Crisis in Korea

This week, the the North Koreans attacked a a South Korean island with artillery fire, killing and injuring island residents and military personnel. The attack was reported as a response to the South Korean military exercises in the area. Four months ago, the North Koreans sank a South Korean frigate with a torpedo. In a short time, the nuclear aircraft carrier, George Washington will be entering the area for joint exercises with the South Koreans. North Korea claims this is an act of provocation. China is sitting on the sidelines not willing to put much pressure on North Korea, presumably to prevent the collapse of the North Korean government and the subsequent influx of refugees into China. This is an oversimplification of the situation as it is today.

China is of course the key to any resolution of the Korean situation. China supports the humanitarian effort to provide basic staples to North Korea, to maintain stability and prevent a pro-western government from being instituted in North Korea.

This begs the question, what leverage do we have with China to bring a peaceful end to the problem? Lets is revisit the economic reasons why China is the powerhouse she has become.

The following are excerpts from various sources to illustrate the history of China's rise.

The key is MFN, or most favoured nation trading status.

MFN/NTR status for China, a non-market economy, which had been originally suspended in 1951, was restored in 1980 and was continued in effect through subsequent annual Presidential extensions. Following the brutal suppression of pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989, however, the annual renewal of China’s MFN status became a source of considerable debate in the Congress; and legislation was introduced to terminate China’s MFN/NTR status or to impose additional conditions relating to improvements in China’s actions on various trade and non-trade issues. Agricultural interests generally opposed attempts to block MFN /NTR renewal for China, contending that several billion dollars annually in current and future U.S. agricultural exports could be jeopardized if that country retaliated. In China’s case, Congress agreed to permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) status in P.L. 106-286, President Clinton signed into law on October 10, 2000.[2] PNTR paved the way for China’s accession to the WTO in December 2000; it provides U.S. exporters of agricultural products the opportunity to benefit from China’s WTO agreements to reduce trade barriers and open its agricultural markets.

China's trade policies have become a focal point in the annual congressional debate over renewing China's most-favored-nation trade status. Along with other non-trade issues, including but not limited to human rights violations, weapons sales, and foreign policy issues. Over the past several years, efforts have been made in Congress to terminate, or attach additional conditions to, China's most-favored-nation trade status, although none have as of yet succeeded. This policy was opposed by the Bush Administration, which sought to deal with these issues outside the most-favored-nation trade status process. As a result, President Bush vetoed congressional attempts to revoke or condition China's most-favored-nation trade status, and such vetoes were consistently sustained in the Senate. As a presidential candidate, Bill Clinton criticized the Bush Administration's China policy and pledged to take a tougher approach to United States-Chinese trade relations, including conditioning China's most-favored-nation trade status renewal. To date many of the very same issues that the United State objected to in the past are still going on every day in China.

Having granted MFN to China, we have created the trade imbalance we face today. If we revoke MFN, what would happen? Well, for one China will have difficulty maintaining their economic advantage they possess today with the US. Their exports will suffer and this could be construed as an affront to their national security, much the way the Japanese were treated by the US prior to WW2. One would think there would be a pragmatic solution here. I mean, is North Korea worth the economic crisis China would face? Is it such a bad thing to have a pro-western government on her borders given the fact that if it were not for the West, she would still be in the economic dark ages? Hong Kong was and still is clearly pro-western and there are few issues unresolved.

It's amazing to me that China would want to have a renegade, nuclear powered nation on it's borders. North Korea's nuclear ambitions should be taken seriously and quashed. It is clear that China is unwilling to take on North Korea, so they sit on the sidelines and play the waiting game, what they are waiting for is cause for speculation.

So what would I do?

First I would confront China and threaten them with revocation of MFN if they do not play ball with us. I would suggest to the Chinese that they send troops to their border with North Korea and set up a 'buffer zone' to collect refugees and provide them with temporary support until hostilities ended. The Chinese can use the ruse that they are sending troops to the border to help defend North Korea from attack. In the mean time, the US and South Koreans will launch a series of quick, surgical air strikes to take out command and control capability, coupled with a airborne assault on Pyongyang to take out the North Korean leadership. Once this is complete, capitulation of the North Korean armed forces would be a mere formality. The South Korean Army can enter North Korea without firing a shot, take over administration of North Korea and unify the country once and for all.

The benefits are obvious to all Americans. Our safety and security are assured. We can begin removing our troops from Korea and Japan as there will no longer be a threat to either country. Stability will be restored for the first time in centuries.

Of course, what do I know.