The nuclear standoff on the Korean peninsula shows little sign of letting up amid an escalating verbal battle between Washington and Pyongyang. Faced with North Korea’s threat of conducting another nuclear test ― perhaps within weeks or even days, not months ― the United States warned Tuesday that it will also take ``significant action” if this occurs.
As done in recent times, Washington is adopting a two-track approach by showing both toughness and moderateness. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has left the door ajar for Pyongyang to return to the negotiation table.
As if by agreement, Beijing has adopted the same approach this time around. China has toughened customs clearance procedures at major ports along the Sino-Korean border, an established way for Beijing to express displeasure with foreign partners. At the same time, new Chinese leader Xi Jinping was quoted in major state newspapers recommending a resumption of the six-party talks that collapsed four years ago.
Such rare U.S.-Chinese coincidence, or unity, in dealing with their common headache shows how seriously they regard the consequences of Pyongyang conducting a third nuclear test in seven years.
The problem is that even concerted action by the G2 will hardly be able to keep the recalcitrant regime from continuing to play with the nuclear option.
Of course, there are far more effective tools China can use to stop its troublesome ally: discontinuing its fuel and food aid, which accounts for 80 and 50 percent of the North’s needs respectively. Few predict that Beijing will go so far as to play this last card, which could lead to either the isolationist regime collapsing or Pyongyang breaking away from its communist big brother, both of which would be unwelcome for the Middle Kingdom whose hands are already full with other problems.
The best scenario for South Korea would be for China’s next president to follow in the footsteps of his benchmarking model, Deng Xiaoping, who pushed ahead with normalizing relations with Seoul despite opposition from Pyongyang about two decades ago. If Xi, who is reportedly as bold and pragmatic as Deng, admits the reality on this divided peninsula in which the capitalist South has won ca omplete victory over the communist North, and dissuades the North from military adventurism, Beijing will be able to jointly revive economic activities in North Korea’s northeastern provinces with Seoul.
It will be far better for China than perennially playing the role of godfather to the destruction of regional peace in order to secure a buffer zone from U.S. influence.
This of course will require corresponding action from Washington. The U.S. also needs to take a bolder, more comprehensive approach by putting all three cards ― denuclearization of North Korea, guarantee of its leadership system and replacing the armistice with a peace treaty ― on the table, dropping its step-by-step strategy, which has ended up enlarging the North’s nuclear arsenal amid the threat of sanctions and even their partial implementation.
To solve the nuclear deadlock on this peninsula, what’s lacking are not the ways but the will of the parties involved, especially the G2.