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.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS