I’m referring to the diplomatic effort at the UNSC “behind the scenes” by the PRC mission there so that the sanctions would not be as severe as the US and other parties wished them to be.
This post of yours is utter rubbish. I have never said that I know better than everyone else. Of course, I know better than you do because you’re still trotting out your ignorance as though it’s fact. I have also provided evidence of my assertions.
Analysis from the Diplomat:
And another article on the growing relation between SK and China:
South Korea is now China’s biggest trading partner (bigger than the US), while NK is an unstable liability. We’ll see how it plays out, but its undeniable that China is changing their attitude towards NK.
I’m not sure I understand why China would even need a “buffer zone” between it and S. Korea.
They don’t, this is 1950’s era thinking. Considering the US could park a submarine straight off Beijing with dozens of cruise missiles or strike China with B-2’s and F-22’s which China almost certainly can’t detect, the idea of a “buffer zone” makes no sense anymore. And as I’ve said South Korea is now China’s biggest trading partner.
Lets say NK starts to collapse and SK decides to intervene. China and SK could do back room negotiations and come to an understanding that China will not get involved as long as SK keeps a demilitarized zone the entire area from the China / Korea border 200 km into Korea. Theres your buffer, for what little good it does (purely psychological).
There was a time, probably until fairly recently, that China tolerated the Kim dynasty’s persistent belligerence if for no other reason than to taunt Japan, China’s centuries old rival.
There was also the widespread sentiment, not only among China but among many in South Korea, that George W Bush’s bluster toward the Axis of Evil, of which North Korea was apparently a part, and the subsequent invasion of Iraq (another of the AoE’s charter members) seriously and unnecessarily destabilized the region. China held the United States responsible for kicking the North Korean hornets nest and didn’t feel especially motivated to be the one to calm the Kim regime down, especially since the beef didn’t involve China per se.
North Korea has wanted one of two things since the ceasefire of 1953: either a solid peace treaty and promise not to invade and overthrow the Kim regime, or a nuclear shield from a friendly partner that prevents the United States and its allies from achieving regime change. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, it has had neither. Bill Clinton came somewhat close to brokering a deal in the late 1990s, but the Republicans essentially blocked it, first by de-funding the fuel oil aid and then stalling on similar measures. And again, from Kim’s point of view, an American attack is not out of the realm of possibility given what happened to Saddam Hussein and the persistent pressure and periodic threats of war on Iran. Bush ratcheted up those tensions after 9/11. To this day, North Korea remains without a peace treaty and nuclear protection. North Korea can’t get a peace treaty, but it can get its own nuclear protection, which is what it’s doing.
All of that being said, just like Donald Trump in the presidential race, it is possible for someone’s bluster to go too far. While China holds the US largely responsible for the uptick in North Korean posturing, it is none too pleased with the Kim regime and China also fears the potential consequences, particularly as it relates to an increased sense of urgency among the United States and Japanese armed forces. China knows that its own assertiveness is causing angst in the East and at the Pentagon. Throw an unpredictable North Korea into the mix and the situation becomes combustible. It would strengthen the case that militarists have been making in Japan for the last 15-20 years, which is that Japan needs a stronger, more aggressive military. This is incidentally a concern for the United States and other Asian countries. Right now Asia is more worried about China and North Korea, but bringing back Japan’s military might would be a worrisome prospect as well, for historically understandable reasons.
Well said. At the end of the day China cares far more about Japan, Taiwan and South Korea than they do about poverty stricken NK. Allowing NK to keep nuclear weapons will trigger a regional arms race that will provide a justification for Japan to re-militarize, possibly eventually resulting in them and South Korea obtaining their own nuclear weapons.
Rather than allow that to happen, China will throw NK under the bus, it order to keep the Korean peninsular nuclear free and take away a major reason for Japan to re-arm.
Okay, where are you getting this fantasy from?
Left out something.
South Korea isn’t going to ever “intervene militarily” to stop a humanitarian crisis in North Korea. For the pending famine which will hit quite soon, SK will do the exact same thing it has done in the past: supply humanitarian aid for the NK government to distribute.
China will not “intervene militarily” to stop a humanitarian crisis in North Korea. For the pending famine which will hit quite soon, the PRC will do the exact same thing it has done in the past: supply humanitarian aid for the NK government to distribute.
The difference between the ROK’s method and the PRC’s is that the PRC will continue to “repatriate” refugees from the DPRK. The DPRK will continue to treat those returnees as they have always done. Another difference is that the PRC gets a healthy bit of minerals imports from NK, which the ROK, for obvious reasons, does not. Another difference would be that the PRC can rapidly mobilize a lot more soldiers to seal its border with NK than SK can.
And let’s not forget that South Korea has not:
[ul][li]killed US soldiers who were attempting to clear part of the DMZ as permitted (even required) under the armistice terms.[/li][li]killed the first lady of NK while trying to assassinate its president.[/li][li]bombed a NK island for fun, killing military and civilians.[/li][li]sunk a NK navy vessel, killing all on board the vessel and at least one rescuer.[/ul][/li]
North Korea wants a peace treaty just about as much as SK wants to let NK reunify the peninsula under total NK control.
Um, NK has called repeatedly for a peace treaty, because then (in their eyes) the US would have no excuse to keep armed forces in SK. Sources:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-nuclear-usa-idUSKCN0UT201
http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/northkorea/2013/05/29/38/0401000000AEN20130529002600315F.HTML
The issue is that NK wants a peace treaty while keeping its nuclear options open, so the US has refused to discuss with them until they first de-nuclearize. Are they sincere about and would they keep to it? Almost certainly not, but they have publicly called for a peace treaty.
Well…that’s one of the issues. From your first article:
Basically, as with just about everything the North Koreans say, it’s hard to take it seriously since it’s just about 100% bullshit and propaganda for internal consumption. It’s not a serious peace proposal, and no one thinks that if there were a final peace treaty that this would mean the US would just shrug and pack up and go home. No one besides the North Koreans and perhaps the Chinese actually WANTS the US to move it’s troops from South Korea, since they act as a trip wire to forestall further or future North Korean aggression or acts of stupidity.
Who is NK going to invade? They know they have no chance against the South even without the US. Kim has seen what happened to Saddam and Gadaffi, there is every reason to think his desire for a peace treaty might be genuine. It makes it harder for the US to take him out without getting international consensus first.
Of course a peace treaty doesn’t mean they’ll stop their nuclear program, or stop making counterfeit superbills, or stop selling missile tech and potentially nuclear tech to the highest bidder, or get rid of his death camps, or his slaves working overseas in Russia for hard currency. But really, it makes perfect sense that he wants a peace treaty, he just doesn’t want to give up anything to get it.
[QUOTE=coremelt]
Who is NK going to invade? They know they have no chance against the South even without the US. Kim has seen what happened to Saddam and Gadaffi, there is every reason to think his desire for a peace treaty might be genuine. It makes it harder for the US to take him out without getting international consensus first.
[/QUOTE]
Neither Saddam nor the Gadaffi Duck had the same gun to the head that the North Korean’s do. Not only do they purportedly have atomic weapons that, at least theoretically can be deployed, but they have literally 10’s of thousands of artillery pieces aimed right at the capital of South Korea and well within their range. In addition, like Saddam with Kuwait they have the means and perhaps the delusion to think they MIGHT be able to get away with an invasion of the South. One of the things holding them back from that is knowing that there are US forces acting as a trip wire. The reality is, of course, that any attack on South Korea, whether the US has forces there or not would trigger a military response from the US. But reality has little to do with the situation on the Korean peninsula, at least north of the 38th parallel. Sometimes you just need to be blatant and obvious to get through to the North Koreans. They might not understand subtly, but they WILL understand that if there are US forces in the DMZ and they attack South Korea that this WILL trigger a military response by the US, regardless of who the president is.
No, it doesn’t, and no, he doesn’t. Kim doesn’t want a peace treaty on any terms other than a reunification under North Korean rule. Full stop. He also knows that his terms won’t be acceptable, so he’s perfectly safe in tossing them out and then he can use that as yet another propaganda tool for local North Korean consumption.
You’re missing my point. If the US was to offer an unconditional peace treaty tomorrow to NK, then NK would accept. Kim wants to be left alone to run his private kingdom of death camps and Kim worship. He doesn’t want to rule unified Korea, he knows thats not realistic.
Note I am very much not justifying anything NK or Kim is doing, I think his rule is abhorrent, but if he was offered a deal to leave him alone he’d probably accept, and I am by no means saying the west SHOULD offer him that deal I’m just trying to say that his offer of “peace” is sincere in that it means leaving him in peace to continue oppressing his own people.
The DPRK is at war with China. The DPRK has always been at war with China.
and yet…
People’s (Republic of Korea)
Who need People’s (Republic of China)
Are the luckiest People’s in the world…
Does anyone remember “carpet bombing”?
AKA “The Solution to the DPRK’s Much-Vaunted Massive Artillery”?
Kim cannot be so stupid that he thinks those obsolete guns would last 30 minutes.
And his “secret” attack tunnels are undoubtedly already located and the explosives/ weapons installed.
If China really is cutting off avgas - they will allow civilian DPRK planes to re-fuel in China - which means DPRK will use the few airliners they can still get airborne as gas cans. It will be interesting when DPRK first sends in an airliner re-fitted as a tanker.
Anyway, Kim and everybody else knows they have no credible Air Force. (note: the MiG-17 they list as “active” can now be found on ebay).
Of course he is.
You seem to envision carpet bombing as bombing artillery pieces that are neatly packed together like a carpet in which a carpet of bombs could take them out. They are almost certainly spread out, dispersed, much more difficult to take out than simply dropping a random spread of bombs.
Even if the artillery pieces only lasted 15 minutes, the damage would already be done. Having thousands of artillery rounds hitting Seoul would be the economic equivalent of a 9/11 to the South Korean economy.
Notice how Seoul has grown - it is now up to the DMZ.
Maybe the guns can’t be lowered far enough to hit with direct fire - and can they point far enough upright to use as mortars?
Carpet bombing does not produce a straight line - esp. if there is a formation of bombers.
You could add kidnapping of Japanese civilians and terrorism to the list. That doesn’t change the fundamental fact that much of what NK has done over the past few decades is in response to the fact that it has no security guarantees. There is no difference between NK and Iran in this regard. The difference between NK and Iran, and Iraq, is that NK and Iran learned that they’d better develop atomic weapons to thwart US military power. And the ultimate difference is, NK and Iran’s regimes have survived, whereas Iraq’s fell.