Conventional wisdom is that North Korea depends on China, but China also depends on North Korea - By Drew Thompson

The biggest loser from the ongoing tensions surrounding the sinking of a South Korean vessel may not be Seoul, or Pyongyang, but Beijing.

By refusing to condemn North Korea for its deliberate attack and sinking of a South Korean Navy corvette in March, China has lost hard-won credibility and reminded countries throughout Asia of the importance of the United States and its dominant presence in the Western Pacific.

The recovery of the vessel, the Cheonan, and dredging the seabed revealed a smoking gun -- the remains of a North Korean torpedo. A South Korean report drawing upon the participation of experts from Australia, Britain, Sweden, and the United States and released in late May laid the blame squarely at the feet of North Korea, thus prompting the real aftershocks of the incident.

In response to the report, Beijing chose not to take a clear stand and simply acknowledged the report, as well as North Korea's shrieks of denial. Rather than condemn North Korea's violent act, Beijing ignored the findings of the international investigators after reportedly having been invited to join the team but declining. In early May, before the report's release, both South Korean President Lee Myung-bak and North Korean leader Kim Jong Il had summits in China with President Hu Jintao to plead their respective cases, but neither came away satisfied.

China's decision to protect North Korea reflects not only a careful policy calculation based on parochial self-interest, but also Beijing's desire to maintain the regional security balance that, as the country's leaders see it, is dependent on a strong China-North Korea relationship. Failure to support North Korea could lead to its collapse -- which could bring far worse consequences for China than most outside observers realize.

China fears the potential for chaos in North Korea for a number of reasons. For starters, the prospect of starving refugees and the remnants of the Korean People's Army so close to its own border is an obvious concern. The 1,400 kilometers of river that separate the two countries is narrow and shallow in many places, presenting an insignificant barrier to refugees and bandits seeking to cross. It is no coincidence that of all China's 14 borders with neighboring states, the country's People's Liberation Army is the lead authority only for those frontiers that border North Korea and Myanmar.

Meanwhile, integration of North Korea's economy and China's northeastern provinces, particularly the provinces of Liaoning and Jilin, ensure that northeast China will pay a significant price should North Korea implode. Economic stability in these "rust belt" provinces, part of the struggling industrial region known informally in the West as Manchuria, is a key concern for Beijing. Having banked on trade with North Korea as a central part of their development plan (about half of the Chinese investors in North Korean joint ventures come from just these two provinces), these northern provinces might suffer significant economic impacts from further instability in North Korea. Not only is all politics local, but sometimes foreign policy is local too.

12NEXT

Save big when you subscribe to FP.

NORBOOSE

7:28 PM ET

June 7, 2010

Good Article

A good, thorough explanation of the situation. Well done.

HITOMI

12:28 AM ET

June 8, 2010

China's games prove not just irresponsibility but malice

While you are certainly correct in pointing out how this incident provides ample evidence of China's inability or rather complete unwillingness to be a responsible stakeholder in the region, you miss the kicker.

The PRC/PLA's representative at the recent plenary session of the IISS Asia Security Summit was a whingingly aggrieved model of petty-man diplomacy who did little more than prevaricate on the subject of the Cheonan, making himself look ridiculous by claiming "there are controversial views on who did it" when his government has put forward no alternative interpretation of the event. His most impressive contribution involved hamfistedly attempting to deflect attention away from North Korea's attack and toward the Israeli incident. In a dialogue that nowhere focued on the Middle East.

http://www.iiss.org/conferences/the-shangri-la-dialogue/shangri-la-dialogue-2010/plenary-session-speeches/first-plenary-session/robert-gates/qa/

Indeed, this representative was none other than ZHU CHENGHU, the same individual who threatened a first-strike nuclear attack on the US in 2005.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/world/asia/15iht-china.html

So China has sent a man famous for little more than having an eagerly shared "personal opinion" (and ask yourself if that opinion would have been publicly allowed would it not have met government acceptability) on the use of nuclear weapons even in response to a conventional conflict China started--has sent this man to discuss the regional security issue involving North Korea and its nuclear ambitions. Impressive show of sincerity, commitment, and restraint, PRC. I guess he wasn't punished for his previous comments after all, despite the central government's claims.

It may be important to note that another way China relies on North Korea is for purchasable and "doable" women.

www.hrnk.org/download/Lives%20for%20Sale.pdf

3:39 AM ET

It's not exactly an "Asian tragedy" when China endorses it

All your feeble rage. And nothing to show for it.

On Zhu ChengHu's "punishment":

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/22/world/asia/22iht-general.html?_r=1

Zhu stated that the PLA would nuclear bomb every major city in the US in response for a US *conventional attack* on PLA assets, even if the PLA initiated conflict in the Taiwan Straits (and one must presume that means attacked US ships first, for attempting to intervene, as the US has no reason to initiate a strike). Only an ultra-nationalistic idiot would believe Taiwan would start the conflict, so I'll let your "=Taiwan will start the war" properly illustrate your level of comprehension. The PRC will be, as it traditionally has been, the aggressor. Zhu is saying, "we'll start it and if you try to stop it we'll nuke you". That is the message meant to be conveyed.

"We have no capability to fight a conventional war against the United States," Zhu said. "We can't win this kind of war."" = they will fight to win...

No, not to win. Zhu also willingly offered up "all the cities west of Xian" (or about 900 million Chinese citizens) for total annihilation in circumstances which he acknowledges China would create, shifting from a conventional war to a nuclear one. I think the Chinese people might like to know about this--to know that their lives mean absolutely nothing to their military (or what, that Taiwan is really worth the death of as many Chinese people possible, I suppose. A billion-plus civilians dead is probably still acceptable for the PLA. For what would be a decimated island.). In other words, Zhu is the typical PLA coward who, when he cannot win a war, would sacrifice all the Chinese people in his power to still lose one.

Your *selected representative of the Chinese government* for this moment of crisis (Mr. Zhu) has been witnessed cavalierly pissing in the face of MAD in the past, yet he was given this opportunity to convey another message for the PRC. I guess since the PLA, with Hu as its restituted mouthpiece, considers its own people cannon fodder worthy of a self-inflicted holocaust, they and the Chinese government surely must have a balanced view of the current crisis though, no?

GRANT

8:10 AM ET

The article in general might

The article in general might be accurate, but in South Korea I don't think that they were too happy with their president's handling of it. The opposition made serious gains in recent elections.

SADRI

10:16 AM ET

Good point

SURESH SHETH

10:39 AM ET

North Korea is China's puppet

Drew Thompson has got it upside down in his claim that China can not survive without North Korea. Fact is North Korea’s lifeline passes through Beijing and it is nothing but a Chinese puppet.

US has intentionally ignored China’s supply of nuclear weapons and ballistic missile technology to North Korea in the vain hope that China will somehow help US contain North Korean nuclear program that China itself has created!

Afterall North Koreans are NOT geniuses who can invent nuclear triggers and ballistic missiles. Neither North Korea nor Pakistan would have dared to exchange Pakistan’s uranium enrichment technology for North Korea’s Chinese ballistic missile technology if China would have strongly objected since China is an indispensable ally of both.

China does NOT want a unified strong Korea on its southeast border because it can lay claim to vast areas of Chinese territory that were part of Korea for almost five hundred years.

North Korean crisis was just a ‘tempest in a teacup’ magnified by American officials and pundits besides South Korean government.

South Korea does NOT want to harm its trade with China to punish North Korea for the sinking of a South Korean warship as South Korean foreign minister said publicly. No significant action by UN is possible without Chinese support as everybody knows and China is NOT going to abandon its puppet regime in North Korea.

Since neither US nor South Korea is willing to start a war over the death of 46 South Korean soldiers, there wasn’t much left for them to do other than raise a tempest in a teacup.

TOMHE

11:14 AM ET

The word "puppet" is not accurate

It was not as that simple as you thought. When China established diplomatic relationship with South Korea, North Korea’s leaders were extremely unhappy. The move was regarded as a betray by North Korea. In the minds of Chinese, North Korea has a weight, for sure; but, Taiwan is heavier than North Korea. I have a feeling that China, in the near future, may view Taiwan and Korea Peninsula as the two aspects of a single issue.

RSAFSOZ

5:32 PM ET

June 10, 2010

lier

i dont like this man who is sikis lier

Foreign Policy Magazine

China's Cheonan Dilemma

We take it for granted that North Korea is dependent on China, but key parts of China are dependent on North Korea as well.

BY DREW THOMPSON | JUNE 7, 2010

(8)

Slate Highlights