7 ms·

You are aware of the fact that NK is PRC's puppet state, aren't you? NK will live on as it is, till PRC ceases tp support it.

by hcho 15y ago

gojomo 15y ago
My impression is that at this point 'puppet' is far too strong a term. North Korea still relies on the PRC's tolerance and patronage, and the PRC doesn't prefer any outcome that boosts the influence of the US and South Korea. But the PRC's influence and patience with North Korea are limited. Some of the Wikileaks cables indicate China has begun backing away from the regime: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables...
- Duff 15y ago
  North Korea is a vassal state of the PRC, and exists because it is politically advantageous to China for them to do so. Until recently, China hasn't liked to take a direct approach to many aspects of international affairs. So they influence countries like North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran as tools to achieve their political aims. They aren't whole-hearted supporters of all aspects of the North Korean regime, frankly, I'd say that they don't really care about what happens in North Korea, as long as they are achieving their foreign policy goals.
  - jbooth 15y ago
    China's interests (and hence, position) are "don't fuck around and create trouble for us". A collapsed NK state creates more trouble for China in the form of refugees than a still-functioning one, so we see enough aid for them to keep functioning. An occasional diplomatic poke in the eye to the US helps China too, but that's a want, not a need. Don't confuse the rhetoric with the reality.
- nknight 15y ago
  Yeah, in the event of actual war, there's no way they intervene as long as the North Koreans are the aggressors -- they know North Korea will lose on its own, and they don't want to get into a fight with the US. South Korea's one of their major trading partners now, too. I think they let a US/SK operation clean up while issuing various diplomatic missives decrying the violence, then wrangle a treaty barring major military installations or exercises in northern areas of, and establishing free trade with, the reunified Korea.
  - gwern 15y ago
    It's worth noting that they did intervene the last time the North Koreans were the aggressors, that is, the Korean War.
    - jbooth 15y ago
      It's also worth noting that 1950 China has very little in common with 2011 China.
      - gwern 15y ago
        Indeed, but it also has some factors in common through different pathways - I grow nervous when I read of the ultranationalist riots permitted by the Party, because it seems like the kind of thing that would itself to the leaders deciding to enter 'a short, victorious war'. (Defending the Middle Kingdom, defending the Revolution; rather similar.)
        jbooth 15y ago
        Entirely different, see my comment above about Deng Xiaopeng's ascendance in the late 1970s and the quite severe repercussions for the perpetrators of the Cultural Revolution. There's no linkage between the revolution and nationalism anymore. "A cat that catches mice is a good cat, whether it's white or black". Nationalist pride, sure, that's been a constant through any cohesive nation's history. Koreans aren't Chinese, though, and the leaders of China are too smart to look for a "short, victorious war" on the Korean peninsula..
        gwern 15y ago
        I didn't say nationalism and the Revolution were the same thing, I said they could play the same role.
    - afterburner 15y ago
      Partly because MacArthur was looking (and talking) like he was going to press on into China as he stormed up the peninsula after the landings at Incheon.
thaumaturgy 15y ago
I do not think that an unpredictable loose cannon could be referred to as a "puppet state", no. Although China has been (and still is) North Korea's largest source of aid, China has also been distancing themselves from North Korea over the past decade. China is a very different, and very complicated situation, but they are currently enjoying more political influence than at any time in recent history, and as they are poised to become a dominant world power, North Korea is a liability that they may well decide that they cannot afford. I would also point out that our respective notions of "live on" must be a bit different; assuming that the data I've read can be trusted, North Korea has almost no paved roads at all [1], which means that the movement of supplies throughout the country is badly hindered. Given the well-known height differences between North Koreans and their South Korean neighbors, the gulags and other oppressions mentioned in this article and others, the threats which North Korea uses to squeeze aid in the form of energy and other supplies from other nations, their nearly complete lack of electrical lighting after dark, and what's known of their trade with China, I find it difficult to see North Korea as being on anything more than the barest of life support from China. [1]: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/north-korea/roads-paved-percent-of-total-roads-wb-data.html http://www.tradingeconomics.com/north-korea/roads-paved-perc..., among others.
- praptak 15y ago
  > North Korea is a liability that they may well decide that they cannot afford. Hard to tell. On the other hand, their influence over North Korea is an asset they can use in negotiations with other superpowers. Plus, they start to look good in comparison.
  - pyre 15y ago
    I've not gotten the impression that North Korea really likes China, just that they tolerate them (because they are the only ones willing to deal with them). Maybe things will change a bit now, but I was always under the impression that N.K. could have easily lobbed a nuke at China 'just because.' That kind of uncertainty is a liability.
runjake 15y ago
Are you so sure about that? It's my understanding that NK is far from a PRC puppet state, and have a strained relationship, but being that NK depends heavily on China for it's continued existence and security, they do have some sway. Kim Jong Il has conducted several actions, like the 2006 nuclear test, which has embarrassed and/or annoyed China considerably, underneath the public facade. Some pertinent links: http://www.cfr.org/china/china-north-korea-relationship/p11097 http://www.cfr.org/china/china-north-korea-relationship/p110... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_China%E2%80%93North_Korea_relations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_China%E2...
nl 15y ago
Saying NK is a PRC puppet is like saying South Korea is a US puppet. China is glad NK exists as a buffer against the US zone of influence (South Korea, Japan, Taiwan), but NK causes China a lot of problems too (eg, there is a crystal-meth problem in the border zones because North Korea produces it as a medicine(!!)[1]) [1] http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/06/19/north-korea-s-meth-export.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/06/19/north-korea...
- forensic 15y ago
  Geopolitically, South Korea is a puppet state of the American Empire. So is Japan. Both countries invaded Iraq for oil at the command of George Bush II. Both countries have ~30,000 imperial troops stationed there. Both countries toe the imperial line on foreign policy. Why can't Americans see their own Empire? The rest of the world does.

You are aware of the fact that NK is PRC's puppet state, aren't you? NK will live on as it is, till PRC ceases tp support it.

by hcho 15y ago

You are aware of the fact that NK is PRC's puppet state, aren't you? NK will live on as it is, till PRC ceases tp support it.

gojomo 15y ago

My impression is that at this point 'puppet' is far too strong a term. North Korea still relies on the PRC's tolerance and patronage, and the PRC doesn't prefer any outcome that boosts the influence of the US and South Korea. But the PRC's influence and patience with North Korea are limited. Some of the Wikileaks cables indicate China has begun backing away from the regime: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables-china-reunified-korea http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/29/wikileaks-cables...

Duff 15y ago
North Korea is a vassal state of the PRC, and exists because it is politically advantageous to China for them to do so. Until recently, China hasn't liked to take a direct approach to many aspects of international affairs. So they influence countries like North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran as tools to achieve their political aims. They aren't whole-hearted supporters of all aspects of the North Korean regime, frankly, I'd say that they don't really care about what happens in North Korea, as long as they are achieving their foreign policy goals.
- jbooth 15y ago
  China's interests (and hence, position) are "don't fuck around and create trouble for us". A collapsed NK state creates more trouble for China in the form of refugees than a still-functioning one, so we see enough aid for them to keep functioning. An occasional diplomatic poke in the eye to the US helps China too, but that's a want, not a need. Don't confuse the rhetoric with the reality.
nknight 15y ago
Yeah, in the event of actual war, there's no way they intervene as long as the North Koreans are the aggressors -- they know North Korea will lose on its own, and they don't want to get into a fight with the US. South Korea's one of their major trading partners now, too. I think they let a US/SK operation clean up while issuing various diplomatic missives decrying the violence, then wrangle a treaty barring major military installations or exercises in northern areas of, and establishing free trade with, the reunified Korea.
- gwern 15y ago
  It's worth noting that they did intervene the last time the North Koreans were the aggressors, that is, the Korean War.
  - jbooth 15y ago
    It's also worth noting that 1950 China has very little in common with 2011 China.
    - gwern 15y ago
      Indeed, but it also has some factors in common through different pathways - I grow nervous when I read of the ultranationalist riots permitted by the Party, because it seems like the kind of thing that would itself to the leaders deciding to enter 'a short, victorious war'. (Defending the Middle Kingdom, defending the Revolution; rather similar.)
      - jbooth 15y ago
        Entirely different, see my comment above about Deng Xiaopeng's ascendance in the late 1970s and the quite severe repercussions for the perpetrators of the Cultural Revolution. There's no linkage between the revolution and nationalism anymore. "A cat that catches mice is a good cat, whether it's white or black". Nationalist pride, sure, that's been a constant through any cohesive nation's history. Koreans aren't Chinese, though, and the leaders of China are too smart to look for a "short, victorious war" on the Korean peninsula..
        gwern 15y ago
        I didn't say nationalism and the Revolution were the same thing, I said they could play the same role.
  - afterburner 15y ago
    Partly because MacArthur was looking (and talking) like he was going to press on into China as he stormed up the peninsula after the landings at Incheon.

thaumaturgy 15y ago

I do not think that an unpredictable loose cannon could be referred to as a "puppet state", no. Although China has been (and still is) North Korea's largest source of aid, China has also been distancing themselves from North Korea over the past decade. China is a very different, and very complicated situation, but they are currently enjoying more political influence than at any time in recent history, and as they are poised to become a dominant world power, North Korea is a liability that they may well decide that they cannot afford. I would also point out that our respective notions of "live on" must be a bit different; assuming that the data I've read can be trusted, North Korea has almost no paved roads at all [1], which means that the movement of supplies throughout the country is badly hindered. Given the well-known height differences between North Koreans and their South Korean neighbors, the gulags and other oppressions mentioned in this article and others, the threats which North Korea uses to squeeze aid in the form of energy and other supplies from other nations, their nearly complete lack of electrical lighting after dark, and what's known of their trade with China, I find it difficult to see North Korea as being on anything more than the barest of life support from China. [1]: http://www.tradingeconomics.com/north-korea/roads-paved-percent-of-total-roads-wb-data.html http://www.tradingeconomics.com/north-korea/roads-paved-perc..., among others.

praptak 15y ago
> North Korea is a liability that they may well decide that they cannot afford. Hard to tell. On the other hand, their influence over North Korea is an asset they can use in negotiations with other superpowers. Plus, they start to look good in comparison.
- pyre 15y ago
  I've not gotten the impression that North Korea really likes China, just that they tolerate them (because they are the only ones willing to deal with them). Maybe things will change a bit now, but I was always under the impression that N.K. could have easily lobbed a nuke at China 'just because.' That kind of uncertainty is a liability.

runjake 15y ago

Are you so sure about that? It's my understanding that NK is far from a PRC puppet state, and have a strained relationship, but being that NK depends heavily on China for it's continued existence and security, they do have some sway. Kim Jong Il has conducted several actions, like the 2006 nuclear test, which has embarrassed and/or annoyed China considerably, underneath the public facade. Some pertinent links: http://www.cfr.org/china/china-north-korea-relationship/p11097 http://www.cfr.org/china/china-north-korea-relationship/p110... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_China%E2%80%93North_Korea_relations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_China%E2...

nl 15y ago

Saying NK is a PRC puppet is like saying South Korea is a US puppet. China is glad NK exists as a buffer against the US zone of influence (South Korea, Japan, Taiwan), but NK causes China a lot of problems too (eg, there is a crystal-meth problem in the border zones because North Korea produces it as a medicine(!!)[1]) [1] http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/06/19/north-korea-s-meth-export.html http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/06/19/north-korea...

forensic 15y ago
Geopolitically, South Korea is a puppet state of the American Empire. So is Japan. Both countries invaded Iraq for oil at the command of George Bush II. Both countries have ~30,000 imperial troops stationed there. Both countries toe the imperial line on foreign policy. Why can't Americans see their own Empire? The rest of the world does.