China's strategy in Korean peninsula

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
An old article on contingency plans in the event of a NK collapse.

The key thing is that no matter what Kim does, China always needs to offer Kim the option of a quiet comfortable exile in China. That would be in exchange for his cooperation during any transfer of power/authority and also him not using nukes. And Kim would probably take this deal, if the alternative was a ending up like Saddam Hussein or like Gaddafi on his death march.

I think this is something that hasn't really been understood or articulated by the US or by NK.

China plans for North Korean regime collapse leaked

Beijing's lack of faith in rule of Kim Jong-un exposed in contingency plans to detain key North Korean leaders, set up border refugee camps and respond to "foreign forces"

Read more
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

sanblvd

Junior Member
Registered Member
An old article on contingency plans in the event of a NK collapse.

The key thing is that no matter what Kim does, China always needs to offer Kim the option of a quiet comfortable exile in China. That would be in exchange for his cooperation during any transfer of power/authority and also him not using nukes. And Kim would probably take this deal, if the alternative was a ending up like Saddam Hussein or like Gaddafi on his death march.

I think this is something that hasn't really been understood or articulated by the US or by NK.

I think when it come down to it, that would be the best outcome for Kim and his top officers, but from what I read so far ever since Kim took power he as been burning his bridges with China.

Unlike his father or his grandfather he shows no respect for China whatsoever and sometimes even deliberately trying to poke China, Kim never listen to China on not developing nukes or testing nukes, and during several top meetings like Xi's meeting with Trump or Xi's BRIC summit he tested rockets on purpose to embarrass China. He also assassinated or purged many officials who were pro-China in his government.

So I don't know how willing is he going to seek exile in China when crap hit the fan.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
I think when it come down to it, that would be the best outcome for Kim and his top officers, but from what I read so far ever since Kim took power he as been burning his bridges with China.

Unlike his father or his grandfather he shows no respect for China whatsoever and sometimes even deliberately trying to poke China, Kim never listen to China on not developing nukes or testing nukes, and during several top meetings like Xi's meeting with Trump or Xi's BRIC summit he tested rockets on purpose to embarrass China. He also assassinated or purged many officials who were pro-China in his government.

So I don't know how willing is he going to seek exile in China when crap hit the fan.

True.

But Kim should know that it is in China's interest for him to go quietly, whilst handing over power to someone who will be very reliant on Chinese support.

And Kim should also know that he is more useful to China alive, as there are future contingencies where his co-operation could be very useful to China.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
An old article on contingency plans in the event of a NK collapse.

The key thing is that no matter what Kim does, China always needs to offer Kim the option of a quiet comfortable exile in China. That would be in exchange for his cooperation during any transfer of power/authority and also him not using nukes. And Kim would probably take this deal, if the alternative was a ending up like Saddam Hussein or like Gaddafi on his death march.

I think this is something that hasn't really been understood or articulated by the US or by NK.
The source is "leaks" to Japanese media. Japan is in the opposing camp of NK. That says everything about the credibility of the story.

Common sense tells us that Chinese military (the leaked plan) think-tank is not allowed to touch upon political arrangement which the exile offer is. It is forbidden by the CCP leadership. It would be more believable if the leak is from a non-military think-tank, for example one related to the central party school.

To the topic of hypothetic offer of exile, why would China accept an exiled NK leader? What would the new leader in NK think about it? Potential rival? How could that kind of suspicion from new NK leader serve Chinese interest on a post Kim NK? Nothing good I believe.

If Kim can not hold on power in NK and is removed by NK leadership, China will let him dry in NK, treated in any way by his colleagues according to NK's procedure. China's only objective is NK's regime survival and 39 parallel remains, not any individual including Kim himself.

Kim would not accept that offer either, because if he does he has already anticipated and prepared for his own dismiss, then why would he keep on doing what he has been doing?

This story is a fallacy (not you but the article). I have to say that this story is just another attempt of China's rivals to paint a picture that everyone dislike NK including China. A propaganda piece.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
The source is "leaks" to Japanese media. Japan is in the opposing camp of NK. That says everything about the credibility of the story.

Common sense tells us that Chinese military (the leaked plan) think-tank is not allowed to touch upon political arrangement which the exile offer is. It is forbidden by the CCP leadership. It would be more believable if the leak is from a non-military think-tank, for example one related to the central party school.

To the topic of hypothetic offer of exile, why would China accept an exiled NK leader? What would the new leader in NK think about it? Potential rival? How could that kind of suspicion from new NK leader serve Chinese interest on a post Kim NK? Nothing good I believe.

If Kim can not hold on power in NK and is removed by NK leadership, China will let him dry in NK, treated in any way by his colleagues according to NK's procedure. China's only objective is NK's regime survival and 39 parallel remains, not any individual including Kim himself.

Kim would not accept that offer either, because if he does he has already anticipated and prepared for his own dismiss, then why would he keep on doing what he has been doing?

This story is a fallacy (not you but the article). I have to say that this story is just another attempt of China's rivals to paint a picture that everyone dislike NK including China. A propaganda piece.

No, I read the report as credible. There's nothing in there that isn't common sense for the military to plan for, and it tries to stay out of the political side.

And China would accept Kim as an exile, because otherwise Kim will have nowhere to go, and nothing to lose by using his nukes and contaminating the region. The new leadership of NK (or what is left of it) will of course be really dependent on China anyway. And would be glad that China removed that complication.

Remember that at this point, there is no credible "leadership" that would replace Kim. So any coup would be very messy, unless Kim left voluntarily into exile.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
No, I read the report as credible. There's nothing in there that isn't common sense for the military to plan for, and it tries to stay out of the political side.
By common sense I meant Chinese common sense that military persons are strictly forbidden to talk about political decisions. It is the practice of "party rule the gun".

I did not mean to say the persons involved in the supposed plan is taking political sides. I meant to say, if such a officer touched upon this kind of subject, he overstepped regardless what he is talking about. "don's say what you are not asked to say", another PLA discipline. Unlike an American general who sometimes speak openly about political subject, a Chinese general is forbidden to do so openly, and worse if he speak internally without instructed by political leadership because that implies intension to influence upper leadership, a capital offence in the power structure.

And China would accept Kim as an exile, because otherwise Kim will have nowhere to go, and nothing to lose by using his nukes and contaminating the region. The new leadership of NK (or what is left of it) will of course be really dependent on China anyway. And would be glad that China removed that complication.

Or he can be imprisoned by his colleagues like what China did to "gang of four" including Mao's wife.
It is up to the North Koreans to remove or keep him, China did not replace his grandfather when China had hundreds of thousands of PVA stationed in NK in the mid 1950s while NK army was much smaller, no reason to believe China is interested to do so in any way (including exile) on behalf of anybody including NK's rival factions. One may argue that Soviet did twice to their satellite, China has never and likely remains so.

Why would Kim use his nuke if nobody is going to eliminate him by any means? By making such plan, China is making herself an enemy (ending his political life) rather than offering a help (exile). The "leak" exactly serve the purpose to put a wedge between NK and China, which serves US and Japan's interest.

This is why I called the story a fallacy (from China's perspective), a propaganda piece (serving opposing interest), not credible (to suggest the existence of such plan).

Remember that at this point, there is no credible "leadership" that would replace Kim. So any coup would be very messy, unless Kim left voluntarily into exile.
Then why bother the plan? for whom? Why would Kim voluntarily choose to exile himself when there is nobody able to replace him? What purpose does this plan serve China when the premises of it is a none-existence except to piss off Kim and make China a accomplice of US when exposed (as the article is trying to say)? And even if it is not leaked, there is still the question of why, after all one plan for something that have a good chance to happen, not making a plan for nothing.
 
Last edited:
now noticed
48 minutes ago
China to close North Korean firms under UN sanctions

Companies and joint ventures with Chinese firms have 120 days to close from the September 11 adoption of UN resolution.
Beijing has ordered North Korean-owned businesses in China to close by January, cutting foreign revenue for Pyongyang under United Nations sanctions imposed over its nuclear and missile programmes.

China's commerce ministry said on Thursday that companies, including joint ventures with Chinese firms, have 120 days to close from the date the UN resolution was adopted on September 11.

The sanctions spare, on a case by case basis, entities involved in non-commercial activities or public utility infrastructure projects that do not generate profits.

China is North Korea's main trading partner, making Beijing's cooperation essential to the success of sanctions imposed to stop Pyongyang's pursuit of weapons technology.

China has long been North Korea's diplomatic protector, but has gone along with the latest penalties out of growing frustration with leader Kim Jong-un government.

The latest round of sanctions approved by the UN Security Council ban member countries from operating joint ventures with North Korea.

The sanctions also ban sales of natural gas to North Korea and purchases of the North's textile exports, another key revenue source. They order other nations to limit fuel supplies to the North.

China, which provides the bulk of North Korea's energy supplies, announced on Saturday that it would cut off gas and limit shipments of refined petroleum products, effective January 1.

It made no mention of crude, which makes up the bulk of Chinese energy supplies to North Korea and is not covered by the UN sanctions.

US pressure
With the latest UN sanctions, North Korea could lose up to $800m a year from textile exports, and another $500m a year from its overseas workers, according to estimates by the South China Morning Post.

The Hong Kong-based newspaper also reported that in China, North Korean businesses, mostly in the restaurant industry would be affected. There are an estimated 100 restaurants run by North Koreans, including 26 in the capital Beijing.

Between 20016 and 2015, North Koreans have made a total of $22m in direct investments in China.

China also has banned imports of North Korean coal, iron and lead ore, and seafood since early September.

In August, China banned North Korean firms and individuals from establishing new companies in its territory following a separate set of sanctions.

On Thursday, the Ministry of Commerce defended its recent imports of North Korean coal as permitted by UN sanctions.

A ministry spokesman, Gao Feng, said imports that were reported in August trade data were allowed by a "grace period" for goods that arrived before the UN ban took effect.

The imports are "in line with the (UN) resolution," Gao said.

The United States has pressed China to use its economic leverage to force North Korea into giving up its nuclear ambitions.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will visit Beijing this weekend for talks with China's top diplomat, Yang Jiechi, and Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

Tillerson will discuss the North Korean nuclear tensions, trade issues and President Donald Trump's planned trip to China in November, the US State Department said.

Trump's tour will also take in regional allies Japan and South Korea.
 
now I read
China says US should turn positive talk into action on DPRK
Xinhua| 2017-09-29 19:53:03
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China commended the commitment made by the United States on resolving the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said Friday, calling on Washington to convert its resolve to concrete action.

Lu Kang made the remarks in response to U.S. Acting Assistant Secretary of State Susan Thornton's statement at a congressional hearing Thursday.

"We are not seeking regime change or collapse. We do not seek an accelerated reunification of Korea, nor an excuse to garrison troops north of the Armistice Agreement's Military Demarcation Line," Thorton said, adding that the United States has "no desire to inflict harm on the long-suffering" people of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).

She said that the purpose of putting pressure on the DPRK was to bring it back to negotiations on denuclearization.

"We have noticed that relevant parties released positive signals recently on peacefully resolving the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue via dialogue. We encourage these moves," Lu said.

"China is affirmative of the commitment and hopes the United States can convert it into concrete actions," he said, calling on the DPRK to exert joint efforts.

"We expect all relevant parties can show their sincerity to pave way for peaceful talks," Lu said.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Tillerson says US has direct channels to talk to North Korea
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
CHRISTOPHER BODEEN and MATTHEW PENNINGTON,Associated Press 1 hour 32 minutes ago


BEIJING (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson acknowledged on Saturday that the United States is maintaining direct channels of communications with North Korea even as tensions rise over the North's nuclear and missile programs and the countries' leaders spar through bellicose name-calling.

Tillerson said the U.S. was probing North Korea's willingness to talk, and called for a calming of the situation on the Korean Peninsula, adding it was incumbent on the North to halt the missile launches.

"We have lines of communication to Pyongyang. We're not in a dark situation, a blackout," Tillerson told reporters during a visit to China. "We have a couple ... three channels open to Pyongyang. We can talk to them, we do talk to them."

No elaboration about those channels or the substance of any discussions came from Tillerson, who met with Chinese President Xi Jinping and other top officials in Beijing.

Since President Donald Trump took office in January, the U.S. has restored a diplomatic back-channel between the State Department and North Korea's mission at the United Nations. That's traditionally been a way for the two sides to communicate because they lack formal diplomatic ties.

The main aim of the initial contacts was to seek the freedom of several American citizens imprisoned in North Korea, although U.S. officials have told The Associated Press that there were broader discussions about U.S.-North Korean relations. Those contacts, however, have failed to reduce the deep mistrust between the adversaries and it's unclear to what extent they have endured the current spike in tensions.

North Korea has in recent months tested long-range missiles that potentially could reach the U.S., and on Sept. 3 conducted its largest nuclear test explosion to date. The standoff has entered a new, more dangerous phase since then as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and Trump have exchanged personal insults and threats of war.

"I think the most immediate action that we need is to calm things down," Tillerson said. "They're a little overheated right now. And I think we need to calm them down first." He did not directly address the impact of Trump's own rhetoric.

"Obviously it would help if North Korea would stop firing off missiles. That would calm things down a lot," Tillerson said.

Trump gave a combative speech recently at the U.N. General Assembly in which he mocked Kim as "Rocket Man" on a "suicide mission." Trump said that if "forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea." Kim responded by saying he would "tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire."

Tillerson's stop in the Chinese capital was helping lay the groundwork for a November state visit by Trump, part of a five-nation swing through Asia. Trump has pressed for sterner measures against the North by China, the North's chief trading partner and source of aid and diplomatic support.

Beijing adamantly opposes steps that could bring down Kim's government, but appears increasingly willing to tighten the screws. China has agreed to tough new U.N. penalties that would substantially cut foreign revenue for the isolated North.

On Thursday, Beijing ordered North Korean-owned businesses and ventures with Chinese partners to close by early January, days after it said it would cut off gas and limit shipments of refined petroleum products, effective Jan. 1. China made no mention of crude oil, which makes up the bulk of Chinese energy supplies to North Korea and is not covered by U.N. sanctions.

China has banned imports of North Korean coal, iron and lead ore, and seafood since early September. Still, Washington hopes China will exert even greater pressure.

China argues that sanctions alone cannot solve the impasse, and has urged Washington to cool its rhetoric and open a dialogue with North Korea. But the North is coming closer to having a nuclear-tipped missile that could strike America, and says it will only discuss the weapons programs if the U.S. abandons its "hostile policy" toward the North.

Tillerson affirmed that the U.S. would not recognize North Korea as a nuclear power, while saying the Trump administration had no intention of trying to oust Kim.

This was Tillerson's second visit to China as America's top diplomat. China is the world's No. 2 economy and chief U.S. rival for influence in Asia, and increasingly, the world.

In addition to North Korea, the U.S. and China have other security concerns to address.

They are at odds over Beijing's military buildup and assertive claims to disputed islands in the South China Sea. Trump is also looking to reduce China's massive trade surplus with the U.S. — $347 billion last year — and what American companies say are unfair barriers to investment, including pressure to hand over their technology.

In opening remarks at his meeting with Xi, Tillerson said relations between the sides continue to "grow and mature on the strength of the relationship between yourself and President Trump."

He added: "We look forward to advancing that relationship at the upcoming summit."

Trump and Xi met in April at Trump's estate in Florida. Trump's planned visit next month will come weeks after Xi is expected to receive a new five-year term as leader of the ruling Communist Party.

The presidents' upcoming meeting promises to be grander and more choreographed than the informal talks in Florida that were most memorable for Trump's ordering a missile strike on Syria and then informing Xi about it afterward as they ate chocolate cake.

___

Pennington reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Joe McDonald contributed to this report.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
It is a good "surprise", but expected "surprise" that US and NK has backdoor channels besides their UN delegations in New York. After all, they both have embassies in Beijing where both sides would feel secured (by the willing Chinese) enough to keep the limelight away.

The low level talk was always there, only the higher level (decision making by FM and State Sec) is not there yet.
 
Top