Will China's new leaders really take on North Korea?

Making real sanctions bite would threaten the North Korean regime's stability, and an imploding North Korea could mean refugees flooding across the border, say Chinese scholars.

Ng Han Guan/AP
Communist Party chief Xi Jinping, left, walks behind Chinese President Hu Jintao at the opening session of the annual National People's Congress in Beijing's Great Hall of the People, Tuesday.

Western analysts are still poring over the evidence from North Korea's recent nuclear test – its third – for clues about what exactly the secretive Communist nation detonated Feb. 12.

Pyongyang claimed that its scientists had successfully miniaturized a nuclear device; if they are telling the truth, North Korea could be within a couple of years of the point of no return – the capability to fire a nuclear-armed missile at the west coast of the United States.

Twenty years of international efforts to deter North Korea from pursuing its dream of possessing nuclear weapons have proved fruitless. And it seems that the country best placed to put pressure on the North Korean government – its only ally, China – is unwilling to do so.

A new government takes over in Beijing this week, but analysts here do not expect the new president, Xi Jinping, to differ significantly from his predecessor when it comes to relations with North Korea – despite recent reports that China has agreed to support a new round of United Nations sanctions against the North. (Read this related article about Why China only expressed 'regret' following the North's recent rocket launch)

"There might be a change in our leaders' words and their tone, sending a more serious message to North Korea," predicts Sun Zhe, a professor at Tsinghua University's Institute of Modern International Relations in Beijing. "But I don't think that the fundamentals will change."

China is the driving force behind the Six Party Talks, intermittent negotiations over the past 10 years aimed at denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula and normalizing Pyongyang's relations with Washington and the rest of the world. But they made little headway, and North Korea pulled out of the talks in 2009.

At the same time Pyongyang expelled inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency who had been monitoring North Korea's promised actions to dismantle its nuclear reactor.

China has gone along with United Nations resolutions imposing economic sanctions on North Korea following its nuclear and missile tests. But Beijing has stopped short of halting the food, oil, and other supplies that keep its troublesome ally afloat.

China's calculation, say Chinese scholars, is simple: Making real sanctions bite would threaten the North Korean regime's stability, and what might happen then? An imploding North Korea could mean hundreds of thousands of refugees flooding across the border into China, and possibly a reunification of the peninsula under South Korean rule. That would mean US troops on China's border.

A nuclear-armed but stable North Korea could be the least bad option for Beijing.

From that perspective, says John Swenson-Wright, an expert on Northeast Asian security issues at the Chatham House think tank in London, "I would be very surprised if we saw a sharp move by China to impose pain on North Korea."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.