7 ms·

Why Won’t China Help with North Korea? Remember 1956

65 points by kawera 9y ago

rl3 9y ago
>Mao claimed Kim, who “still does the Stalin thing,” appalled him. “He brooks no word of disagreement and kills all who tries to oppose him,” Mao said. That's rich. EDIT: For the assholes who put this comment at -2, have a history lesson: Mao Zedong was responsible for approximately 40 million deaths.[0][1][2] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong [1] http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Mao http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Mao [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  It is even richer considering Mao was an ardent follower of Stalin, and hated Khrushchev for disavowing Stalin's legacy (which, of course, would later lead to the Sino-soviet split).
- vkou 9y ago
  National concerns are more important then whether or not you're a hypocrite. At least, that's the justification that gets trotted out whenever an important politician gets caught in a lie.
Endama 9y ago
As a Korean American, this conflict has always been so strange to me. My family members fought in this war, my grandfather ran from his village, in the middle of the night, to join the US-led Korean Army so that he wouldn't be conscripted by NK as they moved south. My mom's father joined as an intelligence officer and later continued on to work in the middle east for the US gov. That left his wife (my grandmother) to raise a family of 4 by herself in a war torn country. My entire cultural experience has been defined by this "police action". My grandfather who fled would later be awarded the Korean equivalent of a bronze star and would suffer from PTSD for the rest of his life. He was violent towards his children (including my father) often, but was able to raise a future for my family nonetheless. Now as a native-born US citizen, the narrative I hear is of doom and gloom, NK is just weeks, if not hours, away from nuking me in SF. China is the only way to get them to stop and they aren't helping. What I hear from my Native-born Korean friends is a lot of nonchalance. The North Korean threat is all bluster, no action. Nothing is ever going to happen. They are going to threaten, maybe shoot some artillery, but no major offensive ever happens. All of this makes for an incredibly confusing experience. I feel like we are approaching a historical precipice, but my two cultures respond with either panic or apathy.
- 0xbear 9y ago
  I wonder if they'd be as nonchalant if US military support were withdrawn. It's like a school boy being nonchalant about bullies because he's friends with Conor McGregor.
- azernik 9y ago
  Going from the similar Israeli experience (back in the bad old days of conventional state-to-state confrontation) - it's all bluster, it's never going to happen, until suddenly it does. Usually when the bluster (as in 1967) leads to an unexpected commitment to action.
- seanmcdirmid 9y ago
  > What I hear from my Native-born Korean friends is a lot of nonchalance. The North Korean threat is all bluster, no action. Nothing is ever going to happen. They are going to threaten, maybe shoot some artillery, but no major offensive ever happens. I bet that since they live it, if they freaked out they would have no chance of having normal lives, so they just blow it off as a form of cognitive dissonance. If that is the case, I really wouldn't blame them.
- komali2 9y ago
  Hah, I wonder if you're my coworker, we just had this argument during lunch today (about whether NK missiles are a threat to us in Mountain View). >What I hear from my native-born Korean friends is a lot of nonchalance. The NK threat is all bluster, no action. Nothing is ever going to happen. I remember this from my time living in Japan and Taiwan - everyone was convinced NK was not a threat because it hadn't been... in their lifetimes. I see it here in the States too - "The USA is immune to revolution / constitutional crisis / splitting into a confederacy / totalitarianism." Intelligent people can read history books and know these things happened in the past, but these things can then seem like "the stuff that happens in history book." They're not real, that's not real life stuff. I heard it from a close family friend about heart attacks, and then he had one, and then it became real. For him. And his family. But they remain unreal to the other morbidly obese people I know. Car crashes, heat stroke, being sued to bankruptcy, etc. Anything even slightly outside the norm, we're generally incapable of internalizing and planning for. It's just too "unreal." I don't know how to solve this, I just observe it and do my best to adopt a mindset for myself that nothing is too "unreal" to happen, especially if it has happened before or to other people.
ams6110 9y ago
> It was in 1956 that Beijing realized it had to go easy on Pyongyang, despite Kim’s maddening obstinacy, because the alternative was to surrender the country to the Soviet influence. Well there is no Soviet influence anymore, so how does that have relevance today? > Like Mao in 1956, Xi is tired of North Korea, but he is keen to emphasize that China won’t crack the whip on anyone’s behalf. So they would prefer the US go in directly? How does that benefit them? China could probably get rid of Kim and install a friendlier government and be the hero of the world.
- boomboomsubban 9y ago
  The US can't go in without either a direct act of war by North Korea or a UN resolution, anything else would allow China to declare war and that would be the US start of WWIII. Removing Kim would just provoke a new round of discussion about a unified Korea an China loosening control over Burma and other areas. They would be a five minute hero with negative long term results.
  - chibg10 9y ago
    This is a pretty big misunderstanding of the situation imo. The reason the US won't directly strike NK is because of the risk to Seoul. It has nothing to do the UN (which is essentially a useless and meaningless body at this point, as Russia and China don't agree with the West on almost literally anything). Moreover, China isn't going to risk a war with the US over NK.
    - vkou 9y ago
      The United States risked a nuclear war with the USSR over Cuba. What makes you 100% certain that China won't risk a war over North Korea? North Korea is an important buffer state for China.
      - chibg10 9y ago
        The US was facing a direct nuclear threat. Risking nuclear war with the USSR was hardly an escalation. Also, there's a large difference between "risking"and "acting." China has much more to lose than gain (economically and militarily) by warring with the US over NK.
Spooky23 9y ago
Total control gives North Korea all of the leverage. This is the part that the current administration doesn't understand. Tweeting about your policy goals undermines the US position. Why should China give a hoot about intervening and giving Trump a win? North Korea is a total dictatorship -- they have all of the time in the world. China wants to be a recognized global power. They won't take any action until they can do so while undermining the United States (not Trump, which is child's play). Our loss is their gain.
wangii 9y ago
all NK wants, according to what I've read so far, is a 'normal' relationship with US, a promise not to overthrow the leadership/govt. is it a ridiculous request given US happily has Saudi as an important ally? here is an interesting review by former Deputy of Chinese Foreign Affair Minister: https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-korean-nuclear-issue-past-present-and-future/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-korean-nuclear-issue-...
- chibg10 9y ago
  NK (and every other autocratic regime in history) has a history of not being true to their word. We've played the appeasement game with them before and it failed.
suhlash 9y ago
It is all about national security for China. China will not tolerate a unified Korea that is friendly to America. It is in China's interest to keep the Koreas divided and have influence over NK. NK not only provides a buffer from the US army but serves as a threat that ties up the military of USA, Japan and SK. Kind of like the way they use Pakistan to tie down India. Why would China help out and do a real sanction of NK. A real sanction of NK by cutting off food and fuel would collapse the regime. Followed by a unification under South Korean leadership. The last thing they want. China will continue to pretend to sanction NK or say that they have no influence over NK. Always ask what is in it for China to figure out what is going on.
- virtuabhi 9y ago
  I agree with your comments. But who knows, maybe one day China will decide that it should be a force for good in the world rather than a regional bully. Thankfully, the one-party-one-leader system of China allows for quick change in its policies. And regarding what is in it for China? A peaceful, democratic, free country is in the interest of every person in the world.
  - testores 9y ago
    There is no good or bad in politics. Just interests. If there really were "good countries," then Saudi Arabia would not be getting any support.
Terr_ 9y ago
Attempted TLDR: China tolerates North Korea because NK acknowledges that China's the big boss in the region, and restricts most of its bad behavior to places where China doesn't have to care. If the US seeks to "pressure" China into reigning in North Korea, it'll backfire, because that threatens the air of authority that China was trying to get in the first place. Lastly, China doesn't want a unified Korea which is in the US' pocket.
- testores 9y ago
  It's like when you decide to do something, but then someone else nags you to do it and you lose all interest.

65 points by kawera 9y ago

rl3 9y ago

>Mao claimed Kim, who “still does the Stalin thing,” appalled him. “He brooks no word of disagreement and kills all who tries to oppose him,” Mao said. That's rich. EDIT: For the assholes who put this comment at -2, have a history lesson: Mao Zedong was responsible for approximately 40 million deaths.[0][1][2] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong [1] http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Mao http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm#Mao [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/08/03/giving-historys-greatest-mass-murderer-his-due/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

seanmcdirmid 9y ago
It is even richer considering Mao was an ardent follower of Stalin, and hated Khrushchev for disavowing Stalin's legacy (which, of course, would later lead to the Sino-soviet split).
vkou 9y ago
National concerns are more important then whether or not you're a hypocrite. At least, that's the justification that gets trotted out whenever an important politician gets caught in a lie.

Endama 9y ago

As a Korean American, this conflict has always been so strange to me. My family members fought in this war, my grandfather ran from his village, in the middle of the night, to join the US-led Korean Army so that he wouldn't be conscripted by NK as they moved south. My mom's father joined as an intelligence officer and later continued on to work in the middle east for the US gov. That left his wife (my grandmother) to raise a family of 4 by herself in a war torn country. My entire cultural experience has been defined by this "police action". My grandfather who fled would later be awarded the Korean equivalent of a bronze star and would suffer from PTSD for the rest of his life. He was violent towards his children (including my father) often, but was able to raise a future for my family nonetheless. Now as a native-born US citizen, the narrative I hear is of doom and gloom, NK is just weeks, if not hours, away from nuking me in SF. China is the only way to get them to stop and they aren't helping. What I hear from my Native-born Korean friends is a lot of nonchalance. The North Korean threat is all bluster, no action. Nothing is ever going to happen. They are going to threaten, maybe shoot some artillery, but no major offensive ever happens. All of this makes for an incredibly confusing experience. I feel like we are approaching a historical precipice, but my two cultures respond with either panic or apathy.

0xbear 9y ago
I wonder if they'd be as nonchalant if US military support were withdrawn. It's like a school boy being nonchalant about bullies because he's friends with Conor McGregor.
azernik 9y ago
Going from the similar Israeli experience (back in the bad old days of conventional state-to-state confrontation) - it's all bluster, it's never going to happen, until suddenly it does. Usually when the bluster (as in 1967) leads to an unexpected commitment to action.
seanmcdirmid 9y ago
> What I hear from my Native-born Korean friends is a lot of nonchalance. The North Korean threat is all bluster, no action. Nothing is ever going to happen. They are going to threaten, maybe shoot some artillery, but no major offensive ever happens. I bet that since they live it, if they freaked out they would have no chance of having normal lives, so they just blow it off as a form of cognitive dissonance. If that is the case, I really wouldn't blame them.
komali2 9y ago
Hah, I wonder if you're my coworker, we just had this argument during lunch today (about whether NK missiles are a threat to us in Mountain View). >What I hear from my native-born Korean friends is a lot of nonchalance. The NK threat is all bluster, no action. Nothing is ever going to happen. I remember this from my time living in Japan and Taiwan - everyone was convinced NK was not a threat because it hadn't been... in their lifetimes. I see it here in the States too - "The USA is immune to revolution / constitutional crisis / splitting into a confederacy / totalitarianism." Intelligent people can read history books and know these things happened in the past, but these things can then seem like "the stuff that happens in history book." They're not real, that's not real life stuff. I heard it from a close family friend about heart attacks, and then he had one, and then it became real. For him. And his family. But they remain unreal to the other morbidly obese people I know. Car crashes, heat stroke, being sued to bankruptcy, etc. Anything even slightly outside the norm, we're generally incapable of internalizing and planning for. It's just too "unreal." I don't know how to solve this, I just observe it and do my best to adopt a mindset for myself that nothing is too "unreal" to happen, especially if it has happened before or to other people.

ams6110 9y ago

> It was in 1956 that Beijing realized it had to go easy on Pyongyang, despite Kim’s maddening obstinacy, because the alternative was to surrender the country to the Soviet influence. Well there is no Soviet influence anymore, so how does that have relevance today? > Like Mao in 1956, Xi is tired of North Korea, but he is keen to emphasize that China won’t crack the whip on anyone’s behalf. So they would prefer the US go in directly? How does that benefit them? China could probably get rid of Kim and install a friendlier government and be the hero of the world.

boomboomsubban 9y ago
The US can't go in without either a direct act of war by North Korea or a UN resolution, anything else would allow China to declare war and that would be the US start of WWIII. Removing Kim would just provoke a new round of discussion about a unified Korea an China loosening control over Burma and other areas. They would be a five minute hero with negative long term results.
- chibg10 9y ago
  This is a pretty big misunderstanding of the situation imo. The reason the US won't directly strike NK is because of the risk to Seoul. It has nothing to do the UN (which is essentially a useless and meaningless body at this point, as Russia and China don't agree with the West on almost literally anything). Moreover, China isn't going to risk a war with the US over NK.
  - vkou 9y ago
    The United States risked a nuclear war with the USSR over Cuba. What makes you 100% certain that China won't risk a war over North Korea? North Korea is an important buffer state for China.
    - chibg10 9y ago
      The US was facing a direct nuclear threat. Risking nuclear war with the USSR was hardly an escalation. Also, there's a large difference between "risking"and "acting." China has much more to lose than gain (economically and militarily) by warring with the US over NK.

Spooky23 9y ago

Total control gives North Korea all of the leverage. This is the part that the current administration doesn't understand. Tweeting about your policy goals undermines the US position. Why should China give a hoot about intervening and giving Trump a win? North Korea is a total dictatorship -- they have all of the time in the world. China wants to be a recognized global power. They won't take any action until they can do so while undermining the United States (not Trump, which is child's play). Our loss is their gain.

wangii 9y ago

all NK wants, according to what I've read so far, is a 'normal' relationship with US, a promise not to overthrow the leadership/govt. is it a ridiculous request given US happily has Saudi as an important ally? here is an interesting review by former Deputy of Chinese Foreign Affair Minister: https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-korean-nuclear-issue-past-present-and-future/ https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-korean-nuclear-issue-...

chibg10 9y ago
NK (and every other autocratic regime in history) has a history of not being true to their word. We've played the appeasement game with them before and it failed.

suhlash 9y ago

It is all about national security for China. China will not tolerate a unified Korea that is friendly to America. It is in China's interest to keep the Koreas divided and have influence over NK. NK not only provides a buffer from the US army but serves as a threat that ties up the military of USA, Japan and SK. Kind of like the way they use Pakistan to tie down India. Why would China help out and do a real sanction of NK. A real sanction of NK by cutting off food and fuel would collapse the regime. Followed by a unification under South Korean leadership. The last thing they want. China will continue to pretend to sanction NK or say that they have no influence over NK. Always ask what is in it for China to figure out what is going on.

virtuabhi 9y ago
I agree with your comments. But who knows, maybe one day China will decide that it should be a force for good in the world rather than a regional bully. Thankfully, the one-party-one-leader system of China allows for quick change in its policies. And regarding what is in it for China? A peaceful, democratic, free country is in the interest of every person in the world.
- testores 9y ago
  There is no good or bad in politics. Just interests. If there really were "good countries," then Saudi Arabia would not be getting any support.

Terr_ 9y ago

Attempted TLDR: China tolerates North Korea because NK acknowledges that China's the big boss in the region, and restricts most of its bad behavior to places where China doesn't have to care. If the US seeks to "pressure" China into reigning in North Korea, it'll backfire, because that threatens the air of authority that China was trying to get in the first place. Lastly, China doesn't want a unified Korea which is in the US' pocket.

testores 9y ago
It's like when you decide to do something, but then someone else nags you to do it and you lose all interest.