By Lee Seong-hyon
Last time, we examined why China has never officially proposed to abolish or abandon its alliance with North Korea, since 1961. We also looked at why China also makes pains not to draw attention to it. When comparing the China-North Korea alliance with the South Korea-U.S. alliance, one also finds, surprisingly, that the North Korea-China alliance was "designed," from the beginning, to be very difficult to break than the alliance between South Korea and the U.S.
In the case of the South Korea-U.S. alliance, the treaty would be simply terminated if either side makes notifications of such intentions one year in advance. However, the North Korea-China alliance is more complex. "Unless there is an agreement between the two parties, the treaty shall continue to remain in force," Article 7 states. This is like when a couple wants to divorce, both parties, not just one side, must agree to separate, only then can a divorce be filed. On the contrary, the South Korea-U.S. alliance can be terminated without fuss when either of them decides to separate. In keeping with the spirit of the treaty, if China wants to terminate its alliance but North Korea refuses it, the couple has no choice but to continue to be bedfellows. It's because they designed the marriage contract that way.
Second, most importantly, the North Korea-China alliance has the "compulsory intervention clause," which is absent in the South Korea-U.S. alliance. This is the key difference between the two alliances. Article 2 of the North Korea-China alliance states that "when either party of the treaty is physically invaded and is involved in a state of war, the other party will provide, with all its might, military and other assistance without delay."
On the contrary, Article 2 of the South Korea- U.S. alliance states that "the parties will consult each other whenever either of them is threatened by external armed attack." In other words, the South Korea-U.S. treaty says they will merely "consult" when one of them is under attack, while the North Korea-China treaty stipulates that they are obligated to help each other "without delay." So, the two treaties are clearly different in terms of the degree of obligation and the immediacy of providing aid.
Third, the North Korea-China alliance uses the very unusual phrase, "brotherly friendly" (xiongdi ban de youhao) to describe the relationship. That expression is not common in alliance treaties. The "brotherly friendly" relationship is an expression that does not exist in the South Korea-U.S. alliance or other treaties. It is also an expression not found in the alliance treaty China made with the Soviet Union (1950), the first ally of China and the most important ally at that time.
Xi Jinping visited North Korea in 2008. It was his first foreign visit after he was minted as the vice president of China. As he was laying a flower basket on the statue of Kim Il-sung, North Korea's founder, he said: "Our two nations are connected by mountains and water, and our friendship has been founded and developed by our two generations of revolutionaries." At that time, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said, "We will strengthen the friendship between the two countries and promote cooperation and friendly relations in each field."
In 2013, Xi became the president of China. Since then, he has not visited North Korea. A bilateral summit has yet to take place. Based on this, and amid China's growing frustration with North Korea over the latter's nuclear program, many pundits have characterized the China-North Korea relationship as at its "worst." Some media outlets in Hong Kong even said the treaty was just a piece of paper that has lost its relevance today.
What is interesting is that the North Korea-China alliance is still, quietly, intact. Further, when China is pushed to state its stance on North Korea at critical junctures, Beijing drops the usual "low-key" mode and forcefully articulates its protective cover for Pyongyang. For instance, when asked whether the murder of Kim Jong-nam would have a "negative impact" on Sino-North Korea relations, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said, "China and North Korea are friendly neighbors and the two nations maintain the friendly tradition." It may not be a coincidence that the term "friendly" was mentioned twice in one sentence.
Lee Seong-hyon, Ph.D., is a research fellow at the Sejong Institute. Reach him at sunnybbsfs@gmail.com
.jpg/dims/resize/740/optimize) |
In the case of the South Korea-U.S. alliance, the treaty would be simply terminated if either side makes notifications of such intentions one year in advance. However, the North Korea-China alliance is more complex. "Unless there is an agreement between the two parties, the treaty shall continue to remain in force," Article 7 states. This is like when a couple wants to divorce, both parties, not just one side, must agree to separate, only then can a divorce be filed. On the contrary, the South Korea-U.S. alliance can be terminated without fuss when either of them decides to separate. In keeping with the spirit of the treaty, if China wants to terminate its alliance but North Korea refuses it, the couple has no choice but to continue to be bedfellows. It's because they designed the marriage contract that way.
Second, most importantly, the North Korea-China alliance has the "compulsory intervention clause," which is absent in the South Korea-U.S. alliance. This is the key difference between the two alliances. Article 2 of the North Korea-China alliance states that "when either party of the treaty is physically invaded and is involved in a state of war, the other party will provide, with all its might, military and other assistance without delay."
On the contrary, Article 2 of the South Korea- U.S. alliance states that "the parties will consult each other whenever either of them is threatened by external armed attack." In other words, the South Korea-U.S. treaty says they will merely "consult" when one of them is under attack, while the North Korea-China treaty stipulates that they are obligated to help each other "without delay." So, the two treaties are clearly different in terms of the degree of obligation and the immediacy of providing aid.
Third, the North Korea-China alliance uses the very unusual phrase, "brotherly friendly" (xiongdi ban de youhao) to describe the relationship. That expression is not common in alliance treaties. The "brotherly friendly" relationship is an expression that does not exist in the South Korea-U.S. alliance or other treaties. It is also an expression not found in the alliance treaty China made with the Soviet Union (1950), the first ally of China and the most important ally at that time.
Xi Jinping visited North Korea in 2008. It was his first foreign visit after he was minted as the vice president of China. As he was laying a flower basket on the statue of Kim Il-sung, North Korea's founder, he said: "Our two nations are connected by mountains and water, and our friendship has been founded and developed by our two generations of revolutionaries." At that time, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said, "We will strengthen the friendship between the two countries and promote cooperation and friendly relations in each field."
In 2013, Xi became the president of China. Since then, he has not visited North Korea. A bilateral summit has yet to take place. Based on this, and amid China's growing frustration with North Korea over the latter's nuclear program, many pundits have characterized the China-North Korea relationship as at its "worst." Some media outlets in Hong Kong even said the treaty was just a piece of paper that has lost its relevance today.
What is interesting is that the North Korea-China alliance is still, quietly, intact. Further, when China is pushed to state its stance on North Korea at critical junctures, Beijing drops the usual "low-key" mode and forcefully articulates its protective cover for Pyongyang. For instance, when asked whether the murder of Kim Jong-nam would have a "negative impact" on Sino-North Korea relations, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said, "China and North Korea are friendly neighbors and the two nations maintain the friendly tradition." It may not be a coincidence that the term "friendly" was mentioned twice in one sentence.
Lee Seong-hyon, Ph.D., is a research fellow at the Sejong Institute. Reach him at sunnybbsfs@gmail.com
![Afghanistan earthquake killed more than 1,000 [PHOTOS]](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/newsV2/images/AFGHAN0001_e064cf8b60c94.JPG/dims/resize/268/optimize)
