本帖最后由 一古斋主 于 2011-7-15 16:19 编辑
【中文标题】像我这样的朋友 － 为何中国像美国一样担心朝鲜问题
【原文标题】Friends like these Why China may worry about North Korea just as much as America does
【登载媒体】经济学家
【原文链接】http://www.economist.com/node/18897395
我们早就听到过类似的报道，似乎都是一厢情愿的想法。但是，越来越多的迹象让我们难以相信，中国对尽力约束这个蛮横、好斗的小盟友——朝鲜——行为的承诺。韩国总统李明博说，中国允诺，如果朝鲜对韩国进一步挑衅，中国不会站在朝鲜一方。这将是一个重大的转变。去年，三月份朝鲜击沉韩国军舰和十一月份朝鲜炮击韩国岛屿的两件事情，中国都没有发出谴责的声音。而现在，中国的学者和官员似乎的确在向朝鲜发出强烈的信号：该收手时就收手。
6月，中国国防部长梁光烈在新加坡举行的地区安全论坛上说，中国与朝鲜之间的沟通“比你们想象的”要多得多。在另一次吉隆坡的会议中，一个朝鲜与会者认为，朝鲜半岛安全问题的根源是统一和冷战的遗留问题。北京大学教授朱峰反驳了这一观点，他认为这同时也是朝鲜政坛一成不变的格局及其行为所引发的。他说，朝鲜“敢在中国送食的手上反咬一口。”
中国曾经在朝鲜问题上被激怒，不仅是2006年首次核武器试验的事件，双方之间的猜疑和仇恨有更深层次的背景。前中国外交部官员、现在新南威尔士大学任教的尤纪在最近一篇文章中说，朝鲜的独裁者金正日从未原谅过中国拒不承认他从父亲金日成手中继承统治权。由于心怀怒气，他在1983年到2000年期间一直没有造访中国。
然而，从去年5月份到现在，他连续三次访问中国。这标志着他的政权更加依赖于中国，中国毕竟占据了它五分之四的贸易额和资源需求，还是它为了防止饥荒再次发生的主要食物来源。
朝鲜的依赖性必然说明了中国不断壮大的地区影响力，但是在以前，朝鲜总是通过引发中国两大战略恐惧来回避讨厌的外部压力。第一个是被抛弃的朝鲜或许会真正激怒韩国和美国，引发一连串的报复行动，甚至战争。第二个是朝鲜或许会在混乱中崩溃，一大批难民将涌入中国。朝鲜政府任何形式的垮台都会导致朝鲜半岛在繁荣的、与美国结盟的韩国手中统一，这或许意味着美国军队在与中国相邻的过境中驻扎，中国会发现自己本来在台湾问题上与美国对立的立场变得更加复杂。到目前为止，朝鲜的初级核武器似乎并未让中国过分担忧。毕竟这些武器并未威胁到自身，而且如果朝鲜政权可以继续维系，它实际上与中国的目的是一致的。
去年的事件似乎改变了中国的这种思维。在韩国，李总统由于未对炮击事件采取有力的回应而遭到国内民众谴责，一些人甚至呼吁美国在韩国部署战略核武器，以震慑中国。任何新出现的挑衅行为，甚至小摩擦都可能让局势失去控制。6月中，两名韩国海军陆战队士兵向降落在首尔仁川机场的一架客机开枪射击，因为他们误认为那是一架朝鲜飞机。尤纪认为，朝鲜半岛已经取代台湾成为最困扰中国的战争潜在问题。中国的朝鲜观察人士也在担心，高层权力的交接——从金正日到圆圆胖胖、羽翼未丰的金正银——或许超出了整个体系所能承担的极限，有可能导致军阀内战的局面。
中国向朝鲜施压的一种方式就是帮助其改善萎靡不振的经济。金先生在近期访问中国之后，朝鲜方面宣布中国将帮助其开发三个经济特区。在过去，类似的图谋往往是竹篮打水一场空，或许是因为金氏政权担心，经济解放会让韩国的例子变得更加吸引人，从而引起内部的不满。
中国施压的另一种方式是哄骗朝鲜回到它主办的六方会谈中，朝鲜、韩国、美国、日本、俄罗斯和中国一起讨论朝鲜的“去核化”进程。中国已经提出了初步的议程：先是韩朝内部谈话，然后是朝美对话。
议程的第一步就已经是一个遥不可及的目标，因为韩国要求先为去年的暴力事件得到某种道歉。这或许是低级别谈判开始时惯用的一些伎俩，但是真正的障碍的确存在，而且中国似乎对此束手无策。对朝鲜的倒行逆施，美国根本没有嘉许的意思，所有人都不相信朝鲜真的会放弃核武器。在最近一次由亚洲学会在首尔举办的核武器会议中，美国国家安全理事部的资深顾问Gary Samore明确表态，美国绝不会容忍持有核武器的朝鲜存在。
超级无力
实际上，美国终究还会是回到谈判桌前，因为的确没有其它更好的方式来限制朝鲜的核武器。在既不受约束也不经审查的情况下，朝鲜很有可能不顾一切、穷兵黩武地发展核武器。但是，如果朝鲜依旧在摩拳擦掌地准备第三次核试验，谈判可能会进一步推迟。这次核试验所使用的弹头并非来自其蕴藏量日渐萎缩的钚，而是高浓缩铀。朝鲜在去年公布这一消息时，世界为之震惊。就目前情况来看，中国会尽其所能来阻止新一次核试验。但是，金氏家族可怕之处在于，他们不一定会对强大的中国言听计从。
评论：
Cloudwarrior：
中国和金氏王朝已经被逼到了角落里。与这么一个贫穷、不稳定、为养活民众而索取无度的国家接壤，中国一无所获。中国或许更希望与一个奉行韩国政策的繁荣国家接壤，但是，我们也可以理解它为什么不喜欢面对外国军队的驻扎。
这是一个互为因果的问题。外国（美国）军队之所以存在，是因为韩国害怕朝鲜的侵犯；中国支持朝鲜，是因为它不喜欢美国军队出现在边境线上。
朝鲜政权倒塌的可能性比美国撤军的可能性大得多。中国需要认清现实，有所准备。
Bismarck888：
我认为，中国如果不向朝鲜大把扔钱，那才是愚蠢。如果朝鲜政权在明天垮台，20年后变成了一个核武器武装到牙齿的“朝鲜合众国”，那么中国领导人也会提出像美国领导人在50年代提出的一样的问题——谁弄丢了“朝鲜”？我敢肯定，中国领导人给金正日起了一个绰号，就像美国人曾经管蒋介石叫“支票蒋”一样。中国目前与越南不睦，我强烈感觉到一个合并的朝鲜半岛会给中国带来更大的问题。
一年100亿美元的支出，完全可以让朝鲜回到80年代中期的GDP水平，正因如此，中国才不愿意资助一个制造麻烦的家伙。如果东方国家集团资助朝鲜候，它就不会像现在这样平静了。
如果中国模仿白俄罗斯模式，朝鲜政权必将崩溃。当俄罗斯停止20年来对白俄罗斯的资助时，中国也会做同样的事情，除非它改变自己的政治立场。我个人认为，朝鲜对中国的重要性远高于白俄罗斯对俄罗斯的重要性。所以，等着花大钱吧。
Chinaeagle：
只要有中国的支持，朝鲜就不会崩溃。所以我们不能说“朝鲜政权倒塌的可能性比美国撤军的可能性大得多”。而且，我也不同意“中国如果不向朝鲜大把扔钱那才是愚蠢”的说法。
中国最应奉行的策略是：仅向朝鲜提供其不至于灭国的资金，别给太多，让其保持饥饿感，同时让中国获取尽量多的特权。（比如向中国开放港口；让中国公司在朝鲜享受特殊政策。）然后逐渐把朝鲜兼并成中国的一个省。
只要没有中国和美国的支持，朝鲜半岛就不可能统一。中国和美国在分裂的朝鲜半岛上占尽了便宜——中国从朝鲜获利；美国从韩国获利。所以，维持现状是中美的共同愿望，没有理由让他们把统一方案提到日程上来。
Cloudwarrio：
Chinaeagle，你的冷酷无情真让我恼怒。让2400万人处于半饥饿状态，只是为了使用港口和享受经济政策优待？这真是令人作呕的观点。
对于中国政府的错误行为，我不认为原因是他们刻意冷酷地用这种方式对待2400万人民，而目的仅仅是使用离日本稍近一点的港口，和进入这个勉强糊口、不知iPod和LCD电视为何物的市场。
更令人质疑的是，为什么中国想方设法要进入2400万穷困潦倒、未经教育、身无一技之长、仇恨排外的朝鲜人群呢？他们以为自己活在天堂，其它人都生活在法西斯的铁蹄下。
这些事实摧毁了你心目中的朝鲜形象吧？
让我们进一步分析你的下一个论点。尽管中国不得不支持朝鲜半岛统一，但美国不会。朝鲜和韩国都未被他人侵占，与朝鲜不同，韩国政府不需要对其保护者承担义务。
朝鲜是美国在韩国的军事力量与中国之间的缓冲带，我们可以看到中国因此而受益，但是美国究竟得到了什么呢？你或许可以查查，美国在韩国驻军花费了多少钱？这其中韩国人掏了多少钱？
美国和世界扶持出一个稳定而又繁荣的韩国，我实在难以理解你为什么认为一个统一的朝鲜半岛会与此不同呢？
Bismarck888：
Chinaeagle：“中国最应奉行的策略是：仅向朝鲜提供其不至于灭国的资金，别给太多，让其保持饥饿感，同时让中国获取尽量多的特权。（比如向中国开放港口；让中国公司在朝鲜享受特殊政策。）然后逐渐把朝鲜兼并成中国的一个省。”
在我看来，你的逻辑有些混乱。我认为中国应当把更多的钱投入朝鲜，以保证其稳定，并且在必要的时候将其变为自己的一个省。为什么一个饥饿的朝鲜会信任中国这个殖民者呢？
如果中国的策略是饲养一只饥饿的狼狗来防范美国和韩国，这倒是一个不错的手段，但存在风险。中国人不懂得什么叫做知足，所以我不认为他们会这么做，与其让朝鲜变得危如累卵，中国人更在乎自己的利益有没有实现。如果是这样的话，他们为什么要浪费时间在每次金正日访问时，向他炫耀那些繁荣的工厂和城市呢？中国的高层领导人除了当导游，就没有正经事可做吗？中国官员不明白，如果金正日进行经济改革，他就死定了。如果朝鲜人真正了解韩国的情况，他们就不再愿意独立作为一个国家生存。我觉得中国官员没有理解到这一点。
朝鲜政治问题的根源在于自由、下流，而又富裕的韩国。如果尝试进行中国式改革，朝鲜人（大都对外部世界一无所知）将面对一个繁荣的韩国的冷酷现实。
改革还会给他们带来对社会控制前所未有的放松，改变的结果或许会让政权的合法性面临巨大的危机，甚至彻底垮台。在某种意义上说，中国的改革之所以成功，是因为并没有一个资本主义的、民主的、富裕的“南中国”存在。（台湾太小了，不足以引起北京的过分关注。）
问题是，你或许可以用中国人的思维来设想，所有事情都会按部就班，不会出现任何偏差。但你无法预见其他人的命运（包括你自己的领导人）。
基辛格的书并不是给中国人看的，而是对西方人的一个警告。他们或许低估了中国人的传统，因此必须要在一个22％的人口扮演越来越重要角色的世界中武装好自己。
但书中的确也委婉提到了一些中国人应当注意的问题：不要过分青睐阴谋论，别总是通过自己的眼镜来观察世界。世界上充满了意外事件，要学会接受不同，并给予恰当的反应。这种对意外的积极、开放心态是西方人的传统，也是中国人不愿面对的事情，因为他们总是在关注“意外”后面隐藏的那些别有用心的动机——陷阱还是阴谋？
我不认为中国领导人与你持相同的观点。他们的确希望朝鲜能有所变化，这样可以少付出一些钱，但是他们又担心朝鲜真正强大起来。这其实是错误的，在苏联时代，朝鲜社会稳定，也没有研制原子弹的念头，美国更是因为顾忌苏联而没有插手朝鲜问题。看看白俄罗斯，20年来它一直在接受俄罗斯的援助。一旦援助在今年停止，白俄罗斯的经济一落千丈，人们走上街头抗议。
你说的没错，美国的确在分裂的朝鲜半岛上有所斩获，主要收益是让自己可以出现在朝鲜半岛。如果韩朝统一，美国驻军就会步日本的后尘。
你或许是无意中提到了，中国行动的风险是增加了这种可能性。
CA-Oxonian：
文章最后一段似乎是在盲目地猜想，而不是理性地讨论出一个合理的战略。朝鲜一直把对话当作向外部世界索取的手段，它自身从来不做任何变化。事实是，朝鲜内部崩溃终有一天会发生，现在发生比以后发生要好。实际上，在起研制核武器之前发生，比现在发生要更好，是我们拖延了时间。继续的犹豫和政治手腕会让我们越陷越深，该正视现实了。哦对了，政治家们做不来这件事。所以，最好有人能从朝鲜拿回一张纸，上面写着，承诺“短时期的和平”。
Nkab：
我觉得你们说的对，分裂的朝鲜让美国有机会继续留在那里。但这毕竟花费了美国大笔金钱，虽然韩国也支付了其中的一部分。
如果两国以某种和平的方式统一，美国从韩国撤军也并非不可想象，因为美国在必要时总可以回到日本和关岛的军事基地。
美国一离开朝鲜半岛，边境贸易的繁荣似乎迎合了中国的经济利益，既无外国驻军又联合统一的朝鲜半岛当然会欢迎中国的贸易，就像蒙古一样。
就目前来看，中国希望保持这一地区的稳定和贸易，所以它并不会耍弄让一个朝鲜反对另一个朝鲜的把戏。
L.Y.Z.：
我就是不明白，为什么一个统一的朝鲜半岛还需要大规模的美国驻军。这样的行为只会招致中国的抱怨，美国人的心态似乎还停留在冷战时期。
我不知道美国在统一的朝鲜半岛驻军在多大程度上有利于本国的经济发展，这个问题已经在美国全球战略溃败时讨论过多次了（当然这与军力无关）。美国人会支持一场新的战争吗？我们已经卷入了这么多似乎永无止境的战争。
Chinaeagle：
Cloudwarrior，谢谢你说我的建议是“冷酷无情的”。在中文里，“冷酷”蕴含着“理性”的意思。中国曾经毫无保留地帮助朝鲜，结果呢？中国申办2000年奥运会时，朝鲜投了反对票；朝鲜在试验核武器时也没有通知中国，而是通知了俄罗斯。因此，中国现在的战略家们说，中国不会再无条件地帮助朝鲜，而是让朝鲜先要服从我们的意志。
如果韩国和美国真正关心食不果腹的朝鲜人民，那么他们为什么停止援助朝鲜呢？当然，我知道你的逻辑——朝鲜人的性命一钱不值。你难道不认为这很虚伪吗？一边谴责别人冷酷，一边自己又提出更冷酷的建议。请记住，中国是唯一援助朝鲜的国家。
美国人得益于直接进入韩国市场。一旦韩国要求美国给予保护，美国总是让韩国进一步开放其市场（汽车、牛肉等等）。美国在韩国驻军的唯一目的就是阻止朝鲜半岛的统一。
如果美国离开韩国，中国会高兴地帮助朝鲜半岛统一，条件是它们必须切断与美国之间的战略盟友关系。因此，除非中国把美国赶出韩国，并且向它们灌输自身的影响力，朝鲜半岛是不可能统一的。
Chinaeagle：
Bismarck888，你说：“中国应当把更多的钱投入朝鲜，以保证其稳定，并且在必要的时候将其变为自己的一个省。为什么一个饥饿的朝鲜会信任中国这个殖民者呢？”
你养过军用狼犬吗，比如藏獒？你应该知道，中国从未把朝鲜当作自己的宠物，而是当作一只狼犬。给朝鲜的援助过多，会让它失去向美国和韩国狂吠的动力。所以，中国只给朝鲜一些勉强糊口的援助，如果朝鲜在中国需要的时候向美国和韩国狂吠，它就会得到更多的奖励。
大把撒钱给朝鲜是愚蠢的行为，中国给的钱越多，朝鲜就越觉得不够，转过来还会恨我们。然而，如果我们仅在他们急需的时候给一点点钱，他们就会对我们感恩戴德，把我们当作大救星。所以，中国不需要喂饱朝鲜人，只需要让他们知道：没有中国，他们必死！与无休止地给钱相比，这种做法会让朝鲜人更加期望成为中国的一个省。
Bismarck888：
Chinaeagle，“你养过军用狼犬吗，比如藏獒？你应该知道，中国从未把朝鲜当作自己的宠物，而是当作一只狼犬。给朝鲜的援助过多，会让它失去向美国和韩国狂吠的动力。所以，中国只给朝鲜一些勉强糊口的援助，如果朝鲜在中国需要的时候向美国和韩国狂吠，它就会得到更多的奖励。”
一只狼犬只有在你让它咬的时候它才会咬，你会把狼犬饿的半死吗？你为什么会认为朝鲜激怒美国，中国就会奖励它？朝鲜核试验的时候中国奖励它了吗？好像没有吧，你为什么认为朝鲜的角色就是激怒敌人，而不仅仅是一个缓冲地带呢？
“所以，中国不需要喂饱朝鲜人，只需要让他们知道：没有中国，他们必死！与无休止地给钱相比，这种做法会让朝鲜人更加期望成为中国的一个省。”
没有中国，他们必将崩溃，落入韩国之手，上百万难民涌过边境。最后一招就是用核武器把首尔烧成白地。死亡威胁对手握核武器的国家是没有用的，当中国用抢指着韩国脑袋的时候，它也有一把抢正对着中国的蛋蛋，他们知道中国没有勇气挥刀自宫。
“大把撒钱给朝鲜是愚蠢的行为，中国给的钱越多，朝鲜就越觉得不够，转过来还会恨我们。然而，如果我们仅在他们急需的时候给一点点钱，他们就会对我们感恩戴德，把我们当作大救星。所以，中国不需要喂饱朝鲜人，只需要让他们知道：没有中国，他们必死！与无休止地给钱相比，这种做法会让朝鲜人更加期望成为中国的一个省。”
我要说的是，这种关系不会有什么结果的。
90年代之后朝鲜的入侵行为比70年代到80年代多出两到三倍，朝鲜还在进行核试验。无数难民从边境涌入中国，靠贩毒为生。每年30亿美元的援助或许可以让朝鲜的生活水平恢复到80年代，难民和毒品也会随之停止。
有很多人参与到中国的朝鲜政策中——解放军、退休的党内元老、中国的边境省份、国际联络办公室的人等等。朝鲜就像一个微缩版的墨西哥，只不过环境更差、手持核武。
朝鲜永远不会表示感谢。中国做这一切都是为自身利益考虑，他们为什么要对此感谢呢？就像年轻的韩国人对待美国军队一样，他们不认为美国人是在帮助自己，朝鲜也是一样。在朝鲜的历史教科书中，中国为它所做的牺牲只字未提。
Kim77：
我在想，中国是不是在尽量拖延时间呢？不可否认的事实是美国经济实力正在衰退，或许速度极为缓慢。美国在亚洲的战争机器很快就会为资源发愁，而中国军队在这个地区的力量会随着经济发展而不断增长。
再过10年、20年，鉴于美国军队在韩国的尴尬处境，它完全有可能做出撤军的决定。这样，韩国就没有其它选择，至少要变成一个中立国，而不是现在美国坚定的盟友。令人出乎意料的是，中国到那时终于可以拔掉朝鲜的电源，因为一个统一的朝鲜半岛不会再欢迎美国驻军。
当然，韩国对中国的威胁不仅仅是美国的驻军，一个统一的朝鲜半岛离北京太近了。朝鲜手握核武器，韩国已经是世界上顶尖的军事国家之一。尽管如此，他们与中国比起来毕竟还是一个弱小的对手，没有美国支持，中国可以轻松地改造他们。到那时，中国就不会对与这两个国家接壤而大惊小怪了。
rice bowl：
共产主义中国人口：13亿；朝鲜人口：2400万。
中国可以轻松地吸纳2400万共产主义移民，毕竟两个国家的意识形态和腐败程度是一样的。开玩笑地说，中国的劳动力成本不是在上升吗？一些肮脏、贫穷的农民正是中国工厂里急需的资源，这或许是他们建立工业园区的原因。
美国的算盘很简单：利用一切手段让朝鲜崩溃，就像1988年到1989年的苏联一样。谁知道呢，或许一个共产主义朝鲜的解体会在共产主义国家中引发大地震。就像苏联一样，国家解体，卫星也不上天了。
Birdsseye：
有意思，西方人以说道朝鲜，必然用到的描述语言是破败、没有教育、身无一技之长、国家摇摇欲坠。朝鲜人均GDP是1200美元，和印度一样。我们能看到的那些有限的朝鲜照片中，街道干净整洁、比印度强多了，朝鲜人看起来健康、喜悦。
更重要的是，朝鲜没有出现任何革命的迹象，而印度的起义事件俯拾皆是。怎么就没有人说印度即将崩溃，而总是在说朝鲜这个明显更好的国家即将崩溃呢？
或许这些恶语相向的人都是CIA的五毛党。
Bismarck888：
Birdseye：“更重要的是，朝鲜没有出现任何革命的迹象，而印度的起义事件俯拾皆是。怎么就没有人说印度即将崩溃，而总是在说朝鲜这个明显更好的国家即将崩溃呢？或许这些恶语相向的人都是CIA的五毛党。”
这两个国家有重要的差别。朝鲜失去了中国的援助必将挨饿，印度尽管有很多问题，但可以自给自足，不需要进口粮食。就这么简单。如果你这样自信，为什么不让中国政府停止援助朝鲜，看看它能否支持一年？
Cloudwarrior：
实际上，更可笑的是那些相信朝鲜政府的人。如果谁相信平壤提供的数据，那些这些数据都是拍脑袋想出来的。平壤不报道事实，只做宣传。
然而，birdsseye徒劳地把朝鲜和印度做比较，其实是没有事实依据的（选择印度或许也是别有用心）。让我们来看看他的观点把：
“朝鲜人均GDP是1200美元，和印度一样。”
根据CIA全球档案，朝鲜并不发布可信的国民收入数据，这里的数据来自对朝鲜购买力平价GDP预测，是Angus MADDISON为经济合作组织所做的一项研究中的一部分。数字从1999年到2009年，推测的依据是朝鲜GDP真实增长幅度，以及美国GDP通货紧缩所产生影响因素。结论是将近100亿美元。
CIA全球档案（你可以上维基百科查一查）不发布表面数字，仅仅发布预测的购买力平价数据。所以，正确的数字是：
人均GDP（购买力平价）：印度——3500美元，朝鲜——1800美元。
再强调一次，这是一个推测的数字，不像印度和中国GDP那样有据可查。
“朝鲜街道干净整洁、比印度强多了。”
如果说干净的街道代表幸福、健康和富裕的人民，那么的确是这样，但是你真的那么好被欺骗吗？奴役你的人民、拒绝自由经济就会出现这样的现象。
“朝鲜人看起来健康、喜悦。”
我根本不知道你说的是哪张照片……下边这张照片或许更能反映朝鲜的真实情况。
如果你在互联网上好好找一找，很容易就发现一些真实的朝鲜照片，而不是朝鲜政府想让你看到的照片。
“朝鲜没有出现任何革命的迹象，而印度的起义事件俯拾皆是。”
考虑到朝鲜民族同质的问题，这个观点太不厚道了。起义需要食物攻击，现在连朝鲜军队都没有足够的食物。在中朝边境叛逃的朝鲜人还算是有那么一点点能量。
“或许这些恶语相向的人都是CIA的五毛党。”
哈哈，终于露出你的真面目了。你不同意我的见解，那么你必定有不可告人的动机。在这种错误的逻辑下，你应该好好想想，到底谁才是五毛？
Midiot：
把缅甸一些没人居住的郊区住宅给朝鲜人如何？让韩国统一朝鲜半岛，美国军人可以回家（或至少回到关岛）。这样的话，中国就有一个富裕、可靠的贸易伙伴了。
TS2912：
我觉得中国支持朝鲜，完全出于单纯的感情因素。现在的朝鲜和毛时代的中国一模一样——饥饿，受凶残的独裁者统治。
原文：
SUCH reports have been heard before and smack of wishful thinking. But there are more reasons than usual to believe China’s promises that it is trying to rein in its unruly, pugnacious little ally, North Korea. South Korea’s president, Lee Myung-bak, has said that China has promised not to side with North Korea if it stages further provocations towards the South. That would be a big shift. Last year China failed to condemn either the sinking by North Korea of a South Korean naval vessel in March, or the shelling in November of a South Korean island. Now Chinese scholars and officials do indeed seem to be sending strong signals to North Korea that enough is enough.
In June Liang Guanglie, China’s defence minister, told a regional-security forum in Singapore that China had done much more in communicating with North Korea “than you can imagine”. At another conference, in Kuala Lumpur, Zhu Feng, a professor at Peking University, contradicted a North Korean participant who argued that the security issue on the Korean peninsula was one of reunification and a legacy of the cold war. It was also a result, Mr Zhu said, of the unchanged nature of the North Korean regime and its behaviour. North Korea, he argued, “risks biting the Chinese hand that feeds it.”
China has been exasperated with North Korea before, not least in 2006, after its first test of a nuclear weapon. Mutual suspicion and animosity go back much further. In a recent paper*, You Ji, a former Chinese foreign-ministry official now at the University of New South Wales, reports that Kim Jong Il, North Korea’s dictator, never forgave China for its disapproval of the hereditary succession in which he took over from his father, Kim Il Sung. Sulking, he did not visit China once from 1983 to 2000.
Since May last year, however, he has been three times. That is a symptom of his regime’s greater dependence on China, which accounts for four-fifths of its trade and energy needs, and most of the food aid it gets to avert renewed famine.
The corollary of greater North Korean dependence should be greater Chinese influence. But in the past the North Korean regime has always managed to fend off unwelcome pressure by silently playing on two big Chinese strategic fears. One is that a spurned North Korea might provoke South Korea and America, triggering a cycle of retaliation and even war. The second is that it might collapse in chaos with a mass exodus of refugees into China. Any collapse would presumably be followed by reunification of the Korean peninsula under the prosperous, American-allied South. That could mean American troops stationed in a country bordering China, complicating its strategy should, for example, it ever find itself in a confrontation with America over Taiwan. Until now, the North’s primitive nuclear weapons have not seemed to worry China too much. After all, they do not threaten it, and if they help the regime survive, they serve a Chinese purpose.
Last year’s events may have changed these calculations. In South Korea President Lee faced criticism for not responding more robustly to the attacks. Some have called for American battlefield nuclear weapons to be stationed there, alarming China. There is also the risk that any new provocation, or mishap, could quickly get out of hand. In mid-June two South Korean marines shot their rifles at a civilian airliner landing at Incheon, the airport for Seoul, mistaking it for a North Korean plane. You Ji thinks that the Korean peninsula may have supplanted Taiwan as the potential war most worrying China. China’s North Korea-watchers also fret that the next dynastic succession, from Kim Jong Il to the plump but callow Kim Jong Un, may be more than the system can stand, leading to a military junta or civil war.
One form of Chinese pressure on North Korea is a renewed drive to help it reform the moribund economy. After Mr Kim’s most recent trip to China the North announced that China would help develop three special economic zones. In the past, similar schemes have come to nought, perhaps because the Kim regime fears economic liberalisation would make the example of South Korea look even more appealing, and lead to an implosion.
Another sort of Chinese pressure is to coax North Korea back to the six-party process that it hosts for the two Koreas, America, Japan and Russia to discuss North Korean “denuclearisation”. China has proposed preliminary steps—starting with inter-Korean talks, followed by North Korean-American dialogue.
The first step has so far proved out of reach because of South Korea’s demand for some sort of apology for last year’s outrages. That might be finessed by holding lower-level talks initially. But the big obstacles remain, and China seems unable to overcome them. America does not want to reward North Korean bad behaviour; and nobody believes it will ever fully abandon its nuclear capability. Yet at a recent nuclear conference in Seoul organised by the Asan Institute, a think-tank, Gary Samore, of America’s National Security Council, made clear that the United States can never accept a nuclear-armed North Korea.
Superpowerless
In fact, America will have to resume dialogue one day. There is no other way to work towards at least capping North Korea’s nuclear weaponry, which, unmolested and uninspected, it is presumably doing its best to enhance. But talks might be further delayed if the North flexes its muscles with a third nuclear test—perhaps even with a bomb made not from its dwindling stock of plutonium but from highly enriched uranium, for which last year it admitted it had a programme, shocking the world. Judging from its recent signals, China should be exerting what influence it can to prevent a new test. What is really frightening about the Kim family, however, is that not even mighty China can tell it what to do.
Cloudwarrior
China has backed itself into corner with the dynastic Kim monarchy.
China gains little by having a poor and unstable country on its border that relies on it more and more to suppress its malnourished population.
China would also love to have a border with a prosperous Korea that was managed along the lines of South Korea, however it is understandable why it doesn’t want foreign troops to be there too.
But it is a circular problem. The foreign (US) troops are there because South Korea rightly fears North Korean aggression and China supports North Korea because if rightly dislikes having US troops on its border.
The likelihood of regime collapse is much higher than US troops leaving. China should be cognisant of that fact and start preparing.
Bismarck888
I think China is foolish for not pumping money into North Korea. If North Korea collapse tomorrow, in 20 years time when it a United Korean Republic armed to the teeth with nukes, the same question will be asked by Chinese leaders as were asked by American leader in the 1950s,but instead who lost "North Korea". I am pretty sure the Chinese leaders have a nick name for Kim Jong Il, just like the Americans used to call Chiang Kaishek "Cash Me a Check". China has problems with Vietnam now, I have a strong feeling it will have the even more problems with a United Korea.
Ten billion a year is enough to drag the DPRK back to the GDP per Capita levels it had in the mid 1980s. Its this unwillingness to pump money into North Korea that is causing instability. When the Eastern Bloc was subsidizing the DPRK it was not as nearly as unstable as it is now.
China does a Belarus, the North Korean regime will collapse. If Russia is willing to cut off an ally that it has been subsidizing for well over 20 years, its just a matter of time when China will do the same unless it changes direction.
I personally thin North Korea is far more important to China than Belarus is to Russia, so it should not be cheap.
Chinaeagle
As long as China backs North Korea, it will not crash. So we cannot say "the likelihood of regime collapse is much higher than US troops leaving". Also I don't think "China is foolish for not pumping money into North Korea".
The best strategy for China is: giving JUST enough money to North Korea to make sure that it will not crash. Don't feed it too much, keep it hungry, request it to give enough benefits to China (e.g. opening its harbors to China, giving privileges to Chinese companies operating in North Korea), and gradually annex North Korea by making it a de facto province of China.
As long as China and the U.S. do not support a unification of the two Koreas, it is impossible to establish a "United Korea". Both China and the U.S. get many benefits from the separation of the two Koreas - China gets a lot from North Korea while the U.S. gets a lot from South Korea. So maintaining the status quo is the best choice for China and the U.S. There is no reason for them to back the agenda of the unification of the two Koreas.
Cloudwarrio
@Chinaeagle
I was quite offended by your callous nature..... to keep ~24 million people in a state of semi-starvation so as to gain access to harbours and economic privileges is quite a disgusting concept.
For any Chinese government faults, I don't believe it is that callous or blind to the consequences that it would treat 24 million people like that just to gain harbours slightly closer to Japan or access to a market of 24 million people who can hardly feed themselves let alone buy an iPod or LCD TV.
As to why China would want to gain 24 million broke, uneducated, unskilled and xenophobic Koreans who believe that they are living in a paradise on Earth and that the rest of the world is living in squalor under fascism is more than questionable.
So that just demolished your grip on reality in North Korea.
Therefore it makes it easier to move onto your next claim. While China would have to support Korean unification, the US wouldn't. Neither North or South Korea are occupied, but unlike North Korea, the South Korean government is not beholden to its protector.
North Korea is a buffer between the US forces in South Korea and China. So I can see what China gets from it, but what benefit exactly does the US get? You should perhaps look up how much of the cost of US troops in South Korea are met by the South Koreans and how much that amounts to!
The US and the world gets a stable and prosperous economically viable South Korea out of this current stand-off...... why you would think that a united Korea would be any different is beyond me.
Bismarck888
@Chinaeagle
"The best strategy for China is: giving JUST enough money to North Korea to make sure that it will not crash. Don't feed it too much, keep it hungry, request it to give enough benefits to China (e.g. opening its harbors to China, giving privileges to Chinese companies operating in North Korea), and gradually annex North Korea by making it a de facto province of China."
Your logic is twisted and not wise in my opinion. I believe that China should pump more money into North Korea stabilize it and if need be make it a defacto province of China. Why would a hungry North Korea trust China as its defacto colonizer.
Now if China's strategy is to raise a hungry pitbull to keep the US and ROK on edge, its the correct strategy, but its risky. The Chinese don't know what is enough. That is why I don't think its their strategy, I think they are looking at their pocket book more than any policy of hanging the DPRK on a string. If that was the case why waste all the effort and time to show Kim Jong Il all those factory sites and boom towns every time he visits China? Don't top Chinese officials have better things to do than be a tour guide. The problem with the Chinese officials is they don't understand that if Kim Jong Il reforms the economy he's dead. If all North Koreans find out what's going on in the ROK, there will be no motivation to exist as a independent country. I don't think the Chinese officials understand this.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/MF21Dg01.html
"The root of all North Korean political problems is the existence of liberal and filthy rich South Korea. Chinese-style reforms, if ever attempted, would expose the North Korean population (still largely unaware about the outside world), to the stark images of South Korean prosperity.
Reforms would also bring with them an unavoidable relaxation of societal controls. The net result of these changes would likely be a grave crisis in the regime’s legitimacy and, perhaps, its complete collapse. In a sense, reforms in China were possible because no capitalist, democratic and affluent South China existed (Taiwan is far too small to be of significant concern to Beijing). "
The problem is you have a educated Chinese mind that assumes that everything is planned, that there is no room for mistakes. You have an inability to look at perspective of others or that everybody thinks like you (including your own leaders)
"Openly, Kissinger's book is not for the Chinese. It is a warning for Westerners who might underestimate Chinese tradition and should learn to equip themselves in a world in which 22% of humanity is playing an ever-greater role.
But it also contains a convoluted cautionary tale for the Chinese themselves. It tells them: Do not get too wrapped up in conspiracy theories and do not look at the world only through your own prism. The world is full of surprises, and one should accept differences and react to them. This ability to be positively open to surprises is a Western tradition and something the Chinese tend to dislike as they wonder about the ulterior motive and ultimate mover - the traps and the plot - behind the "surprise". "
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/MF30Ad01.html
I don't think the Chinese leadership is thinking the way you are thinking. They want the DPRK to reform to reduce the money they send to him. But they don't want to give him too much for the fear of enabling him. But its a mistake, because during the Soviet times, the DPRK was stable and didn't build nukes etc. Nor did the US tried to mess with it because it had Soviet backing. Look at Belarus, for 20 years (up until recently) it still got Russian subsidies. Once the subsidies ended this year, the economy is in shambles and people have started protesting.
Yes you are right that the US gains benefits from a divided Korea. The main benefit is keeping a US presence on the peninsula. If Korea is unified the need for that diminishes. Ditto with its troops in Japan.
The risk with China actions, whether intentional as you say or mistake, is that it increases the likelihood.
1) DPRK collapsing.
But in the meantime it increases instability and causes lot of problems for China.
1) Undermining ROK - China relations
2) Pushes ROK and Japan into the US
The problem is if the DPRK continues like this and eventually collapses in 5-6 years time (its not inevitable of course). If the Chinese response is inept or callous you could end up with a united Korea that has Nuclear Weapons that is suspicious of China. Or a divided Korea, with both Korea's armed with Nukes under their own control. Remember, South Korea is a screw driver away from having nukes.
CA-Oxonian
The final paragraph of this article seems to be blind wishful thinking rather than a considered statement of reasonable strategy. As NK has always, without exception, treated talks merely as a means of obtaining yet more hand-outs from a nervous world it is beyond the bounds of credulity that its behavior will ever change. Fact is, the implosion of NK is going to happen one day and it would be far better for it to happen now than later. Indeed, it would have been far better for it to have happened prior to NK obtaining nuclear capability, but we've left it too late for that. More dithering and faux diplomacy will only result in a deeper hole. Time to stop digging and face up to reality. Oh, but then, politicians aren't notably good at that. So, instead, time for someone to return from NK holding a piece of paper aloft that promises "peace in our time."
Nkab
I guess you guys are right that a major benefit of divided Korea for the US is its presence. But it costs the US money to stay there too, albeit S. Korea pays a portion of the keep.
It is not inconceivable that the US would pull out of Korea once the two Koreas are unified through some peaceful means though, as the US can always fall back to its main bases in Japan and Guam for as long as it would take or for good.
It appears then it’s to China’s interest for a unified Corea with big trades going across the border, since the US would find it difficult to stay put with troops in a unified Corea. And if so, foreign troop free and unified Korea peninsula would be welcome to China, just like Mongolia is, IMO.
For now, China wants stability and trades in the region, it does not play the game of pitting one Korea against the other Korea.
L.Y.Z.
I just did not understand the reason which would back the thesis that an unified Korea under the heels of its ally, would require a large presence of American troops.
Such behavior would just give reason to the Chinese complaints, that the American mentality is still addressed by the tenets of the Cold War.
I do not know to what extent a strong U.S. military presence in an unified Korea would help the U.S. economy, this issue for sure the great matter of debate in the U.S. about the debacle of its prestige in the world (certainly nothing to do with its military power). Would the American people support the opening of a new war front, besides those ones that the country already keeps and honestly has no reliable deadline for their end?
Chinaeagle
@Cloudwarrior
Thank you for saying that my proposed strategy is “callous”. In Chinese, “callous” carries the meaning of “rational”. China once helped North Korea warm-heartedly, the return is: North Korea voted against China when China applied for hosting Olympic Games 2000; North Korea did not inform China when it tested its nuclear weapon but it informed Russia. Thus, nowadays no strategist in China says that China should help North Korea unconditionally. Instead, we will ask North Korea to give what we want if they want our help.
If South Koreans and Americans really care about starving North Koreans, then why did you stop your aids to North Koreans? Certainly I know this callous strategy comes from your calculation – in which the life value of North Koreans is zero. Don’t you think it is very hypocritical to criticize others as “callous” while you are more callous than others? Please keep in mind that China is the only country which gives aids to North Koreans.
The benefit Americans get is the direct access to South Korean market. Whenever South Korea asked the U.S. to make a promise to protect it, the U.S. always asks the South Korea to open its market (e.g. auto market, beef market, etc) to American firms. The purpose of American army stationing in South Korea is to prevent the two Koreas to get united.
If Americans leave South Korea, then China will happily help the two Koreas to get united under the condition that the United Korea breaks its strategic alliance relationship with the U.S. That is, the unification of Koreas will not happen until China kicks the U.S. out of Korea peninsula and instills its influence in the two Koreas.
Chinaeagle
@Bismarck888
You said, China should pump more money into North Korea to stabilize it and if need be make it a de facto province of China. Why would a hungry North Korea trust China as its de facto colonizer.
Did you ever raise military canines – for example, Tibetan mastiff? You should keep in mind that China never treated North Korea as its pet, but rather as a military canine. Giving too much to North Korea will reduce its incentive of barking at the U.S. and South Korea. So China only gives just enough to North Korea. If it barks to the U.S. and South Korea when China needs it to do so, then it will get extra rewards.
It is stupid to give much money to North Korea. If China gives North Korea a lot of money, then it will complain that the money it receives is NOT ENOUGH, and then it will hate us. However, if we give money at the time of their DIRE NEED, then they will be grateful to us and think us as their saver. So China needs not feed up North Koreans. China only needs to let them know this: without China, they will die! That will give North Koreans much more motivation to become a de facto province of China than giving them much money and comfortable life.
Bismarck888
@chinaeagle
"Did you ever raise military canines – for example, Tibetan mastiff? You should keep in mind that China never treated North Korea as its pet, but rather as a military canine. Giving too much to North Korea will reduce its incentive of barking at the U.S. and South Korea. So China only gives just enough to North Korea. If it barks to the U.S. and South Korea when China needs it to do so, then it will get extra rewards. "
A military canine bites when you want it bite. Secondly, do you starve a military canine half to death. Why do you assume that China awards the DPRK for provoking the US? Did China awarded it for the nuke test and for being a pain in the but. No as far as I know no. Why do you assume the role of the DPRK is to provoke rather than merely acting as a buffer?
". So China needs not feed up North Koreans. China only needs to let them know this: without China, they will die! That will give North Koreans much more motivation to become a de facto province of China than giving them much money and comfortable life."
Without China they will collapse, fall to hands of the ROK and millions of refugees will flood the border and as a last act of desperation nuke or shell Seoul into cinder. Death threats don't work with nuclear armed states. While China has a pistol pointed toward the head of the DPRK, they have a pistol pointed at China's balls. They know that China will not cut them off.
"It is stupid to give much money to North Korea. If China gives North Korea a lot of money, then it will complain that the money it receives is NOT ENOUGH, and then it will hate us. However, if we give money at the time of their DIRE NEED, then they will be grateful to us and think us as their saver. So China needs not feed up North Koreans. China only needs to let them know this: without China, they will die! That will give North Koreans much more motivation to become a de facto province of China than giving them much money and comfortable life."
All I have to say this neglect / tough love is not working.
The number incursions by the DPRK starting from the mid 1990s until now is two to three times the number of incidents in the 1970s - 1980s. And the North Koreans have manged to test nukes. The North Koreans are sending in refugees across the border as well as producing and smuggling drugs into China. Another $3 / year Billion will improve the DPRK living standard to what it had in the late 1980s, the refugees with stop and the drugs also.
There are many actors in China's Korean policy -- the PLA, retired party elders, bordering Chinese provinces, people in the International Liason Office etc. North Korea is a like a miniature Mexico, but with lousier weather and nukes. Its a dysfunctional Narco state that sends illegal immigrants and drugs into China.
The Koreans will not show gratitude in a million years. Why should they, China is doing it because of her own interest. China gets something for the transactions. Its the same with the young South Koreans and the US military. They don't thank the US so why do you expect North Koreans to be grateful for Chinese assistance. Only recently, the North Koreans have been praising China's assistance during the North Korean and only to Chinese dignitaries. In North Korea history books, the sacrifices China made are not mentioned.
Kim77
I have wonder, is China playing for time? It is an undeniable fact that the American economic power, however slowly, is on the wane. Soon the American military machine in Asia will have to make do with less and less resources, while the Chinese military capacity in the region will grow thanks to its booming economy.
10, perhaps 20 years of this, and it is not wholly implausible that the US will pull out of South Korea, considering it indefensible. When this happens, South Korea will have no choice but to become at least a neutral country, and not a staunch American ally as it is now. Paradoxically, this will be the hour in which China will feel safe about pulling the plugs out on North Korea, because a United Korean Republic will no longer host American troops.
Of course, the security risk that Korea poses to China does not solely consist of American troops on its soil. A United Korea will be dangerously close to Beijing, may be nuclear-armed, and South Korea is already one of the foremost military powers on the planet. Despite all this, however, Korea is a weaker power compared to China, and without American backing it will be malleable to Chinese influence. And when it is, China may not be too fussy about having a United Korea on its borders.
rice bowl
population of communist China: 1.3 billion
population of communist Korea: 24 million
China can easily absorb 24 million communist immigrants. After all the ideology and corruption are the same. And looking at it a bit cynically, wasn't labour in China getting too expensive? An extra few dirt poor peasants is exactly what China needs in its factories, and the reason why it wants to establish these industrial parks.
US calculation may be simple: precipitate North Korea collapse using all available means with the USSR of 1988-89 as a model. Who knows, once communist Korea collapses if the shock is big enough it could cause instability in the larger communist country too, like Russia collapsed once its satellites started going down - but for different reasons and local factors this time.
Birdsseye
It is funny, whenever people in the West talk about North Korea, the inevitable description of North Korea is broke, uneducated, unskilled and imminent collapse. North Korea’s GDP per capita is same as India 1200 USD a year. From the few images available to West, North Korea cities are way cleaner and better than those in India. Even North Koreans in those pictures look healthy and clean.
On top of that, there is no insurgence in North Korea, while there are plenty of insurgences in India, I just wondered how could nobody ever say India is on the verge of collapse, but keep on saying an apparent better state North Korea is on the verge of collapse.
Maybe those people bad mouthing North Korea are CIA WuMao proxies.
Bismarck888
@birdseye
"On top of that, there is no insurgence in North Korea, while there are plenty of insurgences in India, I just wondered how could nobody ever say India is on the verge of collapse, but keep on saying an apparent better state North Korea is on the verge of collapse.
Maybe those people bad mouthing North Korea are CIA WuMao proxies."
There is a big difference, North Korea can't feed itself without Chinese subsidies. India despite all its problems can, its not a food importer. Without China, North Korea will starve, its that simple. If you were so confident, why not ask the Chinese government to stop all aid to North Korea right now and see if it last a year.
Cloudwarrior
Actually, what is funnier is people that believe the North Korean government. If anyone believes figures that come out of Pyongyang, then the word gullible springs to mind. Pyongyang doesn't report facts but propaganda.
However, birdsseye's futile attempt to compare North Korea to India hinges on unreality (though there seems to be an ulterior motive in choosing India). So let's look at the claims:
"North Korea’s GDP per capita is same as India 1200 USD a year"
According to the CIA World Factbook, "North Korea does not publish reliable National Income Accounts data; the data shown here are derived from purchasing power parity (PPP) GDP estimates for North Korea that were made by Angus MADDISON in a study conducted for the OECD; his figure for 1999 was extrapolated to 2009 using estimated real growth rates for North Korea's GDP and an inflation factor based on the US GDP deflator; the results were rounded to the nearest $10 billion"
The CIA World Factbook (from which you got your information probably via Wikipedia) does not produce nominal rates but only an estimated PPP rate, therefore the correct figures are:
GDP (PPP) per capita:
India 3,500
North Korea 1,800
Again, this is an extrapolated estimate and not a readily checkable fact like India or China's GDP.
"North Korea cities are way cleaner and better than those in India"
If a clean city is indicative of a happy, healthy and rich population, then yes, but you are sure not that deluded. But compare away to India, but then perhaps also those in China too.... but that is what happens when you practically have enslaved an entire population and have no free economy at all.
"Even North Koreans in those pictures look healthy and clean"
I'm not even sure what pictures you are referring to...... but this is perhaps a better picture of North Korea:
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2011/s3253989.htm
If you dig deep enough on the internet, you can easily discover the real pictures of North Korea and not those the government wants you to see.
"there is no insurgence in North Korea, while there are plenty of insurgences in India"
That's pretty disingenuous considering North Koreans are ethnically homogenous. And anyway, an insurgency requires food and let's face it, not even the North Korean army has enough these days - most people that have the energy defect across the Chinese border in the hope of reaching South Korea - this is a better indication of a broken system:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/8133272/Number...
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/connectasia/stories/201107/s3258775.htm
"Maybe those people bad mouthing North Korea are CIA WuMao proxies"
Aaaah and finally you show your true colours..... if you don't agree with me then you must have an ulterior motive. Considering your false analogy, you would have to wonder who is a WuMao commentator now.
Midiot
How about we give the DPRK elite nice retirement villas in Myanmar, let the ROK unify the peninsula, and send the American troops back home (or at least to Guam). Then China will get a wealthy and reliable trading partner with rail links.
TS2912
I think China is supporting North Korea out of pure sentimentality; North Korea is EXACTLY like China under Mao... starving and under a murderous dictator
|
狗仔卡
楼主
提升卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2011-7-14 17:47
发表于 2011-7-14 22:48
