The war virus unleashed by Russian President Vladimir Putin has reached the Korean Peninsula, raising alarm. By labeling his invasion of Ukraine as a “special military operation,” Putin has revived a territorial conquest reminiscent of a bygone era, casting himself as a modern-day czar. Few could have imagined such a brutal war in Europe, which has resulted in 500,000 casualties, including 120,000 Russian soldiers.
The more alarming issue is that Putin’s barbaric actions have not ended there. By involving North Korea, he has now heightened the risk of war in Asia, too. The newly signed North Korea-Russia treaty, which includes an “automatic military intervention” clause in Article 4, mandates immediate military and other support if either nation is attacked, amplifying fears further.
This situation not only revives the trauma of the Korean War, instigated by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, but also undermines the cooperative relationship South Korea painstakingly built with Russia after the end of the Cold War.
At that time, the US$3 billion economic cooperation loan South Korea provided Russia when they established diplomatic ties, along with Russia’s termination of its alliance treaty with North Korea, signaled a major breakthrough in their relations.
Additionally, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, Russia supported 14 rounds of sanctions against North Korea for seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Now, by embracing North Korea as an ally, Russia under Putin has become a rogue and abnormal state.
Putin’s war-driven adventurism has sent shockwaves through the global order, casting a shadow of a potential return to Cold War-era dynamics. The geopolitical balance in Europe and Asia is now destabilized, risking a realignment of the world order that pits continental powers against maritime ones.
As North Korea and Russia grow closer, the balance of power on the Korean Peninsula appears to be dividing into a northern bloc composed of North Korea, China and Russia, against a southern bloc composed of South Korea, the US and Japan.
At a time when the Republic of Korea-US-Japan alliance is at its strongest in countering North Korea’s nuclear threat, Russia’s move to align with North Korea seems aimed at reinvigorating a trilateral alliance with North Korea and China.
Seeking to establish a defensive line against NATO expansion in Europe and Asia, Russia is pressuring China to bandwagon into a renewed trilateral alliance with North Korea.
Russia on July 30 staged large-scale naval exercises worldwide, using its naval forces to demonstrate this goal through a show of force. Before this, Chinese and Russian navies held joint maritime drills in the Western Pacific, signaling China’s alignment with Russia’s global strategy. China’s involvement in these exercises was a direct response to the recent NATO summit in Washington, which labeled China a “decisive enabler” of Russia’s war in Ukraine.
This is China’s dilemma. Although Beijing cannot completely disregard the trilateral alliance with Russia and North Korea, but fully committing to it is neither advantageous for its national interests nor guaranteed to succeed. The more China aligns with Russia’s global strategy, the more its standing and influence in the global market economy erodes.
To resolve this dilemma, China must play a reversal card — steering Russia to align with China’s own strategic framework. For instance, as a global power upholding the UN system, China could temper Putin’s adventurism. This approach would not only best serve China’s interests, but also contribute to global security.
Another decisive reason why the renewal of a North Korea-China-Russia trilateral alliance is unlikely is the heightened risk of conflict on the Korean Peninsula. By extending a lifeline to a North Korea teetering on the brink of collapse, Russia has increased the chances of military confrontation in the region.
In the worst-case scenario, a situation akin to the Korean War in 1950 to 1953 could unfold, with North Korea and Russia conspiring for a conflict that might draw China into the turmoil. Such a nightmare scenario is why China cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the North Korean issue.
Recent reports in South Korean media highlight unusual developments and friction in the North Korea-China relationship following the closer ties between North Korea and Russia. The situation suggests that China is exerting pressure on North Korea, prompting signs of dissatisfaction from Pyongyang. Notably, images of North Korean workers being repatriated from China were captured at an international airport, indicating that the Chinese government is actively enforcing UN Security Council Resolution 2397, which restricts the ability of North Korean citizens to work abroad.
There are also reports that North Korea is redirecting some of these workers, particularly those in the information technology (IT) sector, to Russia. These IT workers have been identified as a critical source of foreign currency for North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s regime, fueling its government and nuclear missile development as a significant “cash cow.”
Moreover, South Korean media have reported that North Korea plans to send military engineering units or workers to the Donetsk region in Ukraine. The UN Security Council Sanctions Committee on North Korea in March released a report indicating that revenue generated by North Korea from its overseas workers has nearly tripled since the implementation of UN sanctions, reaching an estimated US$750 million to US$1.1 billion annually.
Among the anti-China actions observed within North Korea, a particularly striking one was the first directive issued by Kim to the North Korean embassy in China right after the signing of the North Korea-Russia treaty, which reportedly emphasized not yielding to China’s influence, suggesting that North Korea’s anti-China sentiment has reached a serious level.
The dual challenge Russia and North Korea poses to China is significant enough to shape its future trajectory. To prevail in this situation, Beijing must pursue a path of geopolitical transformation. China’s most valuable and momentous success was the decision it made more than 40 years ago to shift from focusing on continental geopolitics to embracing global trade.
While North Korea and Russia might temporarily lure China into reverting back to the outdated model, this is not the direction China should take.
Russia has strayed significantly from the anti-terrorism and anti-hegemony principles that it has traditionally upheld, making it increasingly difficult for China to view Russia as a credible diplomatic partner. In this context, the North Korea-China-Russia cooperative alliance appears unreasonable for Chinese leaders.
China should prioritize monitoring and deterring any potential adventurist actions by North Korea and Russia. To achieve this, it should reactivate a cooperative framework with the US to help restore the UN order. As Russia distances itself from the UN, China’s role and responsibilities within the Security Council have grown even more vital, making collaboration with the US not just optional, but necessary.
In Northeast Asia, China can leverage its trilateral cooperation mechanism with South Korea and Japan, which marks its 25th anniversary this year, to address the North Korean issue. The Republic of Korea-Japan-China ‘Trilateral+X Cooperation’ framework, included in the Joint Declaration from the summit held in Seoul on May 27, could also be expanded to include other nations.
This approach would not only strengthen deterrence against North Korea’s nuclear ambitions, but also contribute to building a more robust security order for the Korean Peninsula.
Lee Min-yong is visiting professor in the School of Global Service in the Sookmyung Women’s University, Republic of Korea.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS