US dependence on China shortsighted

By S.P.SETH

North Korea continues to defy the world on almost everything. The latest was the sinking of a South Korean navy ship with a North Korean torpedo, killing 46 crews. Pyongyang denies the accusation, even though it has been investigated and confirmed by an international enquiry.

Even if one were to give some credence to Pyongyang’s denial, its history of killing its South Korean targets at different times in the past would suggest that the sinking of the South Korean ship is in character with the regime’s propensity to commit murders and create mayhem.

However, all the brouhaha created by this serious act of criminality seems to have died down. After making a big show of protests, and follow up action (with the support of the United States), Seoul too has gone relatively quiet.

There are two reasons for this. First, China has put a damper on getting involved in a punitive action against Pyongyang. Both the United States and South Korea were hopeful, that faced with the evidence of North Korean involvement, Beijing might line up with the rest of the world to take action against the Kim Jong-il’s notorious regime.

Therefore, they put much store by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s recent visit to Seoul to examine the issue. But after a flurry of meetings in South Korea, Premier Wen wasn’t keen on blaming the North. He instead favored a policy of restraint to calm the situation.

In other words, China seemed to put both sides of the Korean peninsula on an equal footing in relation to the crisis. Apparently, China’s reluctance to buy into the inter-Korean crisis had a dampening effect on both South Korea and its ally-the United States.

Premier Wen’s South Korea trip has emphasized China’ special security interests in the Korean peninsula. It had apparently heard the North Korean version from the Dear Leader when Kim Jong-il visited China last month in a special train and was warmly welcomed by its top leadership. Therefore, it shouldn’t be surprising that Wen refused to take sides.

The United States might find comfort in the critical observations of some Chinese academics bemoaning that North Korea has high-jacked China’s foreign policy in the Korean peninsula. But, they argue, that this cannot be sustained and, sooner or later, China would have had enough of it. It might be part of the good cop and bad cop routine because nothing about China is all that simple.

Another reason for the calming of the rhetoric in the Korean situation is that the South Korea’s ruling part has suffered a drubbing in the country’s local and regional elections.

Seoul made a lot of noise (even cancelling the few economic ties it has had with the other side) over the question of its ship’s sinking. They believed that a South Korean government standing up to North Korea’s bullying would be a popular move.

After all, the present conservative government came to power promising a hard line. But it would appear that its strong rhetoric hasn’t gone well with many of its people. And the government has lowered the decibel level.

And where China is concerned, North Korea seems to get away with even the murder of Chinese citizens across their border in Liaoning province. According to a spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “On the morning of June 4, some residents of Dandong, in Liaoning province, were shot by a DPRK border guard on suspicion of crossing the border for trade activities, leaving three dead and one injured.”

China’s response was quite passive, simply raising “a solemn representation with the DPRK” and awaiting investigation. It will obviously be sorted out in a low-key fashion.

Whichever one looks, China’s role in the Korean peninsula is considered critical but Beijing is not inclined to effectively put pressure on North Korea. And without that there cannot be any forward movement, be it the issue of the sinking of the South Korean ship and, more importantly still, its nuclear program.

At one point, when North Korea was saber-rattling with its atomic tests Beijing seemed quite worried, and took a common stand in the UN Security Council to slap sanctions on North Korea. But it was weak on implementing the sanctions, thus continuing to provide lifeline for North’s regime.

China apparently has come to the conclusion that if it went all the way in denying North Korea its essential supplies, the regime would collapse and with it the country itself. Which would flood China with a horde of refugees creating all sorts of unpredictable problems.

Since then, the internal situation in North Korea has only got worse. The Dear Leader Kim Jong-il’s health seems to have further deteriorated, which the Chinese must have had time to assess during his recent trip to Beijing.

The succession issue, with his youngest son supposedly the favored one to take over, doesn’t appear to have been sorted out. The country is in a prolonged state of food scarcity with widespread hunger. Even though hope and morale are very low, there are no signs of rebellion of any sort.

With the government exercising total control, it is not surprising that people are afraid to challenge the regime. However, all the signs of a collapse from within are there.

But China’s economic and political support is delaying the inevitable day. China is, of course, worried about the influx of refugees if North Korea were to collapse. But that is going to happen any way sooner or later.

If such a reading of the situation were correct, it would be in China’s interest to work out with the United States and other countries a comprehensive refugee policy to share the burden.

But China obviously is not keen on a regional or global approach, because it regards Korean peninsula as its own strategic patch. It doesn’t want to involve other countries to further muddy the situation; when the US already has troops’ presence as well as military alliance with South Korea.

Despite this, the United States is depending more and more on China, believing that the US and China have shared non-proliferation objectives. That may well be true in a limited sense but China sees it in a larger context.

The US doesn’t share a border with North Korea. A murky and dangerous situation arising from an unstable North Korea might trigger a US military response on behalf of its South Korean ally from a perceived or actual attack from Pyongyang.

Therefore, for the US to imagine a shared or common strategic objective between itself and China in regard to North Korea is shortsighted. For China, geopolitically, Korean peninsula is its backyard.

For the US, on the other hand, North Korea (like Iran), is part of its global policy to stop nuclear proliferation, as well as to support South Korea against a potential or real military attack from the North.

While it makes sense to have China on its side to stop North Korea’s nuclear proliferation, it doesn’t make sense, though, to depend largely on China to promote US strategic goals.

US dependence on China shortsighted

By S.P.SETH

North Korea continues to defy the world on almost everything. The latest was the sinking of a South Korean navy ship with a North Korean torpedo, killing 46 crews. Pyongyang denies the accusation, even though it has been investigated and confirmed by an international enquiry.

Even if one were to give some credence to Pyongyang’s denial, its history of killing its South Korean targets at different times in the past would suggest that the sinking of the South Korean ship is in character with the regime’s propensity to commit murders and create mayhem.

However, all the brouhaha created by this serious act of criminality seems to have died down. After making a big show of protests, and follow up action (with the support of the United States), Seoul too has gone relatively quiet.

There are two reasons for this. First, China has put a damper on getting involved in a punitive action against Pyongyang. Both the United States and South Korea were hopeful, that faced with the evidence of North Korean involvement, Beijing might line up with the rest of the world to take action against the Kim Jong-il’s notorious regime.

Therefore, they put much store by Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s recent visit to Seoul to examine the issue. But after a flurry of meetings in South Korea, Premier Wen wasn’t keen on blaming the North. He instead favored a policy of restraint to calm the situation.

In other words, China seemed to put both sides of the Korean peninsula on an equal footing in relation to the crisis. Apparently, China’s reluctance to buy into the inter-Korean crisis had a dampening effect on both South Korea and its ally-the United States.

Premier Wen’s South Korea trip has emphasized China’ special security interests in the Korean peninsula. It had apparently heard the North Korean version from the Dear Leader when Kim Jong-il visited China last month in a special train and was warmly welcomed by its top leadership. Therefore, it shouldn’t be surprising that Wen refused to take sides.

The United States might find comfort in the critical observations of some Chinese academics bemoaning that North Korea has high-jacked China’s foreign policy in the Korean peninsula. But, they argue, that this cannot be sustained and, sooner or later, China would have had enough of it. It might be part of the good cop and bad cop routine because nothing about China is all that simple.

Another reason for the calming of the rhetoric in the Korean situation is that the South Korea’s ruling part has suffered a drubbing in the country’s local and regional elections.

Seoul made a lot of noise (even cancelling the few economic ties it has had with the other side) over the question of its ship’s sinking. They believed that a South Korean government standing up to North Korea’s bullying would be a popular move.

After all, the present conservative government came to power promising a hard line. But it would appear that its strong rhetoric hasn’t gone well with many of its people. And the government has lowered the decibel level.

And where China is concerned, North Korea seems to get away with even the murder of Chinese citizens across their border in Liaoning province. According to a spokesman for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “On the morning of June 4, some residents of Dandong, in Liaoning province, were shot by a DPRK border guard on suspicion of crossing the border for trade activities, leaving three dead and one injured.”

China’s response was quite passive, simply raising “a solemn representation with the DPRK” and awaiting investigation. It will obviously be sorted out in a low-key fashion.

Whichever one looks, China’s role in the Korean peninsula is considered critical but Beijing is not inclined to effectively put pressure on North Korea. And without that there cannot be any forward movement, be it the issue of the sinking of the South Korean ship and, more importantly still, its nuclear program.

At one point, when North Korea was saber-rattling with its atomic tests Beijing seemed quite worried, and took a common stand in the UN Security Council to slap sanctions on North Korea. But it was weak on implementing the sanctions, thus continuing to provide lifeline for North’s regime.

China apparently has come to the conclusion that if it went all the way in denying North Korea its essential supplies, the regime would collapse and with it the country itself. Which would flood China with a horde of refugees creating all sorts of unpredictable problems.

Since then, the internal situation in North Korea has only got worse. The Dear Leader Kim Jong-il’s health seems to have further deteriorated, which the Chinese must have had time to assess during his recent trip to Beijing.

The succession issue, with his youngest son supposedly the favored one to take over, doesn’t appear to have been sorted out. The country is in a prolonged state of food scarcity with widespread hunger. Even though hope and morale are very low, there are no signs of rebellion of any sort.

With the government exercising total control, it is not surprising that people are afraid to challenge the regime. However, all the signs of a collapse from within are there.

But China’s economic and political support is delaying the inevitable day. China is, of course, worried about the influx of refugees if North Korea were to collapse. But that is going to happen any way sooner or later.

If such a reading of the situation were correct, it would be in China’s interest to work out with the United States and other countries a comprehensive refugee policy to share the burden.

But China obviously is not keen on a regional or global approach, because it regards Korean peninsula as its own strategic patch. It doesn’t want to involve other countries to further muddy the situation; when the US already has troops’ presence as well as military alliance with South Korea.

Despite this, the United States is depending more and more on China, believing that the US and China have shared non-proliferation objectives. That may well be true in a limited sense but China sees it in a larger context.

The US doesn’t share a border with North Korea. A murky and dangerous situation arising from an unstable North Korea might trigger a US military response on behalf of its South Korean ally from a perceived or actual attack from Pyongyang.

Therefore, for the US to imagine a shared or common strategic objective between itself and China in regard to North Korea is shortsighted. For China, geopolitically, Korean peninsula is its backyard.

For the US, on the other hand, North Korea (like Iran), is part of its global policy to stop nuclear proliferation, as well as to support South Korea against a potential or real military attack from the North.

While it makes sense to have China on its side to stop North Korea’s nuclear proliferation, it doesn’t make sense, though, to depend largely on China to promote US strategic goals.

Hu Jintao’s “harmonious society” is a cruel joke

By S.P.SETH

The recent spate of killings in China, mostly of young children, raises several questions.
The frequency of it---eight assaults in 10 weeks---cannot just be explained away as the work of mentally deranged killers or copycat incidents, though some of them might be.
The Chinese authorities have sought to limit media coverage on the ground that it simply encourages copycat killings. While one sympathizes with China’s ordeal in the wake of such horrible killings---the latest involving the use of a kitchen cleaver to kill seven children and two adults at a kindergarten--- limiting or censoring its exposure by the media is hardly the right approach.
It is only through media exposure and open investigation that a clear picture of such human tragedy is likely to emerge. And on this will depend the desired course of action to deal with such incidents.
But, as with any other disaster, the first response of the Chinese authorities is to clamp down on public information.
Even in the absence any substantive information about the killing of children, there are some plausible explanations.
It so happens that when some people start acting out their murderous impulses to wreak vengeance on society, particularly children, it is most likely that their dramatic action is intended to invite attention in the absence of legitimate avenues to be heard.
They might nurse terrible agony that has remained bottled up, needing psychological counseling/treatment, as well as social interaction.
According to a study conducted last year by Dr. Michael Phillips, a mental health expert at Tongji University, Shanghai, 173 million Chinese suffered from mental problems ranging from schizophrenia to alcohol abuse. Of these, 91 per cent had never been treated.
China’s rapid economic growth, and consequent social disruption, has created a serious disconnect between its rulers and the people.
True, China’s ruling oligarchy has created a new social base in urban middle class. But they too, like most other people, feel frustrated with the growing income gap between them and the rich business class.
Not only this. The new business class and the Party apparatchik work in cahoots; with the princelings of the top Party leadership at the top of the pyramid. Therefore, wherever one looks, corruption and nepotism are the order of the day.
In the midst of such venality, China’s rulers have the gumption to talk about creating a “harmonious society”. And to rally people around the flag by staging national extravaganzas like the Beijing Olympics and the Shanghai World Expo jamborees.
At the same time when horrible killings of school children occur, Premier Wen Jiabao has platitudes aplenty to offer. Reacting to the killings, he reportedly said that besides taking “…vigorous safety measures, we also have to pay attention to addressing some deep-seated causes behind these problems, including dealing with some social conflicts and resolving disputes.”
And what has he in mind precisely? Not much except to urge that, “We must strengthen the role of mediation at the grassroots…” Which means nothing in real terms.
As Prime Minister presiding over the rising social contradictions and cleavages in his country, there should be a well thought out plan to deal with and resolve these issues that threaten the country’s social stability.
Of course, any well-thought out plan will require open debate and investigation into the “deep-seated causes behind these problems.”
But this is not what the government would want. They had squelched the persistent demands by the parents of the children buried alive under shoddy school buildings during 2008 Szechuan earthquake, as well as brushing aside the scandal about the poisoning of children with milk mixed with chemical melamine.
The first response to all these and other tragedies is to manage and censor the media as is being done with schoolyard killings.
In a recent media exposure of children’s deaths and illnesses from the use of unrefrigerated vaccines, the authorities removed Bao Yueyang, editor of the China Economic Times, which carried out the investigation.
The second method is to buy out the victims’ silence with money. And if that doesn’t work to threaten them with physical harm.
And in most cases it works when victims are arrayed against state authorities without any other recourse for redress to their grievances.
The third method is to frame them in some fake criminal case and throw them into jail. A variant of this is to throw some of them into mental institutions.
However, if some victims still persist in taking their cases to Beijing, they are waylaid on the way and thrown into “black jails”--dungeons operated by gangsters hired by local and regional authorities.
In other words, there are no legitimate avenues for Chinese citizens to seek justice.
The media are managed, manipulated and censored; courts work under state direction and politics of the country is the monopoly of the Party.
No wonder, there is so much repressed anger in the society, that tends to find outlet through outbursts like schoolyard killings.
The pursuit of greed at any cost has cost the country its anchors in community life and traditional beliefs as social props. China is increasingly becoming a dog-eat-dog society.
In the light of all this, Hu Jintao’s talk of bringing about a “harmonious society” is not only a contradiction in terms but also a cruel joke. China needs to ease up and open up.
And some of the Chinese academics are coming to this conclusion. Since they manage to say certain things without threatening the one-party system, they serve a useful role.
For instance, the Southern Weekend newspaper recently published extracts from a report by a group of sociologists, led by Professor Sun Liping of Tsinghua University.
The report, quoted in the press, said: “Without fundamental resolution of the question of mechanisms for social justice and balancing interests, blindly preventing the expression of legitimate interests in the name of stability will only accumulate contradictions and render society even more unstable.”
Still another academic, Professor Yu Jianrong at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences has argued for opening up the system for people’s participation. He warns that if this is not done, “Great social upheaval may thus occur, and the existing social and political orders are likely to be destroyed.”
But China’s ruling party is drunk with power, and in no mood to listen.