China Stabs Obama (and America) in the Back on North Korea
I’ve been skeptical of reports, most of them directly from the ChiCom propaganda mill, that China was cooperating with U.N. sanctions against North Korea. So after a brief flurry of displays of cooperation, here is what the statistical record tells us:
North Korea’s trade with China declined slightly during the first half of this year, likely due to falling prices of crude oil, a South Korean agency and officials said Wednesday.
Trade volume during the January-June period totaled US$1.1 billion, down 3.7 percent from a year earlier and the first decline since 1999, the Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency (KOTRA) said in an emailed release that cited official Chinese data. The drop was in striking contrast with a 41 percent increase during the same period last year and a 16 percent gain in 2007. [Yonhap]
Got that? China halted the rate of growth in its support for North Korea, growth that was presumably designed to make up for what South Korea reduced since Roh Moo Hyun’s extinction. But overall, trade only declined by low single digits, most of that the result of North Korea actually getting a better deal on Chinese fuel. Most contemptible of all was China’s increased supply of food directly to the North Korean regime and army, which undercuts any multilateral pressure on North Korea to allow monitored food aid distributed on the basis of need, rather than loyalty.
China isn’t going to help us defang North Korea, and any president who believes they will is delusional. China wants North Korea to have nukes and helped North Korea get them. The only way to stop China from propping up Kim Jong Il is to begin methodically sanctioning Chinese entities that do business in or with North Korea, using a tool such as Executive Order 13,382. Then, other Chinese companies with substantial investments in the United States will have to choose between doing business with us, and doing business with Kim Jong Il. Most will make the choice themselves without having to be prodded.
No surprises. China will do anything to prolong the regime in North Korea.
Stanton, you are the one who is delusional. The Chinese government has never officially pledged to impose trade sanctions on North Korea, has it? China wants North Korea to have nukes? Why is that? You think the Chinese are that stupid that they want a nuclear Japan and nuclear South Korea? I am amazed that a self-proclaimed expert on North Korea like you has failed to grasp this simple reality, which is China has minimal influence over Pyongyang and China continues to prop up North Korea simply because they are afraid of its sudden collapse if China doesn’t.
Stabbing Obama and America in the back? Who the heck do you think you are?
” Despite the international sanctions on the country, North Korea’s trade with Germany gained by 46.53 million euros during the first half of this year, according to KOTRA. Citing Germany’s figures, it said trade volume was up 160 percent from the same period last year, and up 30 percent from the total trade volume the two countries registered for last year.” – Yonhap
I see you blasting China all the time. How about Germany?
I will take the ChiComs over those pathetic, nutty AmeriCons any day.
I don’t think anyone who goes by “juchechosunmanse” is in a position to diagnose anyone. The arms of the worker’s paradise are open to you. What’s keeping you?
Joshua wrote:
Do you have a linkable source for the claim that China knowingly and willingly sought to have North Korea get nuclear weapons? This may have been covered before I started reading this blog on a near daily basis, so I apologize if I’m asking for a rerun.
It just seems to me that a nuclear-armed North Korea is one of the last things China would want, for several reasons. First, it would give Japan great impetus toward getting such weapons itself, and the last thing China wants is a Japan that is an offensive military threat.
Second, it would make the likelihood of US intervention into a collapsing North Korea — to secure those nukes — a far greater certainty, and that’s something else they don’t want.
I meant to link this piece in the post above, explaining China’s long history of nuclear and WMD enabling of North Korea.
Stanton,
Instead of questioning my moniker, why don’t you give me a rebuttal? Pointing to a piece written by yourself as the evidence of China allegedly helping the DPRK go nuclear won’t cut it.
OK, for the sake of the discussion let’s say China did help the DPRK develop its nukes. Could you tell me what China’s intentions were? Are you suggesting that China is a nation of fools who want to jumpstart a nuclear arms race among East Asian countries? Has China been faking all along by hosting the 6-party talks? Has China been telling the North Koreans “You go buddy, we support you”?
Do tell Stanton!
That piece is full of links you may want to follow, although I doubt that any amount of evidence would persuade someone who calls himself “juchechosunmanse” (“ten thousand years for Juche Korea”).
And yes, that’s what I’m suggesting.
Stopped reading there. Even Chinese themselves acknowledge this albeit in informal, not official communications.
China is to diplomacy what Anna Nicole Smith was to orgasms. Of course they faked it.
And Sonagi was correct in stopping there because the sentence can’t even hold itself together….
….if you are propping me up, you have great influence over me, whether you choose to use it or not. — Even if I violently reject any attempt on your part to force me to take a new direction — the sentence reads — if you respond to my response by jerking away your prop – I’ll collapse….
“China is to diplomacy what Anna Nicole Smith was to orgasms. Of course they faked it. “
Stanton, you are increasingly sounding like your president, all rhetoric and no substance whatsoever. A three-year-old could have said what you said. Sure, people claim whatever they want without having the burden to back it up.
Once again Stanton, what are China’s true intentions by hosting the 6-party talks? What can China gain from the DPRK going nuclear? Forever keeping Korea divided? You never know, China might be the target of North Korean nukes! North Korean nukes are no real deterrent at all. They are seriously lacking the delivery capabilities. Last time I checked their nuclear warheads are not small enough to fit into any of their missiles. Make no mistake, if you AmeriCons had seriously wanted to invade the DPRK, you could and would have done it. Perhaps you should invade the DPRK and help the two Koreas unite, then you won’t see a shred of anti-Americanism in South Korea left at all.
The problem with you guys is that you are all talk and no action.
Sonagi and usinkorea,
You have to realize that convention wisdom doesn’t apply to the DPRK. China has sort of become the DPRK’s hostage (willingly or unwillingly). The North Koreans know where it hurts China the most and they know how to play the game. They know China has NO CHOICE but to keep propping up North Korea, because the alternative would be letting it collapse, a price China is not willing to pay any time soon. Basically the DPRK is backmailing China like this: “Feed me and pay me, otherwise you are going to suffer if I die”. After getting fed and paid by China, the DPRK might choose to periodically show its “appreciation” by making some half-hearted gestures that save China’s face. The DPRK is very wary of China exerting more influence there and they are doing their best to minimize it.
Seriously, if you guys were the leaders of China, what would you do? What alternatives? Invading the DPRK? Collaborating 100% with the friggin’ AmeriCons, who ultimately want to suffocate you to death?
Invade? Us? I sure hope not. It’s China that’s going to invade to keep North Korea — or at least a part of it — subjugated. If that happens, we should arm the North Korean people to fight the ChiComs and whatever puppet dictatorship they install. That would have the added advantage of spurring more domestic unrest in China itself. I’ve advocated withdrawing U.S. ground forces from Korea for years.
The Chinese government must have no idea how much damage its netizens are doing to its global image every time they show up in a comment thread. By being such enthusiastic consumers of their internal propaganda Chi-Bots persuasively contradict their government’s external propaganda about wanting good relations with America. What China wants, of course, is to take advantage of America as an export market while indoctrinating netizens in an ethos of angry, anti-Western victimhood and nationalism that’s eerily similar to Germany in the 1930’s. What else does the CCP have when its founding principles have been such a catastrophe? Ironically, it was the Olympics and the outrageous behavior of Chinese thugs in the streets and the Chi-Bots online that reinforced my belief that we should be subverting the Chinese system of government — peacefully in Han China, but by quietly encouraging the formation of disciplined armed resistance movements in places like Burma, North Korea, and perhaps one day, Tibet.
I certainly wouldn’t be saying that now if China really was evolving inexorably toward a truly free market and a more representative government, as opposed to trying to perfect fascism.
Stanton,
I see, not only does Barrack Obama’s shallow rhetoric inspire you, you are also a student of Tom Clancy’s shrewd fantasy. China invading the DPRK? Why should China do that? What can China gain from invading the DPRK? China already has a lot on her plate, she doesn’t need more problems and headaches. Of course you can’t answer any of my questions as you have been evading them since I got here. Logic makes no sense to you Stanton, you tend to think the Chinese (and the North Koreans too) are a bunch of fools or drone driven not by common sense but by some sort of weird, alien psyche that you, your peace-loving, freedom-championing AmeriCons will never comprehend.
Plus, condemnations from the international community is going to crush the thin-skinned China; on the other hand they won’t bother the ultra-thick-skinned AmeriCons who do whatever they want, whenever they want and in any place they want. Therefore I think you people are in a much better position to invade the DPRK. You’ve got everything.
I doubt that the North Koreans, after being indoctrinated for decades to regard you AmeriCons as morons would be that happy to take up arms supplied by you to fight the Chinese or anyone else. Please, North Koreans are human too, they are not that dumb (perhaps even smarter than the average AmeriCons).
You talked as if you people have not been trying to spur more domestic unrests in China. From the CIA-affiliated pro-TGIE organizations to the NED-funded Uighur Islamic insurgents, your hands have been all over China. Sure Stanton, if the value of your house dropping to below 50K doesn’t concern you at all, by all means please write to your congressmen to ask them to bring hell to China. This is the only way to have “One Free Korea”, like I said!
OK, you’re really in over your head with that one. Put the bong down, dude.
Barack Obama the neocon is subverting China! Well, we’ve learned something about you, because no one but a Chi-Bot would echo propaganda that ridiculous.
Cut the BS Stanton, don’t be such a coward. Never have I seen you answering any of my questions challenging your preposterous allegations and fantasies, never have I seen you providing anything to back them up. What have you been doing all along? Ridiculing my moniker, now labelling me a “Chi-Bot”? haha, what a incompetent coward you are, Stanton. How about answering my questions: Why has China been consistently encouraging the DPRK to go back to the 6-party talks? Why is China encouraging the DPRK and the AmeriCons to talk to each other? What can China gain from helping the DPRK go nuclear?
Sure China wants good relations with the US, she wants good relations with pretty much everybody. Isn’t it a no-brainer? You guys don’t want good relations with the rest of the world? Of course, you AmeriCons are not of this world, you are better than the rest of us. What does this have anything to do with what we have been discussing here, anyway? You can’t handle different opinions Stanton? Ahh, you must have been spoiled by the overly harmonious tone of the comments people have left on your blog. I am simply disagreeing with you and calling you nuts on some of your allegations. What? Too much for you to handle?
Haha Stanton, talk about “subverting the Chinese system of government”, you can’t even handle the DPRK, what makes you think you can handle China? Who do you think you are Stanton? You need to wake up and smell the coffee. You need to have a reality check.
Instead of wasting your time indulging in stuff not related to assertions and allegations about the DPRK and China that you started, you should seriously answer my questions and move on!
No, I am not saying Barrack Obama the neocon is subverting China, he is by all means not a neocon; however as the president he inherits the so-called American establishment, which has consistently been seeking to do just that, since 1949. You admitted youself that you are on board with this very effort.
Seriously Stanton, let’s not talk about anything irrelevant to the DPRK and China’s role with regard to the DPRK here, after all this is a blog about the DPRK. For starters, care to answer my questions? They are serious questions.
What does China have to gain from keeping Korea divided?
That’s a fascinating question indeed, and one that has gotten much more complicated since PRC-ROK diplomatic relations were forged in 1992. North Korean leaders are still sore at Deng Xiaoping for that. I think in some ways, regardless of what China does or professes to do, the DPRK leadership fears a late-Koguryo scenario where a China-southern Korean alliance unifies the peninsula and wipes out the power center in Pyongyang. Fortunately the current debate seems more manageable and rooted in the Cold War and doesn’t appear to be dragging back into the Three Kingdoms era or the Qin/Han epoch; that’s raging elsewhere.
On China’s side, there’s obviously a great deal of frustration with Pyongyang’s recalcitrance to open up the economy — but fortunately, China doesn’t have a track record of invading countries with the motive of creating guaranteed trading partners.
I have to say that as regards the current thread, I’ve never seen the notion of Chinese pragmatism toward North Korea asserted quite this way before. Glad that Joshua and the challenger seem to have the time to duke it out for our edification. (Not sure if that counts as a “harmonious comment,” but if so, fine by me.)
China is to diplomacy what Anna Nicole Smith was to orgasms. Of course they faked it.
What inspired you to make that analogy? Were you flipping through The Star while waiting in line at Wegmans?
I took it as a double entendre to the giant “patrio-gasm” about to drench Beijing in harmonious martial law. Faked or real? Wonderful analogy!
@Sonagi, indeed, there’s a bit of Chaucer meets The Star in it.
Of course we could take this one step further with reference to Mao’s physician’s voluminous memoirs (Li Zhisui, The Private Life of Chairman Mao) where the author states quite clearly that with reference to Mao’s vaunted sexual activity, the Chairman in his later years frequently engaged in intercourse, but due to his fidelity to Daoist methods of fluid conservation, never had an orgasm in the conventional sense of the word. (As I recall, Nietzsche also wrote about this somewhere.)
Anyway, with either Anna Nicole Smith or Chairman Mao (or both together as a couple even stranger than Mao with neurotic Jiang Qing and A.N. Smith with Strom Thurmond or whomever) it seems that the coital metaphor could be extended profitably into the realm of international relations, or Sino-North Korean relations. Some kind of variation on “same bed, different dreams.”
Right. After all, Jing Jing and Cha Cha are watching. Say no more! By the way, do you have an opinion about Green Dam?