1

On Resolving DPRK Nuclear Issue Through China-US Pragmatic Cooperation

Li Haidong

Professor at China Foreign Affairs University

In January and February 2016, DPRK conducted the forth nuclear test and

launched another missile respectively. International community universally

condemned DPRK’s reckless behavior and UN security council passed Resolution

2270 in March imposing more severe sanctions on DPRK. However, no indications

show DPRK will change its provocative nuclear test and missile launch policy. It is

said that DPRK is preparing another nuclear test now.

DPRK’s reckless actions has led to radical deterioration of security situation in

this region. Now the US has intensively redeployed its military assets. US-ROK

conducted their largest military drills in post-Cold War era. US-ROK military alliance

is robustly strengthened. Strategic balance among major powers in this region run risk

of being destroyed with ROK and the US statement to discuss the possibility of

deploying THAAD system in Korea peninsular. All countries concerned are worried

about the dramatic aggravating situation in North-East Asia. This essay intends to

explore the feasibility and concrete steps of resolving nuclear issue through China-US

cooperation.

I. US-China Different Approaches to Address DPRK Nuclear Issue

With regard to DPRK nuclear issue, China and the US share common goal of

working for a stable and nuclear-free peninsular which constitutes solid base for

China-US cooperation. However, approaches adopted by China and the US to attain

that goal are different.

China advocates two-track policy, that is, struggling for a nuclear-free peninsular

through convincing DPRK that there is no future for it to possess nuclear weapons,

and transforming cease-fire settlement starting in 1953 into a real lasting peace

settlement through negotiations. Six-party talk mechanism is the most comprehensive

and effective chanel for having all countries concerned to sit together and reach some

form of agreement. This approach emphasizes on patience, confidence-building,

mutual accommodation and importance of fundamentally seeking political solution

through diplomacy and dialogues.

US highlights the graveness of existential threat DPRK nuclear weapons posed

to ROK and felonious nature of DPRK regime, endeavors to comprehensively

strengthening US-ROK bilateral military alliance, makes full preparation for militarily

preemptive-attack on DPRK nuclear, political facilities or even its leader. For the US,

diplomacy should be playing due role, but military means are more dependable and

useful in dealing with DPRK. Now US is considering deploying THAAD system on

ROK soil, the fallout from which will transcend defending ROK and solving DPRK

nuclear issue. This approach reflects US deep-seated distrust for DPRK, emphasizes

the inevitability of conflict between DPRK and other powers concerned, and

2

highlights US preference to adopting military means to fundamentally solve DPRK

nuclear issue (even DPRK issue itself).

In a deep sense, diverging approaches between China and the US in addressing

DPRK nuclear issue reflect diverging blueprint of constructing regional security.

China does whatever it can to persuade DPRK to give up its nuclear plan, to

encourage both DPRK and ROK to exercise restraint, and to endeavor to creating

conducive conditions for reconciliation between DPRK, ROK and the US, and to

build effective mechanism based on six-party talk institution for maintaining lasting

peace in peninsular through China-US pragmatic cooperation.

The US struggles to force DPRK to abandon its nuclear plan through

demonstration of US overwhelmingly military superiority. Military deterrence and

preemptive attack are all viable options. For the US, DPRK regime is root course of

DPRK nuclear issue and instability in peninsular. Changing current DPRK regime and

shape an environment for ROK to unify whole peninsular are what the US struggles

for. US long-term goal is to form a framework in which US-ROK alliance dominates

peninsular and US-Japan-ROK alliance dictate the security in North-East Asia. In

other words, US is in favor of building a differentiated multi-layered security

framework in which US-led alliance is at the core and other countries security

concerns are in outlying place. If this blueprint becomes reality, US will be occupying

a strategic advantage over China and Russia in the radically transforming geopolitical

situation in Korea peninsular.

Objectively speaking, though China-US approaches in handling DPRK nuclear

issue and security framework are different, they share the same goal of having a

nuclear-free peninsular and all view diplomacy as a feasible way of tackling nuclear

issue. Therefore, the room for improving China-US cooperation still exists and is

worth exploring. China-US should have urgency to constructively resolve DPRK

nuclear issue in accordance with China-US fundamental common interests.

Cooperatively coping with DPRK nuclear threat should be an exemplar case of

China-US jointly addressing regional security issue.

II. US-China Urgency to Manage Lesser Power

Repeatedly DPRK nuclear tests and missile launches have led to dramatic and

unpredictable security situation in Northeast Asia. The more provocative the DPRK is,

the tougher military measures the US takes, the more chances it will be for outbreak

of unpredictable military conflict. Here what we should be really alarming is that

DPRK reckless nuclear behavior can lead to potential major powers geopolitical

competition. Current US considering deploying THAAD system in peninsular is

turning that nightmare into reality.

Therefore, it is urgent for China and the US to learn skills handling lesser

country which is in crucial geostrategic location, such as DPRK. The past history has

demonstrated that DPRK leaders addicts to playing major-power card. DPRK surprise

attack on ROK in 1950 immediately locked 20 years China-US hostility and

confrontation. DPRK sneakily developed its nuclear program and nuclear weapons

3

starting earlier 1990s through exploiting major powers’ division in security field. And

now DPRK is adopting brinksmanship strategy with real implication of splitting

China-US cooperation in having a nuclear-free peninsular.

Both China and the US have record of damaging their pivotal strategic interests

in the involvement in military conflicts on behalf of lessor powers. China and the US

joining in Korea war in 1950-1953, the US directly participating in Vietnam war in

1961-1973 and initiating wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in 21st century, are all tragic

cases for them to handle lessor powers.

Policy elites in both China and the US should have consciousness and sufficient

wisdom of avoiding being played off against each other by provocative DPRK whose

malicious intention seems to be vindicated these weeks. Without having clear

understanding of this point, DPRK nuclear issue will not only deteriorate Korea

peninsular security, but also lead to fierce zero-sum game in which China, the US,

Russia and others suffers enormous strategic loss.

Frankly speaking, repeated DPRK behaviors of nuclear tests and missile

launches have demonstrated DPRK deep-seated lacking in trust of other countries,

including China. DPRK’s series of irresponsible actions have destroyed any chance

for stabilizing its relations with its neighboring countries and the US, severely

aggravated security situation in China’s neighboring area, and undercut the effort for

improvement of China-US relations.

It is increasingly clear the DPRK going nuclear is a big liability for China. That

DPRK absurdly declares itself as nuclear power and correspondingly US

consideration of deploying THAAD system is turning DPRK's intention of sowing

seeds of distrust among big powers into reality and is bringing about strategic

imbalance among China, US and Russia in Northeast Asia. It is high time for China

and the US to wake-up to comprehend the malicious nature of DPRK actions. History

provides many facts that strategic interests of China and the US were repeatedly

significantly impaired by unilateral and reckless DPRK behaviors. We should not let

tragic story repeat itself in new era.

In current context, there exists the conditions for China-US Cooperation in

Resolving Korea Nuclear Issue.

First, both China and the US recognize DPRK nuclear issue constitutes grave

threat to their fundamental interests. For China, a nuclear DPRK threatens China’s

natural and living environment in North-East China, damages China’s priority of

having a stable neighboring areas and dangerously poisons the benign environment of

resolving nuclear issue through cooperation. For the US, a nuclear DPRK threatens

not only ROK but also US territory. China and the US should show their unity of

confronting a DPRK going nuclear.

Second, Contrary to prevalent view held by many US analysts and politicians

that DPRK follows China’s direction and China can solve DPRK nuclear issue by

itself, DPRK with a nuclear project is just like an unbridled horse that China itself

doesn’t capably control, which highlights necessity of multi-countries cooperation,

especially China-US cooperation. China just want to treat DPRK as normal country

just as China deals with other country, and has no intention of controlling a sovereign

4

DPRK. DPRK stark refusal to China’s demand of DPRK stopping nuclear tests has

substantiated DPRK’s pigheadedly ignoring China’s voice. UN imposition of

sanctions on DPRK is proper, should be strengthened and related provisions must be

effectively implemented. It is in China-US interests to cooperatively implement UN

sanctions and restrain provocative DPRK behavior.

Third, both China and the US gradually realize DPRK malicious intention of

creating a trap in which China and the US plays off against each other. DPRK’s

intransigent position in nuclear tests and missile launches potentially embroiled major

powers in this region into a fierce geopolitical competition. If this scenario becomes

reality, international community’s focus on DPRK nuclear issue will give way to

geopolitical competition among major powers in North-east Asia, which is probably

what DPRK wants, but absolutely runs counter to China-US common interests. As a

real trouble maker, DPRK shouldn’t get away with its repeatedly initiating nuclear

crisis, which is not what international community want to see.

III. The Steps for China-US Cooperation in tackling Korean Nuclear Issue

Confronting the deteriorating DPRK nuclear issue, both China and the US need

taking proactive and constructive measures to avoid increasing China-US diverging

interests and China-US confrontation. Therefore, it is in China-US fundamental

interests for two countries to conduct continuously intensive interaction and dialogues,

reach a kind of mutual accommodation in order to ensure nuclear issue is resolved in

a way of strengthening China-US cooperation and punishing the real party

double-crossing the world.

To reach a win-win result for all parties involved, it will be necessary for China

and the US to accommodate each other’s interests to positively resolve nuclear issue.

First, China-US should form a consensus of resolving nuclear issue through

cooperation instead of being misled by lesser countries. Elites in Both China and the

US must recognize their coordination plays a key role in alleviating security quagmire

in this region at this crucial time and also the best way of solving internal economic,

social, political issues within respective country. They must exercise their wisdom to

jointly manage provocative DPRK actions and avoid being maliciously manipulated

by DPRK. Frankly speaking, both China and the US are lacking in experience of

handling intransigent lesser country in post-cold war era. However, both China and

the US have no other choice but step up their effort to enrich their experience of

dealing with some lesser countries, such as the tricky DPRK.

Second, China-US should make efforts to create reconciliation atmosphere

among two Koreas. DPRK nuclear issue could be resolved within UN framework

based on concrete cooperation among powers concerned. DPRK’s internal reform and

open-up should be the ideal and fundamental solution to nuclear issues and others.

With DPRK leaders’ stark refusal to internal reform and recklessly making troubles

for external world, major powers should take actions to create conditions to force

DPRK to start reform process. If DPRK indeed accepts and initiates reform, the

5

chances for reconciliation between DPRK and ROK will increase, possibility of

peaceful coexistence between DPRK and ROK or unification of South Korea and

North Korea based on consent of both DPRK and ROK can’t be excluded.

Third, China-US should jointly handle the consequence of possible decay of

DPRK regime. As the most irrational and instable factor, DPRK is short of sense of

security which is key reason for it to develop its nuclear weapons. Political culture

and tradition in DPRK determines that leaders in DPRK have natural tendency of

exaggerating external threat in order to legitimize Kim family’s rule. However, if

stubborn hostility to profound reform, DPRK regime can’t last for long (especially

with tough UN sanctions as background), its decay is unavoidable. The possibilities of

the unification of Korea peninsular dominated by ROK will significantly increase.

Whether pushing DPRK to reform or materialize a ROK-dominated unification will

not become a reality without down-to-earth China-US cooperation. Military

confrontation and mutual demonization between DPRK and the US could only add

fuel to fire and make situation aggravate.

Forth, the deteriorating situation in Korea peninsular reveals the profound

divergence between China and the US in both solving nuclear issue and framing a

lasting security structure among countries in this region. This is a very consequential

issue worth vigilance by policy elites from both countries. China and the US, in long

term, should gradually make significant policy adjustments, the core elements of

which are supporting the establishment of permanent neutral status of the DPRK,

ROK, or a unified Korea. China, the US, Russia, Korea, Japan and other countries

sign a binding agreement promising maintenance of a nuclear-free and permanent

neutral Korea peninsular. Establishing firm belief that lasting neutrality and

nuclear-free status of Korea peninsular and endeavoring to build effective and

practical mechanism to turn this belief into reality, should be a goal worth struggling

for China, the US and all other countries in this region. This is a positive scenario

facilitating stability of China-US relations and guaranteeing perpetual peace in

Korean peninsula. Without embodiment of spirit of this scenario, Korea peninsular

and China-US relations will have more possibilities to be trapped in a quagmire in

which distrust, hostility and even conflict pervade.

Fifth, in an age of global power diffusion and economic interdependence,

building or enhancing military alliance blocs which inherently function as tool of

major power confrontation runs counter to the tide of our times. For major power

(especially current US), allies have more chance to turns into insurmountable

financial and political burden especially in the context of prevalence of political,

social, economic polarization. Both China and the US are facing enormous challenges

of coping with internal social and economic problems. For the United States and

China, devoting huge resources to so-called allies only slow down internal economic

recovery and retard political reconciliation. Sensible voice of cutting back on US

investment in its-led alliance system has been increasingly louder among candidates

in current US presidential campaign, retired diplomats and generals as well as so

many intellectuals. Without a redefined and reformed US alliance system, strategic

competition among China, the US and Russia will be difficult to be eliminated.

6

Conducting intensive dialogues on mutual understanding of alliance function in

current international environment are urgent for all countries in this region. If China,

the US and ROK have sincere intention of building lasting trust, the crucial measure

should be mutual-educational/mutual bargaining on necessity of reforming alliance in

this region.

Sixth, possible deploying THAAD system not only worsens international effort

of resolving DPRK nuclear issue, but also sow another seed of time bomber in

peninsular, which categorically disserve any party’s interests. Unlike many views of

analysts in western world that China will not conscientiously implement UN sanction

against DPRK, Chinese government, now with widespread and firm Chinese public

support, has put UN sanctions into practice and has been strengthening restrictions on

curbing DPRK’s capability of making nuclear weapons. At the time when UN

sanctions and many other bilateral sanctions against DPRK haven’t come into full

play, US hastily set about initiating plan of deploying THAAD system in

peninsular.This measure only compounds multi-effort of forcing DPRK to abandon its

nuclear ambitions. The ongoing international concentration on nuclear issue is being

and will be diverted by possibility of US deploying THAAD into geopolitical major

power struggle, which will pour cold water on peace-loving people’s enthusiasm on

seeking a nuclear free peninsular. The strategic location Korea peninsular occupies

and past history here reveal that major powers competition for this region usually end

up with profound tragedy. Deploying THAAD will present a dim future for the whole

region, in which only DPRK is the beneficiary.

ConclusionRemarks

China and the US have common interests in seeing a nuclear-free Korea

peninsular. Proactive and effective China-US cooperation in this regard is not only

feasible but also desirable. Without China-US honest and pragmatic cooperation,

nuclear issue and other pivotal issues in Korea peninsular could only aggravate further.

One crucial precondition for fruitful China-US cooperation is to wisely avoid being

manipulated by lesser country, that is, DPRK.

Given the intricate inter-linkage of nuclear issue to various other issues, China

and the US should cooperatively address those issues within a sound framework

bringing peace instead of leading to more conflicts. If such framework function well,

the following principles must be given high priority.

First, principle of having a nuclear free peninsular and demilitarize peninsular.

Ongoing international effort to force DPRK to destroy its nuclear project should be

robustly going forward. Aggregating advanced weapons system in Korea peninsular

such as THAAD should be discouraged. With it, bonds of any kind of alliances in

Korea peninsular should be dissolved. Military forces from any foreign country

should permanently leave Korea peninsular.

Second,principle of permanent neutrality of Korea peninsular. China, the US and

international community should strike a grand bargain and form binding international

7

consensus and multilateral peace regime administrated by authoritative international

body such as UN to ensure a neutral and nuclear-free Korea peninsular.

Third,principle of taking full advantage of successful experience in Europe.

Countries with high-valued strategic geographic location are usually filled with fierce

and frequent political and military competition. European neutral countries such as

Switzerland or Finland learn that lessons and establish a neutral tradition winning

respect from all other European countries. They enjoy peace and stability for long

time. Countries in northeast Asia could make use of their successful practice to build a

lasting peace. In that regard, the US and China should take the lead to apply

successful European experience of maintaining stability to solve the security

conundrum to Northeast Asia.

Policymakers in both China and the US should have a clear big picture in their

mind. Korea nuclear issue can and should only be resolved through promotion of

rather than at sacrifice of China-US cooperation. China and the US should develop

series of constructive instead of destructive policies to solve nuclear issue and make

effort to pave way for building a viable mechanism for safeguarding permanent

stability or peace in Korea peninsular and North-east Asia regionas a whole.

Scholars, in their research, usually carry an idealistic tendency. It is this author’s

wish that policy suggestions with somewhat idealistic idiosyncrasy in this article

could be helpful and enlightening for policymakers in their dealing with the thorny

Korea nuclear issue.

On Author of This Article:

LI Haidong, Professor at Institute of International Relations of China Foreign Affairs

University, Fulbright Visiting Scholar at SAIS of Johns Hopkins (2015-2016)

Email: li_haidong@yahoo.comli_haidong@cfau.edu.cn

We-Chat: wxylhd