Revelations from WikiLeaks that China is running out of patience with North Korea thickens the plot on the Korean Peninsula, and makes recent editorial comment from China’s state-controlled press even more interesting.
Beginning over the Thanksgiving weekend, we’ve posted five editorials from the state-run Global Times which reflect a dual strategy on the part of the Beijing leadership: attempt to peel South Korea away from its alliance with the U.S. and toward one with China; and encourage the South to take the initiative in calming down its “brother country” to the North. This appears to fit with the contents of leaked American diplomatic cables that suggest China is seriously mulling a unified Korea under South Korean control.
Let us begin with the an editorial from November 24 headlined Dialogue of Artillery is a ‘Tragedy’ for Northeast Asia. This editorial, Beijing’s first reaction to North Korea’s deadly artillery barrage, shows a softening from the Chinese toward South Korea, and calls the North’s attack ‘ill-conceived.’ But it also blames the U.S. and South Korea for inflaming Northern insecurity:
The exchange of artillery was yet more evidence of the chaotic status of the Korean Peninsula. The North tried to protect its own security in an ill-conceived manner, whereas the response from other countries was futile.
The South, which is clearly reluctant to militarily engage the North, flexed its military muscles. The U.S. and Japan tried economic sanctions, which proved futile. Meanwhile, China and Russia could do nothing but appeal for restraint.
Northeast Asia should try to eradicate the region’s Cold War mentality, and address North Korea’s sense of insecurity. Unfortunately, the U.S. has no such strategic desire; whereas South Korea appears to be hesitating.
The next day, November 25, the Global Times posted an editorial headlined Reliance on U.S. Alone Will Not Ensure South Korean Security, which argues that the U.S.-South Korea alliance is too blunt a weapon to address the crisis with the North, and that the great gap in wealth between North and South must be addressed:
After the latest incident, the U.S. and South Korea announced a new round of joint military drills. Perhaps Seoul has no better option for dealing with the North than resorting to its alliance with the U.S. But the reality is that the U.S. alliance cannot guarantee South Korea’s security.
Past experience shows that America’s military presence there can secure a generally safe environment, but cannot prevent small-scale skirmishes like what happened on Tuesday. The U.S. presence is like a nuclear weapon: It can provide a strategic deterrence, but is incapable of preventing skirmishes. Thus, South Korea often seems at a disadvantage when in conflict with the North.
Perhaps South Korea should reconsider its security strategy, which relies solely on its alliance with the U.S. If greater security to the South means less in the North, stability on the Korean Peninsula will be hard to maintain. … The poverty and insecurity of North Korea have been ignored for too long, and the entire region is paying the price.
The greater the gap between North Korea and the surrounding region, the more the region will fall into uncertainty.
On November 26, the Global Times posted this editorial headlined Time for South Korea, U.S., Japan to Revise North Korea Policies. This editorial expands on the previous theme, urging South Korea and the U.S. to undertake a ‘fundamental policy change’ to end the vicious cycle that has plunged North Korea into ever-deepening poverty and isolation – and the South into a constant state of insecurity:
After the recent artillery exchange in and around the Korean Peninsula, North Korea seems to be the only country to have gained. But Pyongyang is drinking poison to curb its thirst and is running head-long down a road that leads nowhere.
America’s hard-line approach is unlikely to succeed on the Korean Peninsula. If it did succeed, it would mean the failure of Chinese diplomacy and bring unbearable strategic risk to China. But it appears equally unlikely that China’s moderate stance will win out. All of which suggests a fundamental policy change from the U.S., South Korea and Japan is badly needed. Otherwise, the stalemate and test the tolerance of all the parties involved will go on.
The way things stand now, South Korea will continue living in the shadow non-stop provocations from the North, and Pyongyang will go on suffering isolation and poverty, which gets worse after every incident.
On November 29, the Global Times published another editorial, this one headlined To Avoid War, Don’t Pretend to Be Fearless, which appears to suggest that contrary to popular opinion, democracies are not inherently more peaceful than other forms of government. The editorial pleads with South Korea and the U.S. not to allow their “hardliners” to play chicken with North Korea and benefit politically from taking their respective countries down the path to a war no one wants:
The United States, South Korea and North Korea: which party is really prepared for an all-out war on the Peninsula? The real answer is, none of the above. North Korea hasn’t overpowered South Korea, and South Korea lacks the stomach for a full-scale war. The U.S., meanwhile, just emerged from its Iraq War abyss, and is mentally unprepared to face a new war with an unpredictable outcome.
In this context, the U.S., South Korea and North Korea shouldn’t attempt to intimidate one other by taking a stance of blind strength. Because they should all understand that the opposition is no more stupid than they are. It’s like when you’re sure of your opponent’s lowest card, but your opponent is also sure of yours.
If the situation is to be salvaged, they need to avoid adhering to their hard-line stances. This is especially true of the U.S. and South Korea, where the official position is so easily driven by public sentiment. Democracy isn’t always the fire extinguisher of war, particularly at critical moments in certain countries, once it has consolidated strong public opinion.
There a strange phenomenon that occurs in Northeast Asia: peace dominates mainstream public opinion, but is often crushed by the voice of non-mainstream hardliners. In these countries, in terms of public opinion, a hard-line position is relatively safe; and if an election is involved, it can be politically beneficial. On the other hand, calling for reason and compromise with others is risky, as it is often labeled anything from “weak” to “traitorous.” Northeast Asia must end this vicious cycle. … The situation in Northeast Asia over the past decade shows that no country has resolved its problems by sticking to hard-line policies. These offer only short-term benefits to some politicians, while creating adversity that the state must slowly repair.
Finally, in perhaps the fascinating one of these editorials, the Global Times posted this on November 30, headlined All Koreans Share the Same ‘Resistance to External Influence’, which betrays more than a hint of frustration over Beijing’s impotence to influence its long-time ally, North Korea. It also appears to be an appeal to the South to play ball with China for mutual benefit:
South Korea has rejected China’s proposal to restart Six-Party Talks. Radical emotions are leading South Koreans astray. While it’s true that Six-Party Talks could ease tensions on the Korean Peninsula, it seems as if South Korea first needs to vent its anger.
South Koreans are demonstrating almost unanimous toughness, which isn’t normal for that country. … While China cannot help South Koreans vent their anger, it sincerely wants to assist in easing tensions on the Peninsula and wishes to find ways of defusing the crisis. By not agreeing to talks, the South Korean government showed its reluctance to support China. Seoul decision makers probably believe that in the short term, opposing a pragmatic solution entails much smaller political risk.
Since the United States declared its return to Asia, the frequency of clashes on the Peninsula has risen. Instead of reflecting on this, South Korea has become even more obsessed with its military alliance with the U.S., which has proven faulty at best. Seoul and Washington want to pull Beijing to their side and think that once China gets tough, North Korea will behave. But such logic is quite ludicrous.
People from the South and North are one people. South Koreans clearly share the Korean temperament of sticking to independent choices and being reluctant to succumb to external influence.
Isn’t Pyongyang’s decisiveness in the face of demands by external powers also part of the South Korean character? Does South Korea really believe the North would submit to pressure?
READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, your most trusted translator and aggregator of foreign news and views about our nation.
