US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's trip to China hasn't achieved much. North Korea is still adamant about its nuclear ambitions and Beijing remains wary about any dramatic action against Pyongyang to bring home the message.
The atmosphere during Rice's visit was good, and some unattributed Chinese sources sought to give the impression that China was somehow making progress with its difficult neighbor. For instance, Tang Jiaxuan(
There was no elaboration of what he meant by this.
Of course, there have been unconfirmed reports that Kim told the envoy there would be no further tests. It was even reported that Kim apologized for the first test.
According to South Korea's Yonhap news agency, "Kim said during a meeting with Tang that North Korea would not conduct an additional nuclear test unless the US harasses the North."
Yonhap also quoted a source as saying that, "Kim also promised that North Korea would return to the six-way talks in the near future as long as the US promises to lift financial sanctions after the talks reopen."
At the official level, though, China's Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing (李肇星) would only say that Tang's visit had increased "mutual understanding" and he discussed how to revive the six-party talks.
Apparently, China has been trying to create an impression of some forward movement by encouraging or floating these rumors. The fact, though, is, as Rice said in Moscow (where she went after her China-visit), that: "Councillor Tang did not tell me that Kim Jong-il either apologized for the test or said that he would never test again."
In other words, if the US was hoping to swing China to its position of hardening the sanctions regime, Rice's visit was futile.
As before, China continues to push its own central role by way of six-party talks. But so far, the on-off six-party talks have even failed to prevent Pyongyang from testing a nuclear device.
The US is not ruling out returning to the six-party forum and for the North to re-engage in talks. As Rice said, "The Chinese are emphasizing the need for six-party talks to begin again and for the North to re-engage in talks."
She maintained that the US had no problem with that, but Washington will not lift sanctions to accommodate Pyongyang.
The arguments thus keep going around in a circle, without any serious analysis of whether or not the six-party talks, if resumed, would go anywhere. Which, on the basis of the record so far, is not at all encouraging.
Indeed, according to prominent Chinese security analyst Shen Dingli (
Beijing fears that any toppling of the Kim Jong-il regime might not only create a flood of refugees into China, but could even lead to the installation of a pro-US government, thus complicating its security problems.
In some way, Shen brings in Taiwan as a factor in Beijing's Korea policy. According to him, "China must continue to look at North Korea through the prism of Taiwan.
You cannot expect China to abandon its ally completely while the US continues to back Taiwan and allow the independence movement to thrive there."
North Korea, therefore, is not simply a question of its nuclear arsenal. It is part of a larger equation of US-China relations. What it means is that North Korea is sometimes a problem because it doesn't always do China's bidding, as was the case when it went ahead with its atomic test.
But, with all its imperfections, it is an important strategic tool, with the US still looking to Beijing to somehow bring Pyongyang into line on the question of nuclear proliferation.
Clearly, the US doesn't want to attack North Korea. In its present state, with Iraq and domestic politics the prime issues, it is in no position to do that. Its only option, therefore, is a strict enforcement of UN sanctions.
But these might not work without Beijing coming on board, which is unlikely to happen.
Washington is not happy with China for pussyfooting on the question of sanctions. Beijing knows that this could seriously damage its relations with Washington at some point. It is, therefore, trying to reinvent the six-party forum.
It was in this context that it sought to float all sorts of rumors about Kim's apology and his promise to Tang that he wouldn't conduct another test.
During her China visit, Rice was persuaded that Tang had delivered a "very strong message to the North Koreans about the seriousness of what happened," after the atomic test.
But she didn't think it meant much as "there wasn't anything particularly surprising" that came out of Tang's North Korean visit.
Whether or not the six-nation forum is revived will depend on Pyongyang's attitude. Washington apparently is not opposed to the idea but is unlikely to lift sanctions to accommodate Pyongyang. And Kim reportedly won't come unless the lifting of the sanctions is promised.
Therefore, unless the deadlock is broken for the talks to resume, the situation will remain tense. According to former South Korean president Kim Dae-jung, North Korea might try to bust sanctions through military action.
During her Japan visit, Rice assured her hosts that "The United States has the will and the capability to meet the full range ... of its deterrent and security commitments to Japan."
That should apply equally to South Korea in the event of a North Korean lunge across the border.
Hopefully it will not come to this. But if it does, how will China respond?
Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS