest mystery of this whole puzzle. So China is the country that everyone understands has the most influence with North Korea. It supplies North Korea with most of its energy, a very large amount of its food, and probably other forms of aid which it's a little less easy for outsiders to know about.
The Chinese have been pretty straight, as far as we can tell, with the North Koreans in saying that they really wanted one thing out of them which was some degree of stability and predictability. "Just don't rock the boat" seems to have been the Chinese mantra. And in return for that, we will not press too hard for the denuclearization of North Korea, we will not try regime change and we will protect you in the Security Council...
And here we are with North Korea doing something that seems highly unlikely to have been sanctioned by the Chinese. It clearly made the Chinese uncomfortable, and it raises important questions about what the nature of that relationship is, and frankly about Chinese foreign policy more broadly.
CNN: Is there a connection between's China's call for moderation in dealing with the Iranian nuclear issue and in dealing with the North Korea issue?
Zakaria: The Chinese basic view, whether of North Korea or Iran, is don't rock the boat, don't do anything that would cause disruption, or unpredictable change, because the way the Chinese see it, they're managing the world's most fast-moving but complicated economy. The last thing they need is some kind of abrupt change.
But here's the dilemma. If China is going to play a larger role in the region, in Asia, what does it say when the country they have the maximum influence on -- they have really one vassal state and that is North Korea -- and if they can't get the North Koreans to toe the line on what is a very reasonable request, what does it say about China's ability to conceive of a foreign policy, enact it, and contribute to regional stability? And I'm not talking about Chinese intentions, which may be perfectly fine.
But is China able to exert itself in foreign policy terms? Does it have the capacity, does it have the diplomatic skills? What is going on in that relationship between China and North Korea and why has it clearly not worked out the way the Chinese would have liked? The Chinese cannot be happy about what's happened here and it will be very interesting to see what they do about it. |
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/05/27/zakaria.korea.china/index.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?sid=awElM7vM4Vq4&pid=20601087
| Quote: |
May 27 (Bloomberg) -- Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao is likely to resist pressure to acknowledge that North Korea torpedoed a South Korean warship when he flies to Seoul tomorrow to meet President Lee Myung Bak and Japan�s Yukio Hatoyama.
China hasn�t followed South Korea, Japan and the U.S. in blaming North Korea for the March 26 sinking of the Cheonan, which killed 46 sailors. Vice Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun yesterday repeated a call for �restraint� by both sides and said China had no �firsthand information� on the sinking.
China wants to avoid a conflict on the Korean peninsula, and is concerned that taking South Korea�s side may provoke North Korea into further escalations and even lead to war, said Shen Dingli, vice dean of the Institute of International Affairs at Shanghai�s Fudan University.
�North Korea is dying, and we can make things worse,� Shen said. �We have assumed North Korea is not a rational actor.�
...
China has a big stake in stability in Northeast Asia. Japan and South Korea are China�s third- and fourth-biggest trading partners after the European Union and the U.S., with combined two-way trade reaching $485.1 billion in 2009, Chinese customs figures show.
Trade Imbalance
China�s two-way trade with North Korea, at $2.7 billion last year, is less than 1 percent of that total, even though the two countries share a 1,415-kilometer (880-mile) border and an alliance going back to China�s 1950 entry into the Korean War.
�If our region falls into chaos it will undermine the interests of all parties concerned,� Zhang said yesterday.
South Korea, Japan and the U.S. want the North to acknowledge its responsibility for the incident. An international panel on May 20 concluded North Korea was behind the attack. South Korea wants China to acknowledge the findings.
�They won�t be able to ignore the truth,� South Korean Foreign Minister Yu Myung Hwan said yesterday at a joint press conference with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Seoul. President Lee said on May 24 that �no responsible country in the international community will be able to deny the fact that the Cheonan was sunk by North Korea.�
...
China�s government may conclude that taking South Korea�s side will only stoke a cycle of escalation, Shen said. Wen is scheduled to have talks with Lee and meet with both Lee and Hatoyama at a three-nation summit on South Korea�s Jeju Island May 29-30. He met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il earlier this month in Beijing.
...
China may be willing to condemn the sinking of the Cheonan in a United Nations Security Council resolution provided that North Korea is not singled out for blame, Shen said. Such an outcome may end the cycle of escalation, he said.
...
�China is doing the thing that best suits China�s interests and everyone�s interest,� Shen said. �China is not pushing the envelope either on the North Korean side to be aggressive or on the South Korean to punish North Korea with warfare.� |
I agree with China. The loss of life on the ROK ship is a tragedy. An escalation could lead to a catastrophe. Sometimes you have to take a punch and walk away. We aren't Klingons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big win for China and it cost them nothing. At a time when the Chinese economy is set to stumble the U.S. was pushing them to open up to U.S. products. Also China needs the U.S. troops to stay in Korea to keep Japan from rearming. This incident shakes up American foreign policy, and shows the U.s. how much it needs China to help keep stability in the region. So the U.S. can not push so hard for economic changes . There is a bad side to this. The U.S. may not let this play out the way China wants. If the Obama administration draws down U.S. forces in South Korea it would change eveything. Unfortunately the U.s. does not have the political will power to do this so the game playing will continue and the South Korea people will be the victims. The wild card here is the japanese, if they see the U.s. as unwilling to call China's bluff or to shake up the situation then they could make a decision to rearm. A rearmed and nuclear Japan( they could have a working weapon in a few months according to experts) is Chinas worst nightmare. . Worldwar one basically started here with Japan and Russia fighting over the region, World war two also was over the North China /Korea region. Japan,russia, China and the U.S. have vital interests here. Korea is an unsinkable base that controls the seaways of North China, Eastern Russia and isthe springboard for invasion of Japan. But I think China has played this well and comes out looking like a peacekeeper. There is no way the north fired that torpedo with out approval from Beijing!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Worldwar one basically started here with Japan and Russia fighting over the region |
Are you suggesting a continuity between the Russo-Japanese War and World War I? Because Russia and Japan fought on the same side in World War I. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Worldwar one basically started here with Japan and Russia fighting over the region |
Are you suggesting a continuity between the Russo-Japanese War and World War I? Because Russia and Japan fought on the same side in World War I. |
You forget, of course, that in Bizarro Asia Russia and Japan have been in a continuous state of war since the Bizarro dawn of time.
You also forget that Klingons are utterly defenseless on hardwood floors, which predominate traditional North East Asian homes.
Also, I would add, that Korea and China are trade partners to one degree or another. The Chinese stand to benefit most from the status-quo -- especially the touchy-feely recent-history with the previous administration.
Furthermore, I enjoy ham.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
| . There is no way the north fired that torpedo with out approval from Beijing!!! |
I doubt it.
Above all, China wants stability in the region. That is why they give N.K oil and help it (vetoing/watering down sanctions). A collapsed regime with millions of N.K. refugees on the border and no government to return them to is one of China's worst nightmares. Plus N.K serves as a buffer zone between them and the Americans.
No way would it be a rational act for them to stir up trouble and tension in the region.
It was probably fired as a way to get the population's support for the regime or handover "Look those evil South Koreans/Americans are making trouble again!"
Either that or KJI was showing everyone that he makes his own decisions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I honestly believe the best realistic hope for peace and stability is a Chinese backed coup in Pyongyang. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Welsh Canadian
Joined: 03 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Japan would Banzai everyones ass |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
| There is no way the north fired that torpedo with out approval from Beijing!!! |
I disagree. There's a way that could happen. It's less likely that the Chinese would approve such an action.
Rollo is right about the value U.S. troops in South Korea present to China. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The continuity is that the European powers were angling for strategic control of Korea and manchuria just like they were battling for colonies in other regions. the russo- Japan conflict was the forerunner of the larger struggle of World war I. Germany had Qingdao located directly accross from Korea.so Japan became an ally of russia and the WEst to help evict the Germans from the region, after it had evicted the Russians. That was Japan's only interest in World War one. Like Germany and England were fighting for control of Africa, Japan was batttling the West for China. They fought a war with Russia in the thirties in Mongolia and Manchuria. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
| The continuity is that the European powers were angling for strategic control of Korea and manchuria just like they were battling for colonies in other regions. the russo- Japan conflict was the forerunner of the larger struggle of World war I. Germany had Qingdao located directly accross from Korea.so Japan became an ally of russia and the WEst to help evict the Germans from the region, after it had evicted the Russians. That was Japan's only interest in World War one. Like Germany and England were fighting for control of Africa, Japan was batttling the West for China. They fought a war with Russia in the thirties in Mongolia and Manchuria. |
I see what you're saying. Thanks for the clarification, and the history. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu May 27, 2010 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rollo wrote: |
| Like Germany and England were fighting for control of Africa. |
Woah there, WWI and the years before was not England and Germany fighting over Africa.
The main English concern was preventing Germany gaining overwhelming dominance in Europe and becoming a threat. There was also the naval arms race ("we want eight and we won't wait"). Keeping a balance of power in Europe had been British foreign policy for yonks. The ostensible reason for declaring war was violation of Belgian neutrality, but the tensions had been building up for years.
Britian fought to stop German ambition in continental Europe, not Africa. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tiger fancini
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Location: Testicles for Eyes
|
| Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
| I honestly believe the best realistic hope for peace and stability is a Chinese backed coup in Pyongyang. |
I agree with this. It makes the most sense for all involved. A Chinese-backed puppet regime running things in Pyongyang would decrease the threat/possibility of nuclear strikes and/or military conflict.
I get the impression that the Chinese powers feel that their economy is too important to risk by starting wars. So they could certainly decrease the tension in the region. US, S.Korea, Japan and Russia could essentially maintain the status quo in this situation, which is basically what they all want anyway.
As for the poor N.Korean people, well anything has to be better than life under KJI. Their lives won't magically change overnight, but this is probably the best option that they have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
travel zen
Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Location: Good old Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You also forget that Klingons are utterly defenseless on hardwood floors, which predominate traditional North East Asian homes. |
I do not agree.
China has enough on its plate to want to be sucked into a war, even a regional one. Looking like the big brother who can talk to the younger brother about fist-thumping is more its policy.
China is pretty defenceless against American power. North Korea stands less of a chance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| travel zen wrote: |
| Quote: |
| You also forget that Klingons are utterly defenseless on hardwood floors, which predominate traditional North East Asian homes. |
I do not agree.
China has enough on its plate to want to be sucked into a war, even a regional one. Looking like the big brother who can talk to the younger brother about fist-thumping is more its policy.
China is pretty defenceless against American power. North Korea stands less of a chance. |
What about Klingons though? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
