The other example is the once hostile relationship between US-Canada and US-Mexico.
Things change
Last edited:
China's strategy in Korean peninsula
- Thread starter Phead128
- Start date
The other example is the once hostile relationship between US-Canada and US-Mexico.
Things change
A John Bolton piece on possible North Korean reunification, if things kick off.
The articles coming out of the policymakers are becoming much more realistic these days.
It's similar to the Korean reunification scenario essay that I posted previously, but there's 2 big issues with his analysis.
1. US troops should not be anywhere near the Chinese border, nor would they really be needed as there are a lot more SK forces on the Korean peninsula.
2. At a minimum, Chinese troops will secure a buffer area next to the North Korean border. And they will not leave unless all US troops are removed from the Korean peninsula and the US-SK military alliance is ended.
The articles coming out of the policymakers are becoming much more realistic these days.
It's similar to the Korean reunification scenario essay that I posted previously, but there's 2 big issues with his analysis.
1. US troops should not be anywhere near the Chinese border, nor would they really be needed as there are a lot more SK forces on the Korean peninsula.
2. At a minimum, Chinese troops will secure a buffer area next to the North Korean border. And they will not leave unless all US troops are removed from the Korean peninsula and the US-SK military alliance is ended.
Last edited:
Disagree, I this this article is as unrealistic as the ones as anything else. First of all, please notice this article is written by John FREAKING Bolton. If you don't know who he is, he represented US at UN under Bush. This guy make Neo-con look like pussy peacemakers,
What he advocated is basically USSR/East Germany collapse for NK and SK easy win take over, with the promise that US will only stop at Southern tip of Korea and would not interfere with China, the force there will be there for US to deploy in Asia else where..... else for China??? LOL what else can there be?
2nd of all, he said China have acknowledge that Chinese policy in Korea has not worked out that even Chinese think Korean needs unification... for what? From what source? and why? Just because there is that 1 liner does not make it so.
3rd of all his argument is mostly from moral point of view that NK is a really bad government for its own people, which I fully agree, but from a geopolitical point of view this is an none-issue. It does not matter how badly NK, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Congo government treat its own people, no geopolitical decision is ever made base on this criteria.
ps, if you were being sarcastic when you said "The articles coming out of the policymakers are becoming much more realistic these days." then ignore this post.
Last edited:
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Utter piece of Washington wet-dream wishful thinking.
The main reason NK wants nukes that can hit the US is because it wants a cast-iron guarantee of regime survival, so the US doesn't get any stupid ideas about trying a Libya or Iraq on them.
North Korean nukes and missiles are no threat to China because China does not seek to swallow them up, so poses the North Koreans no threat, while possessing the military capabilities to easily end Kim's rule and life should he be stupid enough to attack China.
For all his pomposity and cruelty, Fatty Kim isn't stupid, nor is he as erratic as a certain other world leader who has his equally fat and tiny fingers posed over a big red proverbial nuclear button.
America can have the same deal as China, and all they have to do is not threaten and provoke NK with needlessly aggressive war games and political posturing.
I dare say the two Koreas will have a better chance of working out some kind of peaceful reunification plan if left to their own deceives rather than have the US being the armed-to-the-teeth elephant in the room.
If the US pulls all its military bases out of Korea, I dare say China would be a great deal more amenable to the possibility of an equatable reunification (rather than a total annexation of the North by the South as the Americans insist).
But that is getting off topic.
The whole reason NK is making all these missile tests is to try and demonstrate that they can drop a nuke on an American city, and thus remove military action and regime change as possibilities for the Americans.
Once the Americans get over themselves and stop dreaming about taking over NK through military force or CIA sponcered coups, things will stabilise and NK may actually start to enact some meaningful Chinese-style economic reforms once they are no longer perpetually worried about an American attack/coup, so won't need to spend every penny they have on arms.
If an actual (and unwanted war) kicks off in North Korea, what is China's best course of action?
Fighting an actual war with the USA is not in China's interest. Particularly since China can achieve its objectives with Chinese troops crossing an undefended NK-China border to secure a buffer zone which will not be vacated unless all US troops leave Korea. That is the key point that US policymakers needs to get into their heads. We can see in Europe that US troops and NATO have steadily expanded eastwards, despite Russia believing this would not happen.
If North Korea has to face both China and the US at the same time, everyone in NK knows that is a losing proposition. That is when China will find ample opportunity to bribe and support the appropriate individuals, but also offer Fatty Kim a comfortable exile in exchange for a smooth transition. Alternatively, Fatty Kim can end up as the next Saddam Hussein or Ghaddafi, and he knows this.
So it doesn't matter who starts it
It doesn't matter how it starts
It doesn't matter who secures NK nukes (although I would argue China is better placed to do so, because Chinese troops will face less resistance)
And there has recently been a number of posts on how Vietnam has to bend to China's interests. The same rationale applies to a unified Korea which is way more integrated with the Chinese economy.
Also remember in the aftermath of reunification, only China has the spare industrial and financial capacity to rebuild a reunified Korea, which would be to the mutual benefit of China-Korea.
But note that China also has the capacity to sabotage Korean reconstruction and wage economic warfare against Korea, if US troops do not leave.
Just a few points.
Any sort of "equitable" reunification still means the end of the Kim dynasty. South Korea is just so much more dominant from an economic and population perspective.
And if we want North Korea to enact China-style economic reforms, this will inevitably mean North Koreans turning against the Kim dynasty because they will realise that there is a much more successful South Korea just next door, instead of the lies that they have been fed by the Kims.
So the only way we could see NK really enacting economic reforms is if China guarantees Fatty Kim will stay in power in the event of an internal uprising. I just don't see this happening for a whole host of reasons.
If US troops left Korea, then I would agree that it would be so much easier to work out NK/SK reunification.
1. US is not going to overthrow NK, I highly doubt US will even attack NK, simply because NK has China's indirectly backing so US would think twice before they try Libya or Iraq on NK. US still remember what happen in 1st Korean war, and they won't make the same mistake twice.
2. Even if US do attack NK (highly unlikely), it would at most, limited attack against NK nuclear capability with cruise missiles and bombs, no US or SK troop will ever set foot on NK soil. And no, if US/SK bomb NK, NK at most will rocket SK but NK will NOT invade SK because fat Kim know its suicide. And from SK point of view, I personally don't think they want to take over North as well, 1, SK is too developed and too rich to suffer such high casualty in a unification war. 2 SK don't want to stuck with such high reconstruction bill 3 SK need to secure China's approval to unify North Korea and I doubt they will get it without US leaving and SK is not going to ask US to leave.
3. With the above 2 point established, NK will not be defeated or regime change, theretofore there is no reason for China to help US with Korean unification, so any further talk of Chinese troop resistance level or buying off the Kim family is a moot point.
4. I think I have been saying from the past 5 pages or so, that Korea unification is NOT in the Chinese interest with or without US troop presence at Korea peninsula, just as it was a mistake for China to help Vietnam to unify, it will be equally bad idea for China to help Korea to unify, if you disagree please go back a few pages and see my posts.
Therefore John Bolton is just being John Bolton as usual, in fact that article is quite lazy, he literally want the cake (Korea unification) and eat it too (With Chinese help), I think I have higher chance of winning the lottery than what John Bolton wants.
What I think is going to end up happening is that Trump have to accept a ICBM capable North Korea, and then start to compromise and negotiation from there.
Last edited:
I hear what you're saying.
I don't think the US will launch an attack on NK, for a large number of reasons.
I agree that there will be a lot of short-term risks and costs with a Korean reunification, so it's better for the status quo to continue.
However, if a war starts, China will have no chance but to take a stand, otherwise NK will eventually be over-run. So there are 2 options.
Option 1. China supports the survival of NK. However, this probably means war with the USA. And a ruinous land war in the Korean peninsula is not in the interest of both China and the USA
Option 2. China accepts Korean reunification. China's core interest is the removal of US troops from Korea and the end of the SK-US military alliance. Combined with China's likely growth, the long-term results would be:
- a) Another Vietnam (which is the worse case)
- b) Potentially a Canada/Mexico (in the best case where China is even bigger)
Yet China is still growing fast. A deceleration in growth to 6% still means the economy doubles in size over the next 12 years, which is far in excess of Korea/JP/USA. Also note that China has only just passed the USA in terms of commercial R&D spending. So China's trajectory is still ramping upwards.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
That is highly unrealistic.
Any US attack on NK nukes will the same as if the US started attacking Chinese or Russian nukes, or vice Verda, and present Fatty K with the classic 'use them or loose them' dilemma.
There is absolutely no way anyone could convince Fatty K that after the US has destroyed all his nukes that the next step won't be regime change or an US nuclear first strike.
As such, he will most likely nuke Seoul and every other major target his nukes can reach out of some desperate hope that such a move would force the US to reconsider or just out of sheer spite.
Even if Fatty K holds back or cannot launch any nukes, NK 'rocketing' SK in response to such an attack won't just be a few random shots for show, but a full sustain barrage from tens of thousands of heavy artillery and rockets aimed at Seoul.
Most of those artillery pieces and well dug into mountains, and it won't be quick or easy to silence them with air strikes alone.
Indeed, the only way to totally silence them will probably require boost on the ground to dig them out. And the pressure to act will be irresistible for SK with millions of civilians trapped under bombardment in its capital.
Once SK and the US gets sucked into a ground war, it will be virtually impossible for them to pull out half way, because Fatty K will do all he can to force them to advance ever northward since his only hope in such a situation would be to force China to come in against the US and SK forces.
Basically, as soon as the US targets any NK nukes, the domino effect to the re-start of the Korean War will be near impossible.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Then that won't be an equitable reunification
. If SK wants a peaceful reunification, then they will have to swallow their distaste and offer the Kims some meaningful and lasting role in the new United Korea. So either a power sharing government, or make him the Queen or Empress of the new united Korea or sth big on symbolism but light on actual power.
But odds are it will require the death of Fatty K and a more acceptable Kim to succeed him for that to become a realistic possibility.
Did the Chinese turn against the CCP when China opened up because the outside world was more advanced and richer, or were they too busy making up for lost time getting rich and enjoying the new economic fruits on offer?
Well, considering the most likely cause of an internal uprising would be a CIA plot, I don't think it would be out of the question for China to provide such assurances.
What more, with NK being a nuclear power, I don't think anyone will tolerate it to collapse into chaos and civil war, least a Syria situation happen, but instead of chemical false flag attacks, we get nuclear.
You can't sent in spec ops after NK nukes as you will trigger the 'use them or loose them' dilemma, especially if Kim is convinced the uprising is American backed, as he is sure to.
So the only way to safeguard NK nukes in that scenario would be combat peacekeepers to put down the insurrectionists.
Sure, China will get a lot of flak for that, but it will be incomparably better than nuclear armed extremists on your doorstep.
That is likely the only scenario under which a peaceful reunification can even be on the table as a possibility.