By Lee Seong-hyon
North Korea's Kim offered a rare peace overture. Washington should be careful not to make the usual mistake of tossing the ball over to Beijing.
Kim Jong-un's offering the "olive branch" by adopting a conciliatory tone in the inter-Korean relations and talking about sending a delegation to the Winter Olympics is seen by some skeptics as deceptive art. Yet it is also a rare and valuable opportunity to probe North Korea's intentions and size up its young leader.
The Trump administration therefore should seize the opportunity too. But it should be careful not to go through China, the usual "middleman" in Washington's dealings with North Korea. Trump repeatedly said China has "total control" over North Korea and personally urged Xi Jinping to do more in containing Pyongyang's nuclear ambition.
Apparently, sanctions against North Korea are seen bearing a tangible impact on North Korea's economy recently and China gets major credit for that. China is seen implementing more strenuous sanctions this time against North Korea than before. Some observers see North Korea showing its willingness for dialogue as "evidence" that the sanctions are finally biting.
Yet there is also a lack of analysis as to why China is "suddenly" implementing bona fide sanctions this time after years of carrying them out perfunctorily. The timing is particularly odd because North Korea is widely seen as already owning nuclear weapons. The purpose of the sanctions was to prevent Pyongyang from having nuclear weapons. So, in theory, this should be a more opportune time for China to display cursory punitive gestures with full knowledge that it's a lost cause now. But China is doing the opposite.
China's Commerce Ministry on Jan. 5 said it will limit exports of crude oil and refined oil products (and some others) to North Korea, in line with the latest U.N. resolution. The U.N. Security Council last month unanimously voted in favor of new penalties on North Korea for its recent intercontinental ballistic missile test.
The key here is crude oil, as it can be turned into products for military use, in addition to civilian transportation. According to the December resolution, the U.N. limits Chinese crude oil supplies to 4 million barrels a year. China annually provides 500,000 tons of crude oil to North Korea. If converted, 4 million barrels are equal to 580,000 tons. Simply put, there is no reduction in China's crude oil supply to North Korea. It's a numbers gimmick. China still provides the same level of crude oil to North Korea.
All in all, China is playing a very clever game. It is good at displaying the appearance of cooperation with the U.S., which is the main driver of harsh sanctions on Pyongyang. China is making noticeable "progress" in its implementation of sanctions, fearing Washington's pre-emptive strike against Pyongyang. A narrative such as "the sanctions are working" will prevent Washington from resorting to military options.
"We could cut off crude oil to North Korea completely, if we want to. But why should we turn North Korea into our enemy by doing so? We could stop all the smuggling across the Sino-North Korean border. But why should China spend tremendous national resources for such a purpose? It hurts our own economy. It hurts our relationship with North Korea. And we know that the U.S. always tries to drive a wedge between Beijing and Pyongyang," said a Chinese interlocutor.
In the end, it boils down to China's ultimate intentions with North Korea. Namely, China and the U.S. have different strategic goals pertaining to North Korea that are irreconcilable. It's time to accept it.
This aspect also points to why the much touted idea of the "grand bargain" between Washington and Beijing stands not to materialize. The "Kissinger moment" on North Korea is intellectually entertaining but realistically flawed. In 1972, China was poorer and weaker. Sino-U.S. relations were asymmetrical at that time. But not at the present geopolitical situation where China believes it has entered a heroic struggle for global supremacy vis-a-vis with the U.S.
For the U.S., waiting for China to solve the North Korean issue is a flawed policy. Trump should make a grand bargain with Pyongyang, not with Beijing. Washington should bypass China and directly engage North Korea. This new approach has a better chance of bearing any fruit in the 25-year-old barren tree in North Korea's nuclear garden.
Lee Seong-hyon (sunnybbsfs@gmail.com), Ph.D., is a research fellow at the Sejong Institute.
.jpg/dims/resize/740/optimize) |
Kim Jong-un's offering the "olive branch" by adopting a conciliatory tone in the inter-Korean relations and talking about sending a delegation to the Winter Olympics is seen by some skeptics as deceptive art. Yet it is also a rare and valuable opportunity to probe North Korea's intentions and size up its young leader.
The Trump administration therefore should seize the opportunity too. But it should be careful not to go through China, the usual "middleman" in Washington's dealings with North Korea. Trump repeatedly said China has "total control" over North Korea and personally urged Xi Jinping to do more in containing Pyongyang's nuclear ambition.
Apparently, sanctions against North Korea are seen bearing a tangible impact on North Korea's economy recently and China gets major credit for that. China is seen implementing more strenuous sanctions this time against North Korea than before. Some observers see North Korea showing its willingness for dialogue as "evidence" that the sanctions are finally biting.
Yet there is also a lack of analysis as to why China is "suddenly" implementing bona fide sanctions this time after years of carrying them out perfunctorily. The timing is particularly odd because North Korea is widely seen as already owning nuclear weapons. The purpose of the sanctions was to prevent Pyongyang from having nuclear weapons. So, in theory, this should be a more opportune time for China to display cursory punitive gestures with full knowledge that it's a lost cause now. But China is doing the opposite.
China's Commerce Ministry on Jan. 5 said it will limit exports of crude oil and refined oil products (and some others) to North Korea, in line with the latest U.N. resolution. The U.N. Security Council last month unanimously voted in favor of new penalties on North Korea for its recent intercontinental ballistic missile test.
The key here is crude oil, as it can be turned into products for military use, in addition to civilian transportation. According to the December resolution, the U.N. limits Chinese crude oil supplies to 4 million barrels a year. China annually provides 500,000 tons of crude oil to North Korea. If converted, 4 million barrels are equal to 580,000 tons. Simply put, there is no reduction in China's crude oil supply to North Korea. It's a numbers gimmick. China still provides the same level of crude oil to North Korea.
All in all, China is playing a very clever game. It is good at displaying the appearance of cooperation with the U.S., which is the main driver of harsh sanctions on Pyongyang. China is making noticeable "progress" in its implementation of sanctions, fearing Washington's pre-emptive strike against Pyongyang. A narrative such as "the sanctions are working" will prevent Washington from resorting to military options.
"We could cut off crude oil to North Korea completely, if we want to. But why should we turn North Korea into our enemy by doing so? We could stop all the smuggling across the Sino-North Korean border. But why should China spend tremendous national resources for such a purpose? It hurts our own economy. It hurts our relationship with North Korea. And we know that the U.S. always tries to drive a wedge between Beijing and Pyongyang," said a Chinese interlocutor.
In the end, it boils down to China's ultimate intentions with North Korea. Namely, China and the U.S. have different strategic goals pertaining to North Korea that are irreconcilable. It's time to accept it.
This aspect also points to why the much touted idea of the "grand bargain" between Washington and Beijing stands not to materialize. The "Kissinger moment" on North Korea is intellectually entertaining but realistically flawed. In 1972, China was poorer and weaker. Sino-U.S. relations were asymmetrical at that time. But not at the present geopolitical situation where China believes it has entered a heroic struggle for global supremacy vis-a-vis with the U.S.
For the U.S., waiting for China to solve the North Korean issue is a flawed policy. Trump should make a grand bargain with Pyongyang, not with Beijing. Washington should bypass China and directly engage North Korea. This new approach has a better chance of bearing any fruit in the 25-year-old barren tree in North Korea's nuclear garden.
Lee Seong-hyon (sunnybbsfs@gmail.com), Ph.D., is a research fellow at the Sejong Institute.
