Particularly when you control the media and present yourself as a god to be revered.
The simple point is this: you and others here have just thrown out the assertion that China could solve the north korea problem any time but are just unwilling to do so, or unable to reach an internal consensus.
But let’s look at the situation.
The amount of trade China does with NK is already pitiful: basically a small amount of coal for food. Cut that off and all you do is cause yet another famine. Why would this famine be the one that finally brings down the regime?
Nevertheless, these are exactly the sanctions that China has just agreed to, so I guess we can all look forward to the problem being solved now.
The point about technology transfer is valid of course: if, at this point, China (or indeed Russia) is still providing technical assistance then of course they should stop doing that. But what reason do we have to think that they are providing assistance at this stage?
The amount of trade between China and the US is not pitiful.
NK exists at the discretion of China. They need a reason to replace NK’s leadership. The reason is trade with the US.
That’s just repeating the premise that I’m saying is false. I think first you should justify that assumption.
Welcome to the Straight Dope, Mr President. I think you’ll find however that this is another situation where “who knew it would be so complicated”
China can no more choose NK’s leader than the US can.
And a trade war with China will hurt the US at least as much, probably more, than it will hurt China.
That has not one thing to do with the observtion, it merely shows the irrational response of the Americans who can not think of themselves except as the White hat Cowboys.
The regime actions to protect itself are perfectly logical and perfectly rational in the context of the regime’s own position, given the history of the americans in aggressive actions.
But perhaps somel flying parachuting motocycle commando can be sent in to solve the regime…
Also, is China really any more willing than anyone else to risk North Korea’s insane nuclear wrath? China has many very large cities within the range of the same missiles that are now flying into the ocean. Does North Korea also have artillery positioned on the Chinese border, threatening cities to the north-west, as they do on the DMV threatening Seoul? Are Chinese cities “held hostage” in the same way that Seoul is? (I have no idea how militarized that border is.)
I’m pretty sure China is in the same trap we are: yeah, a military solution exists…and it would be hellishly costly for them.
If China didn’t prop up the regime it would fold immediately. NK literally exists at the discretion of China.
NK citizens isolated from the outside world and and spoon fed a political ideology complete with it’s own god.
Their “position” (and apparently yours) starts with North Korea invading South Korea. Whatever point you’re trying to make is based on the support of the aggressor in that war. their “dear leader” has total control over his people and has had them executed by such things as anti-aircraft guns for his pleasure.
But clearly you think someone who has murdered 340 people who disagreed with him is sane as well as his message to his people.
I think you’ve misunderstood (and misrepresented) what Ramira’s point was. Nobody’s disputing the fact that the North Korean population are suffering under a tightly oppressive and restrictive regime that controls the flow of information. There’s no informed debate among North Koreans – we get that.
This is a discussion and debate about what can be done to defuse the situation. Hostage negotiators don’t just play Rambo and kick the door down without realizing the costs. Kim Jung Un has hostages. He’s walking around with a gun in his hand threatening to shoot them all. The question is, what can be done to get him to talk him out of that?
There seems to be disagreement that China is propping up NK.
NK exports 2.83 Billion dollars of goods a year. 2.34 billion of that goes to China. That’s 83%. They import 3.47 Billion. 2.95 Billion of that comes from China. that’s 85%.
There is no doubt China is propping up NK. China’s economic assistanceto North Korea accounts for about half of all Chinese foreign aid. Beijing provides the aid directly to Pyongyang, thereby enabling it to bypass the United Nations.
During the period of severe food shortage between 1996 and 1998, Beijing provided unconditional food aid to North Korea.
For any diplomatic solution to have any affect on NK it has to involve China’s support. And that support means cutting off support to NK. Therefore, the diplomatic solution has to involve some mechanism that is in the best interest of China and the only one available to the United States is renegotiated trade deals that rewards or punishes China based on their support of NK.
There’s no disagreement; China is propping up NK, and to a lesser degree, so is Russia. And for similar reasons: it’s in their political interests to push the United States out of their geopolitical sphere, or at least away from their borders. They’re not going to stop supporting North Korea, either. Not unless the U.S. gives them a reason to, which would mean Trump would have to stop talking up military threats and start talking about longer-term bi-lateral and multi-lateral diplomacy.
If the United States starts an economic war with China, it would almost certainly boomerang and have economic consequences for the U.S. It would also signal to the rest of our allies that we’re not a very reliable political partner, which would in turn force allies to spread their risk around by putting some distance between themselves and the United States. Alliances are two way streets. There has to be something in it for our partners as well.
Our foreign policy fails because we’ve increasingly failed to respect the limits our real power, and at the same time how to use the power that we have. The perception we have of our own strength is that we have the ability to bring our adversaries to their knees. No question, we can inflict a lot of pain, economically, militarily or otherwise. But as we’ve seen with Iraq, Afghanistan, and Russia, our power is not unlimited. It has limits. It doesn’t make sense to keep twisting a jar lid in the wrong direction.
Once again you’ve just repeated as a premise the very thing I’m disputing with you.
You understand how debates work, right? You can’t do that: otherwise I’d just start with the premise that I’m right, and we’re done.
But anyway, I see you actually gave some reasoning to another poster here, so I’ll respond to that:
In my very first post in this thread I pointed out that almost all of NK’s international trade is with China, and that it’s peanuts. So thanks for looking up the actual numbers to confirm that.
3 billion out, and 3 billion in, is a tiny amount of trade for two nations sharing a border, and importantly:
1: It’s not things that help the nuclear program
2: China has just signed up to further sanctions that includes almost all of this trade. So they’re already now doing the thing that you say will bring the regime down.
Actually at that point at least 500,000, and maybe as many as 3.5 million (out of a population of 22 million) had already starved to death. It didn’t bring the regime down.
But I guess the population was fine with millions of their fellow family and friends dying of hunger, and enduring malnourishment themselves. All we need is a little more hardship next time! The sweet spot is, what would you say, 10 million dead? Then they’ll be a popular uprising for sure.
Perhaps yes, perhaps no depending on what is meant - the autarky of the regime already proven to be willing to let the population starve makes the confident assertion unfounded.
It is an assertion 100 per cent irrelevant to my observation. one hundred percent. My observation was about the rationality of the regime’s own decision making.
Yes the American White Hat Cowboys… Yehaw!!
The history of the Americans invading other countries (the Iraq, the Panama, the Grenada, the Viet nam, etc.) is a well known one and in your own eyes always heros.
Does not matter, in the rational analysis of the North Korean regime they must see themselves as threatened
This has not one thing to do with them being good or bad. It is about understanding their own rational analysis.
Your going on and on about how bad they are (and I have no disagreement it is an evil regime) is 100 per cent irrelevant to my observation on the rationality of their risk analysis to themselves from their own internal regime interest perspective. All it shows is the blindness of a certain American ideological faction has to any kind of dispassionate rationale analysis beyond the White Hat - Black Hat action movies thinking.
It is not even needed they be fine.
It is only needed that the regime be completely cold blooded and have the systems to support the loyalty and the effectiveness of its armed forces to repress any uprising.
As the Soviet Union in the era of Stalin showed, complete terror with no restriction can work although at the expense of crippling.
Since the regime Kim values itself above all, we have no need to doubt they are willing to do anything. Only the internal coup d’état solves that.
What might drive the actors to the internal coup d’état? who knows?
If Kim Jong Un’s biggest priority is “stay in power in North Korea”, then ISTM that acquiring nukes is entirely rational. With nukes, they are very unlikely to be invaded for regime change. Without them, the chances go up significantly.
I wish his biggest priority was “serve the people of North Korea”. If so, he could make a secret deal with SK and the US to start gradual reforms and re-enter the world community. But he won’t do that – not only because he doesn’t care about the North Korean people, but because it would probably greatly increase the chance of being stabbed in the back by other North Korean elites, or taken down by jittery SK/US agents who might see an opening for assassination as less risky than waiting to see if he actually follows through with reforms.
It’s a monstrous situation, unfortunately, and Kim Jong Un and his predecessors deserve the blame, but it doesn’t change the fact that from his perspective and with his goals of staying in power, seeking nuclear weapons is a rational decision, IMO.
I’m certainly no expert in these things but I don’t really understand this thinking. It seems to me that feeding his people and making their life happy and comfortable would be a better solution to staying in power. I realize that they are not living in a democracy but it doesn’t seem to me that the average citizen would care that much throwing (perceived) nuclear might around. Or if they do it’s only because they have been told we are out to kill them - which of course they well might have been. But if so, they would have been told as much so the people would understand the need to spend money on nukes instead of luxuries.
If they were not being told that, kju wouldn’t have the need for nukes.
It appears to me he is setting up a false justification for needing nukes WRT the populous.
A turtle farmer!! He executed a turtle farmer? Wow.
Well, two things. One, from China’s perspective you are correct…it’s a very small amount. However, from North Korea’s perspective, it accounts for over 80% of their trade. Cutting it off entirely would mean they would have zero inflow of hard currency. Certainly, the result would be another famine, but a point you are obviously missing is it would mean they would have to stop their nuclear and missile programs as well. Where do you think they are getting the critical parts for those programs from?? Do you think they are actually making it all internally?? Then you have the reality of, at this stage of things, having to stop halt both programs. You don’t seem to realize what a knife edge North Korea is on or what a precarious position little Kimmy v3.0 and his merry men are in. At a time when trade is already being hammered, when less and less hard currency is coming into the system, the only bright spot they have is these tests. As the screws tighten on the food supply and they head into winter with low stocks, it’s going to be the only thing holding everything together. But if China REALLY puts the screws to them it would be all over for the regime.
No, China has agreed to them in theory but hasn’t actually committed to doing them full out. And I was talking about a full embargo. You questioned if China could ‘solve’ the problem and I told you how they could, and why it would work. And I admitted that CHina isn’t likely to do it. Do you understand why China wouldn’t do this? Do you understand why it would work if they did it anyway? It isn’t JUST the famine. As has been pointed out, it’s not like they haven’t had famine in North Korea before. I can think of at least 2 in the last 20 years that cost them over a million people dead. But here is another wrinkle…Kim Jong Un isn’t in nearly the same position as his daddy. And nothing like where his grandfather was. He’s in a much more precarious position at this stage. Now, all three of the Kimmy’s were epic in their ability to mismanage, but Un doesn’t have the base support either of the others did. The only thing keeping him afloat right now is China. The only thing that has allowed him to do the nuclear testing he’s done is…China. The only thing that’s allowed him to keep pushing missile technology is China (and the hard currency from trade that allows him to buy technology from the Ukraine and Russia…as well as tools and parts from, that’s right, China). That that support away, fully, and KJU would be in a very bad position, one from which I wouldn’t expect the regime to survive. It’s not going to happen instantly (though it could start pretty fast), but it will be inevitable unless someone else steps in with massive food aide and an injection of hard currency. The North Koreans can only print so many fake US $100 bills after all…
Saddam Hussein was afraid that the US might invade and try to remove him from power. So was Gadhafi in Libya. They were both monsters, but those fears were entirely reasonable, right? If they had had nuclear weapons, we probably would not have engaged in military action against them. Based on our history of invading countries to try and change the regime, ISTM that Kim Jong Un’s fear that we might invade them and take him out of power is pretty reasonable. And thus seeking weapons that would make that much less likely is reasonable.
While I still maintain they are playing a rational game, I do agree that every move they make reduces the number of rational moves left available to them. That being said…
Suicide is an alternative to what exactly? We all agree that kind of countervalue attack would result in the end of NK as we know it. We’ve seen NK go through some extremely dire domestic circumstances without getting suicidal. What would be different this time?
I mean, the sequence would be like this:
- NK has such severe famine that they can’t feed the army anymore
- Army threatens revolt
- Kim wants to intimidate other nations into giving free stuff, but he’s already done everything short of massive countervalue strike
- Threatens nuclear strike
- If threat is appeased, then crisis averted. If threat is disregarded, goto:
6A) Manage situation internally, make some symbolic minor conventional strike, OR
6B) Suicide via nuclear strike, with a big middle finger to SK, Japan, and the US
We’ve seen Pyongyang survive some dire shit in the past, so I have a hard time seeing the situation progress through all these gateways, unless external forces put the squeeze to accelerate this process.
Very american.
The regime is in the place it is, and the Arab spring revolutions have already demonstrated that for the nasty family centric dictatorship to move to some other kind of relationship and structure is extremely dangerous, in particular when you are a regime the Americans hate and will take any excuse to topple.
It is 100 per cent rational for this regime to want to bolster and armor itself against the American intervention given the track record of the americans.
It is certain they know that the slightest slip up and they will end up hanging from a lamppost or worse. There is no rational incentive for them to regime members to act otherwise - they would have to be self deceiving to think otherwise.