A Tale of Two North Koreas

China can't decide If It wants to bury Kim Jong Il or to praise him.

BY ADAM CATHCART | DECEMBER 30, 2011

CHENGDU — Watching Kim Jong Il's funeral on the English-language version of China's Central Television (CCTV), one would be forgiven for thinking that North Korea was a progressive country well on its way to achieving success with major economic reforms. While commentators in New York and Seoul attacked the regime's ability to survive or poured cold water on the prospects for peace, Chinese commentators on English-language official state media praised Kim Jong Il for the wisdom of acknowledging the efficacy of the Chinese model of foreign investment.  With a kind of tenacious obliviousness, CCTV reporters predicted that Kim Jong Un, the twenty-something heir and new supreme leader, would further consolidate the victory of market principles, and subsequently guarantee the viability of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).

Repeated several times during the live but intermittent funeral procession coverage, the official Chinese television narrative of Kim Jong Il's life provided variations on the economic theme. This TV tribute to Kim depicted him as a China-inspired aspiring reformer and a force for regional peace, and excitedly described his various trips to the People's Republic of China (PRC). As Kim Jong Un's formidable jowls filled the screen, Chinese television decoupled North Korea's eruptions of 2010 -- namely, the sinking of the South Korean warship the Cheonan and the shelling of Yeonpyeong island -- from the young successor, who was rumored to be behind such provocations. Rather than dwelling on his military ties, Chinese television analysts pointed to Kim Jong Un's foreign education, commenting that his five years spent in Switzerland as a teenager could be a sign that "greater opening and more reform measures are on the way under his leadership." Talk about putting lipstick on a pig.

That said, there's good reasons for Beijing to evince support for Pyongyang to Western audiences. China has indeed gambled much prestige and a great deal of money on the question of Kim's acceptance of China-style economic reforms. Besides bankrolling development along the border, Beijing has declined to criticize Pyongyang for its provocations (with the exception of its second nuclear test in 2009). And there's no doubt that China prefers an independent North Korea -- as a unified peninsula, led inevitably by Seoul, would likely mean American troops in a country bordering China.

However, in the less official corners of the PRC press, a more nuanced discourse about North Korea is taking place. Despite what is published in China's major official media outlets, like Xinhua, or English-language venues like Global Times and China Daily, many heavyweight Chinese intellectuals and foreign-policy makers have been airing the views in more niche publications that North Korea is both untrustworthy and unstable.   

Within the parameters established by the Chinese Communist Party -- that Kim Jong Un is the face of stability and that economic engagement should be sustained for now -- practically everything else is up for debate. Some responses to Kim Jong Il's death on Chinese editorial pages, while not reaching the heights of John Bolton's mustachioed fury, betray a deep distrust of the Kim regime.

One Dec. 21 editorial by Sun Xingsong, an international affairs commentator in the nationalistic Chinese-language version of Global Times, lashes into North Korea's military-first policy. "Under Kim Jong Il," writes Sun, "North Korean people had to tighten their belts in exchange for sophisticated military weapons." Sun goes further, writing about Kim Jong Un's total lack of charisma, then describing a scenario whereby North Korea's future opening to the web (an inevitable consequence of following the Chinese path) leads angry youth to overthrow the regime, a bald acknowledgement that the DPRK could collapse. 

Why is there a discrepancy between what is presented to foreigners about China's stance on North Korea, and the way that the Chinese themselves discuss the issue?

One answer lies in the old Communist notion of united front. Disagreements between Beijing and Pyongyang may have festered for decades, but don't get aired publicly due to a concern that they would weaken the alliance.  The leaders in Pyongyang take the same approach, projecting an image of socialist brotherhood with China to the outside and then continually surprising the Chinese with things like nuclear tests near their border and using the frontier as a transit point for illegal drug exports. Both China and North Korea maintain a willingness to privately despise and disparage their alliance while remaining publicly riveted into it.

The schizophrenic nature of how China discusses and views North Korea, and how it wants the West to imagine it sees things, is perhaps most evident in the Global Times, whose Chinese-language version is far more negative on the DPRK than its English-language counterpart. When North Korean border guards defect, the Chinese version covers it on page 3; the English version is silent. When the Chinese version ran front-page rumors of an attempted assassination of Kim Jong Il's eldest son in 2009, the English language version kept mum. For every outward declaration of the common Chinese phrase that the two countries are as close as "lips and teeth" to the outside world, there is a depiction at home of North Korea as dangerous and even possibly depraved.

Global Times editor Hu Xijin sees the Korean peninsula as ultimately a stage upon which China can demonstrate its proud global emergence as a "great power."  His influential editorial page describes North Korea as "a little country" which should neither challenge China's directives nor doubt its protective capacity. He complains about how much money Pyongyang sucks from Beijing's foreign aid budget, while warning how much worse things would be if North Korean refugees en masse flooded into China.

But perhaps one television shot from the funeral best illustrates the schizophrenia of the Chinese read on North Korea. As the feed showed Kim Jong Un walking beside his father's immense hearse, a foreign CCTV English-language news anchor asked his Chinese colleague to describe the meaning of the wailing of the crowds of North Korean mourners. The analyst paused, then neatly summed up the ambivalent Chinese attitude toward North Korea: "I think it means they love their leader, and they are ready for a change." Whether the Chinese will now actively assist in that change remains to be seen, but at least they're starting to talk about it publicly -- at least among themselves.

 SUBJECTS: CHINA, NORTH KOREA, EAST ASIA
 

Adam Cathcart is assistant professor of Chinese history at Pacific Lutheran University in Tacoma, Washington, and editor of SinoNK.com.

AMCALABRESE

6:52 AM ET

December 30, 2011

A good time?

All things considered, wouldn't this be a good time to offer the North something radical, say an offer of recognition and removal of US troops from the south in return for better monitoring of their nuclear program?

 

XMASTER4000

6:45 PM ET

December 30, 2011

Mmm

And how would that avoid North Korea from doing even more absurd war provocations with absolute impunity? And in exchange for "better monitoring", that's ludicrous. Something radical for both parties, sure, but not something stupid.

 

BDMNTN

8:28 PM ET

December 30, 2011

stop this trope

Constantly bandied about otherwise interesting pieces on China / DPRK relations is this nugget about China not wanting troops on it's borders, and that this desire is influencing Chinese policy decisions in regard to the DPRK. This has shown up all over the place, from CFR media calls about the death of KJI to the Economist and all the major newspapers.

It is not true.

The facts are that China already has plenty of American troops along its border, something like 100,000 across the Wakhjir Pass in Afghanistan. If we include maritime borders, and why wouldn't we, then we'd have to include another 60,000 troops in Japan, South Korea and the Philippines. Throw in billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan, nuclear deals with India and major arms sales to Taiwan, all of whom share borders with China, and that should round out the picture more accurately.

If China were making policy considerations based solely or even primarily on reducing US troops on its borders, then it has been making serious blunders. But of course, it hasn't.

According to Wikileaks, China would be just fine with a 'benign' US ally like a unified Korea on its doorstep and why wouldn't it be. Yet of course, this info has yet to permeate US media. South Koreas largest trading partner is China and South Korean / Chinese relations are more amicable and reliable, based on a contractual economic interest, than Chinese / DPRK relations. China is an authoritarian, repressive state, but it is rational - a unified Korea would fit squarely into its sphere of influence without much blinking.

China surely backs the murderous regime, but in many ways, so does Japan, South Korea and the US. Japan, by making the issue with the DPRK solely about kidnappings, has totally given away any negotiating tactics. South Korea, who through the Sunshine policy has propped up the regime, and the US whose refusal to sign a peace deal with the North led to nuclear armament and now, a legitimate reason to not sign the deal.

A contrast with 'communist' Vietnam must be applicable here, as openness and peace led to the opening the country.

And yet, propping up the regime seems to benefit the elites of all the involved parties. When the regime finally does crash, some sort of federated weak state funded by foreign direct investment will allow all the major parties to milk the cash cow that is North Korea of the natural resources and cheap labor available. Any other outcome, regardless of the humanitarian situation, would not be in any of the six parties interest.

 

B3050612

9:52 PM ET

January 9, 2012

Always use caution when

Always use caution when giving out any personally identifying information about yourself or your children in any Communication Service. Deep River Sporting Clays and Shooting School does not control or endorse the content, messages or information found in any Communication Service and, therefore, Deep River Sporting Clays and Shooting School specifically disclaims any liability with mkv converterMKV ConverterYouTube Converter for MacYouTube To MP4 ConverterPdf Converter for Macregard to the Communication Services and any actions resulting from your participation in any Communication Service. Managers and hosts are not authorized Deep River Sporting Clays and Shooting School spokespersons, and their views do not necessarily reflect those of Deep River Sporting Clays and Shooting School.

 

ZEESHANRANJHA

8:36 AM ET

January 2, 2012

Good work by the writer. :)

Good work by the writer. :)

 

BGVFYDFDSHJ

8:53 PM ET

January 2, 2012

very good web: ===

very good web: === http://www.plzzshop.com

The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike, jordan, prada, also including the jeans, shirts, bags, hat and the decorations.

All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment., After the payment, can ship within short time.

We will give you a discount

WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT

YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

=== http://www.plzzshop.com

thank you!!!

Believe you will love it.

We have good reputation, fashion products,

come here quickly== http://www.plzzshop.com

Opportunity knocks but once

 

HECTORGREG11

12:54 AM ET

January 27, 2012

amazing how time changes everything

This is nothing new...China goes with whatever is best for their own interests, much like any country for that matter. The thing that is really interesting is that Kim Il Jong is gone now and the world is free of one old dictator, lets hope that this new one doesn't pick up where his dad left off though wedding officiant austin

 

YARINSIZ

10:25 AM ET

January 27, 2012

The facts are that China

The facts are that China already has plenty of American troops along its border, something like 100,000 across the Wakhjir Pass in Afghanistan. If we include maritime borders, and why wouldn't we, then we'd have to include another 60,000 troops in Japan, South Korea and the Philippines. Throw in billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan,seslichat nuclear deals with India and major arms sales to Taiwan, all of whom share borders with China, and that should round out the picture more accurately.