North Korea's atomic test has put China on the spot. Beijing is angry with Pyongyang for conducting the test without any prior consultation. According to reports, Beijing received only 20 minutes advance notice. In response, China's UN ambassador said that Beijing might not be able to protect North Korea.
The Chinese wanted to maintain some credibility with the US by agreeing to vote for a UN sanctions regime, but also wanted to keep the response more symbolic than real. China will not be part of the interdiction and enforcement provisions of the sanctions regime. It will simply do inspections on the Chinese border.
As Xu Guangyu (徐光宇) of the government-sponsored China Arms Control and Disarmament Association, said, "This is more a symbolic step than a real sanction measure."
"China just doesn't engage in that sort of trade with North Korea, so there's not much practical that needs to be done," he added.
But if Pyongyang is being told that China's endorsement of the UN sanctions regime is just a symbolic exercise and that it will continue to do business as usual, how is this going to effect North Korea's behavior?
Indeed, North Korea is already under a severe embargo by much of the international community and it is surviving mainly on food and fuel supplies from China. And if this arrangement continues, it might as well be business as usual for North Korean leader Kim Jong-il's regime.
Unless Beijing is prepared to bite the bullet and go all out against Kim's nuclear ambitions, North Korea is likely to develop as a serious issue between China and the US.
As US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton said "China itself now has an obligation to make sure that it complies with the resolution," because "China voted in favor of that provision [of sanctions]."
Beijing rates curbing terrorism and nuclear proliferation as positive factors in US-China relations. Indeed, the US focus on terrorism and Iraq has enabled China to expand its political and economic influence in the Asia-Pacific region, Middle East and Africa.
Therefore, it is to Beijing's advantage to create an image of China as a relatively benign alternative power center. On the question of nuclear non-proliferation, China doesn't share US enthusiasm for substantive action, be it in Iran or North Korea.
True, it has condemned North Korea's atomic test and voted for sanctions. But that is as far as it is likely to go. Beijing will not intercept or interdict North Korean ships carrying banned items.
"I think different countries will do it [sanctions] different ways," Chinese Ambassador to the UN Wang Guangya (
Until now, North Korea's nuclear ambitions had given China a strategic advantage. With the US mired in Iraq and over-stretched militarily, Washington came to depend heavily on Beijing to bring North Korea into line. With the China-sponsored six-party talks, Beijing was in the driver's seat with everyone looking to it to produce the proverbial rabbit out of the hat.
The talks, however, weren't going anywhere. For the last one year Pyongyang had boycotted the six-party forum. Beijing was not keen on putting the extra squeeze on Pyongyang by tightening up its economic and political leverage.
But North Korea was already hurting under the US financial embargo and trade boycotts by many other countries. It therefore decided to ratchet up the stakes by testing an atomic bomb and announcing that the UN sanctions were an act of war. And the North has promised further dramatic action in the future.
The prospects, therefore, are not good. And if China were to stay off-course, it might lose whatever leverage it has acquired over the US on the question of North Korea's nuclear ambitions. And this will become a serious issue between them.
Indeed, Wang Jisi (
"In the field of international security, the primary focal point in Chinese-US relations is the North Korean nuclear issue. On this question, the [US President George W.] Bush administration has little choice but to act cautiously, relying on the six-party talks to exert pressure on Pyongyang and using various mechanisms (such as the U.S.-sponsored Proliferation Security Initiative) to stop North Korea from exporting nuclear materials or technology," Wang said.
"China, in its own way, has tried to dissuade North Korea from developing nuclear weapons but so far has declined to support multilateral blockades or sanctions on Pyongyang," he said.
"If North Korea ever publicly, explicitly and unmistakably demonstrates that it does possess nuclear weapons, the policies of the US, China, South Korea, Japan and Russia -- all of which favor a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula-will have failed," Wang Jisi said.
"The US then might call for much tougher actions against North Korea, which could increase tension and narrow China's options. The result could be new friction between China and the US and a serious test of their relationship," he said.
Its first test, of course, will be the visit to China of the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice. Even if Beijing were to make some gesture to harden its policy against Pyongyang, it is likely to be an elaboration of the symbolism characterizing its UN sanctions.
Therefore, North Korea, as Wang predicted, could become "a serious test of their [US-China] relationship."
Compounding North Korea is the question of Taiwan, as a "war between China and the US over Taiwan would be a nightmare ... Chinese and US government agencies and their foreign policy think tanks should launch a sustained and thorough dialogue on the issue and explore ways to prevent separatist forces from making a rash move, dragging both counties toward a confrontation neither wants," Wang Jisi said.
This self-serving suggestion has apparently been ignored in the US and is unlikely to have any relevance, more so with North Korea now occupying the center stage.
Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US