China on North Korea: Where Does Our "Ally" Stand?
China on North Korea: Where Does Our "Ally" Stand?
North Korea seems to be rivaling Russia for coverage in today's Western Main Stream Media, a 24-hour cycle of alarmist hawks battling with naive doves battling for the podium. Trump is giving enough attention to the matter to keep up his war of words with China, but hasn't released any definitive plan on what he or SecDef Mattis plans to do about the Hermit Nation.
An aside on Mattis: it is my opinion that he is the one smart pick made by Donald for the current administration's cabinet. Many on the Left have tried to paint him as an extremist hawk. While the hawk accusation is undoubtedly true, he is far from extremist. His every word is calculated, as are his actions, and he seems extremely "business" oriented, in that you haven't seen much of Gen. Mattis in the news unless it regards him getting the job done.
China and North Korea's relationship has come under close scrutiny since Trump's campaign brought it to light, but the DPRK ties to China are based in history. China supported North Korea during the Korean War, a move most attribute to the US crossing the 38th Parallel, and have been close trading partners since the 1950's and 1960's. Kim Jung-Il and Mao Zedong had a close personal relationship and strengthened their ties as Chairman Mao attempted to create a stronger Asia-Pacific region.
More recently, China has been viewed as NK's only true friend, but that facade seems to be breaking before our very eyes. July 4th of 2006 seems to be the day the world saw the first knot come unraveled between the Asian superpowers. North Korea launched a missile test and the world saw for the first time a public rebuke from Beijing. Since then, Beijing has kept up the public war of words with the Kim regime, especially as Kim Jung-Un has stepped up testing and development of nuclear weapons and missile systems.
Economic ties between the nations have been tense. UN sanctions have essentially blocked all trade between the two countries entirely, and China has publicly turned away North Korean coal ships at port. They've stopped short of kicking ambassadors out of their embassies like the Russians and Americans seem to be apt to do, but ties have definitely gotten terse. KCNA, the North Korean state-sponsored news agency, has turned a cold shoulder on Beijing and condemns the economic sanctions set upon it by Beijing and the UN.
This is not to say that there is not money being made. A US investigation into Chinese ties to NK is still underway, and several Chinese companies are being blocked from entering the US market, citing claims that they may be violating sanctions under the table. Accusations that North Korean ambassadors are selling drugs out of their embassies have circled the news, and Chinese boats shipping technology across to their neighbor have been caught on camera red-handed. Whether this is state-sanctioned sanction dodging, or newly capitalist communists trying to make a quick buck off of North Korean desperation, we do not yet know.
As I showed in my last post regarding technological and economic ties, China is very rightfully suspected to be dodging sanctions and furthering ties with North Korea behind the international community's back. This could mean that the condemnation by both of the nation's state controlled media could be smoke and mirrors, designed to make it look like ties are cut.
China also seems to be coming out against several of the most recent defense measures enacted by the West against North Korea. They condemned the THAAD missile deployment in South Korea, and came out very publicly against joint military exercises in the region. They have rarely enacted their own sanctions in response to missile and nuclear tests, usually choosing to do so only when a UN resolution forces them to. Their overall outlook towards the North Korean regime seems to be pretty doveish. A paper written by a team of Chinese scholars for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) released two papers, by American and Chinese political scholars, where the Chinese side seemed incredibly reluctant to condemn North Korea and came out relatively heavily against provocative measures against the Kim regime. The overall doveish policy towards North Korea could be a sign that Beijing has not quite picked a side in the impending conflict between NK and the US.
At the very least, under the table sanctions dodging and doveish behavior concerning a nuclear neighbor should have US policymakers and intelligence officials nervous about just where our ally stands. I await more news about the economic investigations, and will be updating the blog based on what I find.
Resources:
New York Times Q&A on China-North Korea relations.
CSIS Joint Report and Podcast on US-China Relations.
---------------------
Like the post? I run this threat intelligence blog on Steemit and offer the content free of charge. If you're a Steemit user, you know that upvoting, which you do for free, magically puts a couple cents in my pocket. Maybe I'll buy a pack of gum with last week's earnings, but it all depends on your help. Not a Steemit user? My biggest metric of success is my viewership. If I don't make a cent but my content reaches a wide audience, that means my product is valuable and my efforts are worthwhile. Therefore, give me a share on your social media of choice, follow me on Steemit for more threat intel posts, and follow me on Twitter to see stupid memes and get updates when I post.
Well, I am pretty sure China only acts against NK because the US always threatened to go into North Lorea themselves if China does not handle the situation.
On that note, no one wants the USA to handle NK, except for those who want to advance the geo-political standing of the US.
I heard North Korea was on a huge uprise with modernisations and allowing limited private trade/ownership. But well, we rarely talk about what is actually happening in the country, do we?
The government of NK has allowed a "black market" to develop in response to it's inability to feed the country. Like any communist country, rich people find it easier and easier to bribe local authorities with Western products that are hard to get your hands on.
Bingo. Allowing a black market != allowing private trade/ownership
Yeah I don't know where you heard about modernisation or private trade/ownership, that sounds like a crock of shit. The elite class has always been allowed to own property, and I'm sure small markets for the poor are perfectly allowed because they would starve too quickly otherwise. But to say they are becoming a burgeoning economy and we're just trying to cover that up because military industrial complex... that's a bit too far into the tin foil for my taste, sorry m8.
Read and weep
https://www.efe.com/efe/english/life/pyongyang-s-modernization-defies-tough-sanctions-against-north-korea/50000263-3239550
On wiki you can find under North Korea economy the sentence "Experimentation in small scale entrepreneurship took place from 2009 to 2013, and although there continue to be legal uncertainties this has developed into a significant sector.[37] By 2016 economic liberalisation had progressed to the extent that both locally-responsible and state industrial enterprises give the state 20% to 50% of their output, selling the remainder to buy raw materials with market-based prices in akin to a free market.[38]"
Sry to break it to you but your media has been lying about everything they possibly can.
Okay but reading that article itself seems like a very thinly veiled propaganda push.
If the streets are so beautiful and the businesses so bustling, where are the pictures? When Vice was allowed into NK, they were shown fake storefronts and what were pretty clearly actors set to seem like businessmen. That's not just from The Interview, that actually happened. If you want me to believe that a country that has some of the toughest sanctions in history, that spends an exorbitant amount of very limited money on nuclear funding, and sells drugs out of the back of their embassies is "bustling", you're going to have to show me some irrefutable evidence.
Small scale liberalization is easy as hell and is not a good indicator that the nation as a whole is being liberalized. And a 20-50% product tax? That's draconian, and hardly a sign of liberalisation.
I have seen the Vice Docu, at least the one with Rodman.
But you know what, you convinced me. The US should really bomb NK, the country will finally be prosperous and free again. Look how well that worked in the middle east.
It seems you are one of the few people who still believes in the warmongering mainstream media. Just stay on the internet for a while and your soul might be cleansed.
I repeat, once again for clarity, I am not supportive of war after war. The war in the middle east is/was a shitshow. Period. That does not mean that ending a nuclear war before it begins is a bad idea. Those two aren't connected.
Because the US never made that very same argument against the Iraq?
The argument was not made against "the Iraq".
The chemical weapons threat was a threat against innocent people. Regardless of whether or not there ever was any legitimate threat of chemical weapons in the area, there is a HUGE difference between the use of chemical weapons in small, defenseless villages and nuking San Francisco or Tokyo.
You're still using the same broken argument. Iraq/Afghanistan is not the same as Korea. This is a global, existential threat. There is a difference between a global, existential threat and some religious extremists that pissed off the wrong, oil hungry government.
You and I agree on more than you think, but for you to say that because of Iraq and Afghanistan, a war with a nuclear megalomaniac is inherently illegitimate is illogical.
Also, sincerely doubt anyone besides the US will handle this. Nobody wants bloody hands in it. The US is better equipped and better prepared to deal with NK.
OK, the whole Asian continent will retaliate, Russia will jump to Asias aid and I hope that so will we.
Just do it! I can't wait to free the world from the American leech.
Guess you struck a nerve. Sry for getting so triggered, but you guys really should think about how even your "friends" are looking at your actions atm.
Haha okay edge lord.
The Asian continent will retaliate because a nuclear global hegemon isn't good for ANYONE. Someone who holds the world hostage to get what they want is a global threat. That's not a hard battle to pick a side on.
So you are also in favor of removing America as a world power? I knew Odin would be on my side :)
I think the nuclear weapons of a state that is currently invading and infiltrating countries all around the world is more dangerous than the ones of some asian micro-state.
You're right. Because a country that regularly pushes propaganda videos that depict San Francisco in nuclear flames is just some Asian micro-state. A non threat really.
We're not talking about the US here. I could dedicate my entire blog just on how badly the US wars have fucked up the world. BUT. Instead I'm writing on the only ACTUAL nuclear threat to the world we have. Currently, there is ONE nation threatening to begin a nuclear holocaust. That is what this post was about.
You are talking about the US again. They are the ones having a-bombs positioned in my country. NK would never attack us, while America planned to blow up Germany with nuclear weapons if the Red Army ever decided to make a move.
"Blowing up Germany was better than the commies invading all of Europe" is the same twisted way of thinking that you show when you say I just want to prevent a nuclear war by bombing NK.
Nobody is threatening to bomb Germany. That is absolutely preposterous. I have no idea where you're getting the idea that America is even mentioning bombing Germany.
I'm not saying a pre-emptive strike is the best choice. It might still be, but it wouldn't be my first option. I am saying that, at present, the only country pumping out state-sponsored propaganda videos depicting a burning sea of fire in the place of San Francisco happens to be ruled by the Kim regime, not the Trump administration.
oh and my position is not edgy at all. Being against invasiv wars and american imperialism is kind of common in the thinking community.
The clearly edge lord comment I was referring to.
Again, nothing in my post indicated I'm pro invasive war. But generally speaking, the thinking community also tends to be against nuclear war as well. Myself included.
Maybe edgy in the states, but common table talk everywhere else in the world ;)
China acts against NK because if they don't, their economy is fucked. Also, having a nuclear neighbor isn't great PR.
So you are saying: China will obey because the US is threatening them with sanctions?
Absolutely. Reign in your neighbor or it will hurt your economy. That seems pretty basic. Also, I repeat, having a nuclear neighbor isn't great PR.
It never hurt us to have the nuclear power France as a neighbour but if you really want to we can conquer them again to get rid of their nuclear arsenal. Avec plaisir :).
France is not threatening to glass Tokyo. France is not launching missiles over Germany. France is not a Hermit kingdom ruled by a psychotic emperor known for putting political enemies on islands and blowing them away with artillery fire.
Again, entirely illogical comparison.
The good old Psycho Dictator meme. If it was not true for Saddam and Assad, what makes you believe it is true for Kim? Don't you see the method? Are you really that blind?
As I said, I don't believe this discussion is getting anywhere. Your only arguments are all based around the illegitimacy of the war in the Middle East, which we seem to agree on, but the comparison is entirely invalid. Saddam had no method of reaching out and hitting any sovereign nation outside of his immediate neighbors, besides radicalization online. Kim successfully tested an ICBM. The US was set to gain big time from a war in the Middle East, both through the military industrial complex and via control over the oil market. The US does not gain anything from nuclear war with a close to broke Asian micro nation. That war would be expensive, in terms of lives lost, public relations, and economically. An occupation of the Middle East was easy: there weren't many Middle Eastern nations that could really combat our forces once we dug in. A long-term excursion in NK would require combatting local forces as well as other Asian nations who would also want stake in the NK power vacuum, or at least would want to make sure the US weren't the occupiers.
Again, I understand your belief in the illegitimacy of the war in the middle east. I agree with you there. But North Korea is an entirely different narrative.
I would hardly call China an allie.
The dhmikrats have been wanting a war for a long time.
I would consider them an ally formally but an opponent in many matters. South China Sea, Taiwanese and Hong Kong independence, definitely opponents.
Upvoted and followed. This is the one conflict zone I need more and more sources for. I do a weekly podcast on war and geopolitics.
I agree with you on Mattis. He's a hawk on Iran, but overall an adult. And he's a Democrat, so the left going over him just shows their cards.
China might be an ally, but in terms of the Korean region and surrounding seas, they are the USG number one competitor.
Can you link your podcast? I'd love to give it a listen.
What irritates me is people looking at complex geopolitical relationships as a binary function. We are not binary allies with anybody, whether it be the UK or China. We are allies with China over most trade, but not human rights, South China Sea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, etc. We are allies with UK on trade, some war, etc, but not immigration.
Relationships on the geopolitical spectrum are not binary.
Here is the most recent episode post. There you can follow links to the download. Also on ITunes - https://steemit.com/politics/@chieppa1/the-voluntary-exchange-podcast-lords-of-war
I'll be catching up on it all this week! Thanks so much!
Some are better than others. Talking to yourself out-loud while being recorded is a skill I am still developing.
North Korea is China's junk yard dog.
Dangerous thought, but I see where you're coming from.
Congratulations @odinthelibrarian! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPThanks for the update
Not a problem, thanks for reading!
You are welcome. Look forward to more of your posts