Politics & Policy

The China Problem

Chinese President Xi Jinping walks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un during a ceremony in Beijing, March 28, 2018. (KCNA/via Reuters)
North Korea is just a part of the challenge confronting Trump and the United States.

‘I think I understand why that happened,” President Trump said Thursday, reflecting on a change in North Korean behavior that prompted him to cancel a planned summit with Kim Jong-un in Singapore on June 12. When a reporter asked him to elaborate, the president declined.

Allow me to speculate.

Until recently, the prospects of a summit were high. Experiencing the consequences of debilitating sanctions under President Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign, Kim Jong-un signaled a new openness. North and South Koreans marched together in the opening ceremonies of the Winter Olympics. Kim pledged to suspend missile testing and destroy an already-disabled nuclear facility in advance of talks. And most important, at the beginning of May, Kim freed three American hostages in what Trump would describe as a “beautiful gesture” that “was very much appreciated.”

Then the turn came.

In early May, around the same time the hostages were released, Kim flew to Dalian, China, where he met for two days with Xi Jinping. We don’t know what the Chinese dictator and Kim said to each other. But we do know that, by the end of the meeting, the North Korean tyrant was backing away from his gestures of conciliation. The two governments issued a statement saying North Korea was open to giving up its nuclear weapons “as relevant parties eliminate the hostile policy and security threats” against its government. And in the weeks that followed, North Korea became increasingly belligerent, antagonistic toward key Trump officials, and, according to Mike Pompeo, uncommunicative.

Was the bilateral meeting a fool’s errand to begin with? Probably. Did John Bolton and Mike Pence’s references to the “Libya model” of complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization spook the Communist apparatchiks? No doubt. Does Trump’s decision to withdraw put Kim and Xi on their heels? Absolutely.

It is this confrontation, between Washington and Beijing, which will determine the course of the 21st century. And as recent events have demonstrated, the confrontation is not merely geopolitical. It is also geo-economic.

We are dealing with both North Korea and China here. Beijing’s warnings that it cannot “control” Kim notwithstanding, the two governments function in a close alliance. North Korea would not exist without Beijing’s support. And Beijing protects North Korea precisely because it fears nothing more than another democracy on its borders. For the Chinese, one Mongolia is enough. If you doubt me, look up the history of the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Taiwan, and Hong Kong since the transfer of sovereignty from the United Kingdom.

We don’t have a North Korea problem. We have a China problem. North Korea is a wild dog — China holds the leash. To change North Korea’s behavior, change Chinese behavior first.

Trump has done this before. Beijing’s accession to U.N. sanctions against the North last September was the beginning of détente. By spring 2018, however, China was beginning to fear that something might actually come of the Trump–Kim bromance.

An April 22 article by Jane Perlez in the New York Times is a case in point. Headlined, “China, Feeling Left Out, Has Plenty to Worry About in North Korea-U.S. Talks,” the article reported:

With events moving so quickly, and Beijing finding itself largely left on the outside, analysts said China and its leader, Xi Jinping, must at least consider what they called worst-case contingencies.

“The loss of prestige is a big problem for China and Xi, who wants everyone else to view China as an essential actor of international relations, especially in the Northeast Asian context,” said Zhang Baohui, a professor of international relations at Lingnan University in Hong Kong. “Now, suddenly, China is no longer relevant.”

Well, China became more relevant in the weeks after the Dalian conference. North Korea became more recalcitrant as China’s trade delegation to Washington, D.C. pressured the administration to relieve sanctions on tech giant ZTE and back off from its threat to impose tariffs and restrict investment. Beijing was testing how far it could push Trump. Could it make him back off his demands for complete denuclearization of the Peninsula, leave John Bolton and Mike Pence in the Beltway, and stand down from his threats to renegotiate Sino–American trade?

The test failed. The summit is canceled. ZTE and trade are both unresolved. We are left where we were earlier this year, as foreign capitals attempt to make sense of Trump’s strategic ambiguity (the “Madman Theory” of foreign policy), “maximum pressure” grinds down what remains of the North Korean economy, and China and America eye each other warily.

It is this confrontation, between Washington and Beijing, which will determine the course of the 21st century. And as recent events have demonstrated, the confrontation is not merely geopolitical. It is also geo-economic. Just as China has participated in a shadow play of peninsular diplomacy, forever pledging North Korean denuclearization without any results, it has done a song-and-dance on trade policy, promising to open its economy as the U.S.–China trade deficit grew from $82 billion in 2000 to $337 billion in 2017.

On every front — social, cultural, economic, diplomatic, and military — China is working to subvert America’s position in the Pacific and ultimately force us out of the region. The North Korean gambit is a part of that strategy. Trump was right to call the bluff.

To change the power dynamic in the region, however, he must go further. Continue sanctions against the North, and build up our military assets to maintain deterrence. Support the democratic government in Taiwan. Above all, target the real pillars of Chinese power: the forced technology transfer, discriminatory licensing restrictions, state-coordinated outbound investment, and cyber-theft and intrusion through which the Communist dictatorship has amassed its fortune — and threatened the future of freedom.

This article first appeared in the Washington Free Beacon.

Most Popular

U.S.

Yes, Hillary Should Have Been Prosecuted

I know this is ancient history, but — I’m sorry — I just can’t let it go. When historians write the definitive, sordid histories of the 2016 election, the FBI, Hillary, emails, Russia, and Trump, there has to be a collection of chapters making the case that Hillary should have faced a jury ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Yes, There Was FBI Bias

There is much to admire in Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz’s highly anticipated report on the FBI’s Clinton-emails investigation. Horowitz’s 568-page analysis is comprehensive, fact-intensive, and cautious to a fault. It is also, nonetheless, an incomplete exercise — it omits half ... Read More
Sports

Let the World Have Soccer

The United States of America did not qualify for the World Cup this year. Good for us. Soccer is corrupt, hyper-regulated, impoverished by a socialist-style fondness for rationing, and organized to strangle human flourishing. It is so dependent on the whims of referees that is in effect a helpless captive of the ... Read More
Culture

Staying on the Path

Dear Reader (Including those of you who are no longer my personal lawyer), Almost 20 years ago, I wrote in this space that the movie A Simple Plan was one of the most conservative movies of the 1990s. In case you haven’t seen it, the plot is pretty straightforward, almost clichéd. It focuses on three men ... Read More
Immigration

Child Separation at the Border

If you want to read a thoughtful and constructive explanation and partial defense of the policies being implemented by the White House, you should read this piece by Rich Lowry. If you want to read a trollish and counter-productive screed fit for a comment section, read the White House’s official press ... Read More
Economy & Business

Asymmetrical Capitalism

I like to think of American Airlines CEO Doug Parker as my pen pal, but, in truth, he never writes back. It’s a lopsided relationship — asymmetrical, in a word. I have for many years argued that most people would be enthusiastic about capitalism if not for their interactions with a small number of ... Read More