Although there's still uncertainty over prospects for peace on the Korean Peninsula, it seems that South Korea is highly optimistic about the economic aspect of its cooperation with North Korea.
North Korea has a population of about 25 million. The largest city, the capital of Pyongyang, has about 3.2 million people and other cities generally have populations of about 300,000. The country's per capita GDP is a mere $530.
By comparison, with a population of 51 million, South Korea boosts per capita GDP of more than $27,500. But South Korea's economic growth is believed to have peaked, and its export-oriented growth model has run into trade protectionism.
If the hypothesis of merging and unifying North and South Korea were true, South Korea's population would increase by 50 percent. In light of this, although North Korea's GDP is a negligible fraction of that of South Korea, there is a chance that South Korea could see a 50 percent rise in its GDP that now adds up to $1.4 trillion. With a GDP of more than $2.1 trillion, a unified Korea would have an economy half the size of Japan's, or larger than the economies of Brazil, Italy or Canada.
South Korea's economy is dominated by family-owned conglomerates known as chaebol, with the top 10 chaebol accounting for a hefty part of GDP. Economic growth is seen mainly benefitting big chaebol such as Samsung and Hyundai, which in theory would have the opportunity of maintaining a fairly high rate of wealth growth over the next 10 years.
An assessment of Asia's economic future based upon the hypothesis of Korean unification indicates that it would be hard for Japan, China and even the US to derive any meaningful economic benefit from such an outcome.
North Korea's abundant pool of cheap labor and its market eager to see wealth growth will mostly benefit South Korea. In the past, China used to host a certain number of North Korean workers, but that was during an era when North Korea was blockaded by the outside world and could only rely on China for foreign-currency earnings.
If Korean unification, or to be exact the two nations' economic unification, becomes a reality, the situation will change. In this case, China or Japan will be just onlookers.
China might even find itself challenged by a unified Korea with lower costs in the world market. Japan might fare slightly better, considering its technological advantages and traditional partnerships with South Korean business groups. The benefits the US would get from unification would be limited or nil, taking into account uncertainties about its geopolitical interests.
For the world economy with total GDP of more than $70 trillion, Korean unification is likely to boost global growth by 1 percent. But much is still uncertain if this scenario is to play out.
North and South Korea still face tough obstacles including ideology, capital, nuclear weapons and internal political stability on the path toward genuine unification. The outcome also depends particularly on US political moves. Nevertheless, amid uncertainties there seems to be one certainty: The only way to avoid risk is to have the foresight to make future-proof plans.
By Chen Gong Source:Global Time
The author is the chief research fellow with Beijing-based private strategic think tank Anbound. bizopinion@globaltimes.com.cn
Chinese President Xi Jinping met North Korean leader Kim
Jong-un in Beijing on Tuesday, and the two leaders discussed topics
including the US-North Korea summit in Singapore.
Source: Global Times | 2018/6/19 22:53:39
China Air carried Kim to Singapore talks with Trump
https://youtu.be/V3PbgGb8zIE
The historic meeting on Tuesday between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and US President Donald Trump began with a handshake at the Capella hotel, Singapore.
The handshake lasted about 20 seconds before the two leaders walked to the meeting room accompanied by their interpreters.
Trump and Kim sat next to each other and answered a few questions from the media. Trump said he hopes the historic summit would be "tremendously successful,” adding, "We will have a terrific relationship ahead" as he faced Kim.
Kim said there were a number of “obstacles” and “prejudices” which made today’s meeting more difficult. “We overcame all of them and we are here today,” he told reporters through a translator.
Of particular note is the display of the two countries’ flags at the hotel, which is unusual between two countries with no formal diplomatic ties. Observers believe that this is a positive sign.
Trump arrived at the hotel about 8:30am, with Kim arriving five minutes after.
Displaying the national flag of North Korea shows that the US wants to express its sincerity and kindness to North Korea, Cheng Xiaohe, an associate professor at the Renmin University of China's School of International Studies, told the Global Times on Tuesday.
“The move toward establishing formal diplomatic ties could be an achievement of the summit,” Cheng said.
Hundreds of journalists are gathered at the Press Filing Center of the JW Marriott Hotel Singapore, where they can watch the livestream of the historic moment. Dozens of photographers attempted to get closer to Sentosa Island in the morning to film and take photos for the two leaders’ motorcades.
Trump and Kim met alone at 9:15 am and held an expanded bilateral meeting 45 minutes after. At 11:00, the two leaders are scheduled to have a working luncheon. Trump will leave Singapore at 7pm on Tuesday, the White House said.
Trump says summit with North Korea's Kim is 'very, very good'
SINGAPORE: U.S. President Donald Trump said he had forged a "good relationship" with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un at the start of a historic summit in Singapore on Tuesday, as the two men sought ways to end a nuclear standoff on the Korean peninsula.
Should they succeed in making a diplomatic breakthrough, it could bring lasting change to the security landscape of Northeast Asia, like the visit of former U.S. President Richard Nixon to China in 1972 led to the transformation of China.
"There will be challenges ahead," Kim said, but he vowed to work with Trump. Both men sat against in the hotel's library against a backdrop of North Korean and U.S. flags, with Kim beaming broadly as the U.S. president gave him a thumbs up.
With cameras of the world's press trained on them, Trump and Kim displayed an initial atmosphere of bonhomie.
Both men had looked serious as they got out of their limousines for the summit at the Capella hotel on Singapore's Sentosa, a resort island with luxury hotels, a casino, manmade beaches and a Universal Studios theme park.
But they were soon smiling and holding each other by the arm, before Trump guided Kim to the library where they held a meeting with only their interpreters. Trump had said on Saturday he would know within a minute of meeting Kim whether he would reach a deal.
After some initial exchanges lasting around 40 minutes, Trump and Kim emerged, walking side-by-side through the colonnaded hotel before re-entering the meeting room, where they were joined by their most senior officials.
Kim was heard telling Trump through a translator: "I think the entire world is watching this moment. Many people in the world will think of this as a scene from a fantasy...science fiction movie."
Asked by a reporter how the meeting was going, Trump said: "Very good. Very, very good. Good relationship."
Kim also sounded positive about the prospects.
"We overcame all kinds of scepticism and speculations about this summit and I believe that this is good for the peace," he said.
Trump was joined by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security Adviser John Bolton, and John Kelly, White House Chief of Staff, for the expanded talks, while Kim's team included former military intelligence chief Kim Yong Chol, foreign minister Ri Yong Ho and Ri Su Yong, vice chairman of the ruling Workers' Party.
MARKETS CALM
As the two leaders met, Singapore navy vessels, and air force Apache helicopters patrolled, while fighter jets and an Gulfstream 550 early warning aircraft circled.
Financial markets were largely steady in Asia and did not show any noticeable reaction to the start of the summit. The dollar was at a three-week high and the MSCI index of Asia-Pacific shares was largely unchanged from Monday.
While Trump and Kim search each other’s eyes and words for signs of trust or deceit, the rest of the world will be watching, hoping that somehow these two unpredictable leaders can find a way to defuse one of the planet's most dangerous flashpoints.
A body language expert said both men tried to project command as they met, but also displayed signs of nerves.
In the hours before the summit began, Trump expressed optimism about prospects for the first-ever meeting of sitting U.S. and North Korean leaders, while Pompeo injected a note of caution whether Kim would prove to be sincere about his willingness to denuclearise.
Officials of the two sides held last-minute talks to lay the groundwork for the summit of the old foes, an event almost unthinkable just months ago, when they were exchanging insults and threats that raised fears of war.
Staff-level meetings between the United States and North Korea were going "well and quickly," Trump said in a message on Twitter on Tuesday.
But he added: "In the end, that doesn't matter. We will all know soon whether or not a real deal, unlike those of the past, can happen!"
The combatants of the 1950-53 Korean War are technically still at war, as the conflict, in which millions of people died, was concluded only with a truce.
On Tuesday morning, Pompeo fed the mounting anticipation of diplomatic breakthrough, saying: "We're ready for today."
He earlier said the event should set the framework for "the hard work that will follow", insisting that North Korea had to move toward complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation.
North Korea, however, has shown little appetite for surrendering nuclear weapons it considers vital to the survival of Kim's dynastic rule.
Sanctions on North Korea would remain in place until that happened, Pompeo said on Monday. "If diplomacy does not move in the right direction ... those measures will increase."
He added: "North Korea has previously confirmed to us its willingness to denuclearise and we are eager to see if those words prove sincere."
The White House said later that discussions with North Korea had moved "more quickly than expected" and Trump would leave Singapore on Tuesday night after the summit, rather than Wednesday, as scheduled earlier.
Kim is due to leave on Tuesday afternoon, a source involved in the planning of his visit has said.
One of the world's most reclusive leaders, Kim visited Singapore's waterfront on Monday, smiling and waving to onlookers, adding to a more affable image that has emerged since his April summit with South Korean leader Moon Jae-in.
'CHANGED ERA'
Just a few months ago, Kim was an international pariah accused of ordering the killing of his uncle, a half-brother and scores of officials suspected of disloyalty.
The summit was part of a "changed era", North Korea's state-run KCNA news agency said in its first comments on the event.
Talks would focus on "the issue of building a permanent and durable peace-keeping mechanism on the Korean peninsula, the issue of realising the denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula and other issues of mutual concern", it added.
Ahead of the summit, North Korea rejected unilateral nuclear disarmament, and KCNA's reference to denuclearisation of the peninsula has historically meant it wants the United States to remove a "nuclear umbrella" protecting South Korea and Japan.
Trump spoke to both South Korea's Moon and Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Monday to discuss developments ahead of the summit.
"I too, got little sleep last night," Moon told his cabinet in Seoul as the summit began in Singapore.
"I truly hope it will be a successful summit that will open a new age for the two Koreas and the United States and bring us complete denuclearisation and peace." - REUTERS
Chinese President Xi Jinping met North Korean leader Kim
Jong-un in Beijing on Tuesday, and the two leaders discussed topics
including the US-North Korea summit in Singapore.
Nature’s fury: A car dealership is covered by Hurricane Harvey floodwaters near Houston, Texas. The chaos caused by the hurricane proves that climate change is not fake science. — Reuters
THIS month, two Category 4 hurricanes hit the United States within 17 days of each other. In Asia, North Korea is threatening nuclear Armageddon, and floods and famine are putting thousands of lives at risk from Bangladesh to Yemen. How can one survive in this chaotic era?
A first step must be to make sense of the apparent chaos. Hurricanes Harvey and Irma have proved that climate change is not fake science, but real threats to home and security. When hailstones the size of golf balls hit Istanbul in the middle of summer, even the agnostics accept that climate change is serious business.
The biggest uncertainty that has hit Asia recently is the shock that North Korea has not only developed possibly a hydrogen bomb, but also the missile capability to deliver it even to the United States. This has changed the geopolitical balance not only in North Asia, but globally because it is no longer possible for the United States alone to contain nuclear proliferation.
Physics teaches us that chaos is often a characteristic of transition from one order to another. Chaos is also a pattern in which there is apparently no discernible pattern.
But there is a seismic transition from a unipolar world led by the United States to a multi-polar world of competing powers and ideology, particularly after the 2007 global financial crisis. As the share of US GDP in the world declines relative to the rest, the rise of China, India and increasing assertion by Russia and non-state players like IS means that the United States’ ability to dominate militarily and ideologically is being challenged.
At the same time, increasing stresses from social inequalities and paranoia of terror, immigration and job loss have tilted the United States to become more inward looking. The Trump administration has dramatically begun to dismantle the neoliberal order of multilateral trade and finance that shaped US foreign policy since the end of the Second World War.
There is a raw open division within the United States in outlook and values. The Democratic Left believes in maintaining the old order of moral leadership on human rights, democracy and multilateral global stability and prosperity. The Republican Right questions these beliefs and prefers America First, negotiating bilaterally to achieve that premier status.
Earlier this year, the Pentagon asked the Rand Corporation to conduct a review on “Alternative Options for US Policy toward the International Order”. The key questions for the New Global Order are: Who sets the rules and how binding are the rules?
The study breaks the future order into two camps of rule-makers – the US and its allies or a concert of great powers. Under such a division, there are two conditions where rules are binding – one dominated by the US camp to enforce rules and the other where the great powers agree to a global constitutional order enforced by institutions. The other two conditions where rules are not binding involve a coalition of states aligned to counteract against revisionism and a new concert of great powers.
The immediate problem with the Rand categorisation of New Order Visions is that the existing liberal, rules-based order is not being challenged by others, but by the US itself.
First, after German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s comment earlier this year that Europe must begin to look after its own interests, it is no longer clear that America’s traditional allies are going to follow the US leadership when there are serious disagreements on trade, climate change and immigration. It is no coincidence that the largest trade imbalances are no longer between China or oil producers with the US, but between Europe and the United States. Germany alone is running a current account surplus equivalent to around 8% of GDP.
Second, within the Middle East, alliances are shifting almost by the day. The quarrel between Saudi Arabia and Qatar has riven the Gulf Cooperation Council, while Turkey is playing an increasingly pivotal role within the shifting alliances.
Third, North Korea’s bid for nuclear power membership, despite being a small state, means that Great Powers may have to accommodate new players whether they like it or not.
Fourth, climate change in the form of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma demonstrate that nature can impose larger and larger economic losses on nations and regions, which will require global public goods that the current order is neither willing to fund, nor able to agree on how to address. The economic losses from Harvey alone is estimated at US$180bil, equivalent to the annual GDP of a middle-income economy. The existing multilateral bodies such as the United Nations and the World Bank are facing serious resource shortages relative to these new global demands.
The bottom line is that the current order has neither the resources nor the collective will to enforce rules when the human population growth puts increasing competition for scarce water, food and territorial spaces. Chaos arises from the breakdown of rules and borderlines.
In short, globalisation of trade, information and human migration has meant that traditional borders in many regions are becoming non-enforceable. For example, it is 101 years since the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement divided up the collapsing Ottoman Empire into British, French and Russian spheres of interest and eventual control. These borders were drawn and enforced by the Great Powers through their military superiority.
Seen from the long lens of history, with the Great Powers being unwilling to put troops on the ground to enforce borders drawn up under the colonial era, these artificial borders are failing.
A hallmark of the times is that even the best of think tanks cannot map out how to navigate through this era of disruptive technology, unpredictable climate and shifting alliances and interests. What history teaches us is that the fault lines will be at the borderlands, at the confluence of emerging forces and stresses.
We should therefore be prepared for not only disruption at the borderlands of physical space, but within the realms of cyberspace.
By Andrew Sheng
Tan Sri Andrew Sheng writes on global issues from an Asian perspective.
North Korea's Atomic Energy Institute on Wednesday claimed that it has reprocessed spent nuclear fuel rods removed from a graphite-moderated reactor in a written interview with Japan's Kyodo News. It also disclosed that its Yongbyon nuclear facilities have produced uranium needed for nuclear armaments. At a time when Beijing and Seoul are in a tug of war on the deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) anti-missile system, Pyongyang has thrown a bombshell.
North Korea mothballed the Yongbyon reactor in 2007 under the Six-Party Talks accord, but began renovating it amid the confrontation with the US and South Korea in 2013. Kyodo's report suggested that North Korea has resumed its reprocessing facilities and its nuclear reactor is in full swing.
This is a dilemma facing China, the US and South Korea. The choice of the latter two is simple. The more nuclear activities North Korea will carry out, the greater pressure they will impose on it. But their tactics are of no help in solving the problem.
Given the increasing risks of a military strike by the US and South Korea and subversion of the regime, Pyongyang seemingly has no other choice but to intensify its efforts in developing nuclear power. China seems to have the most options, but that has put the country in a predicament. Beijing has cooled down its relations with Pyongyang and imposed the toughest ever sanctions against it over the past several years.
Complaints from South Korea that China hasn't pressured Pyongyang enough have often been heard. Seoul hopes Beijing and Pyongyang will openly turn against each other. It is even better for Seoul to see the North targets its nuclear weapons at China. Meanwhile, Pyongyang blames Beijing for taking the wrong side.
China should stay unwavering to pursue denuclearization in the Korean Peninsula. Meanwhile, it should hold firm to opposing any strategic military deployment by the US that will cause threats to China's security under the excuse of dealing with the Peninsula situation. North Korea's resumption of uranium production further complicates the Korean Peninsula situation. But currently, China should pay more attention to THAAD.
Pyongyang has paid the price for developing nuclear weapons, so should the US and South Korea for deploying THAAD. Any resolution by the UN Security Council to denounce North Korea and adopt new sanctions should be associated with the THAAD issue. The US and South Korea should take the blame if THAAD impairs the effectiveness of sanctions against the North. Nonetheless, Pyongyang shouldn't feel relieved. It would rather be totally isolated from the international community before it gives up its nuclear ambition.
China objects to North Korea's nuclear tests and war on the Peninsula. But once large-scale military conflicts break out, the North and South Korea will take the brunt. China doesn't need to feel more anxious than them. Global Times
S. Korea-US provocation heightens DPRK's insecurity, sabotages regional stability
https://youtu.be/vBCGw8iNpJc
Under the pressure of South Korea-US military drill and the widely disputed THAAD deployment, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) reportedly fired a ballistic missile early Wednesday, sending a strong signal that Washington and its allies are risking turning the region into a powder keg.
If confirmed, the missile launch would be a new violation of UN resolutions. However, the fact that it came two days after the South Korea-US drill simulating an all-out attack by the DPRK merits a closer look at its motivation.
Denounced as aggression and provocation by the DPRK, the two-week Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercises will surely not make Seoul safer. Rather, it might compel Pyongyang to take even more reckless actions for the sake of its own security.
In fact, the United States and South Korea have been warned in advance by the north. Calling the South Korea-US exercises the "most undisguised physical measure and provocative action," the DPRK has vowed to "foil all hostile acts and threat of aggression and provocation with the Korean-style nuclear deterrence."
Within that context, the launch could be regarded as a tit-for-tat move of Pyongyang.
Washington and Seoul are playing a dangerous game. They are holding a wolf by the ears in the hope that their sabre-rattling would deter the DPRK. However, their plan dooms to be a wishful thinking, as muscle-flexing leads to nowhere but a more anxious, more agitating and thus more unpredictable Pyongyang.
Meanwhile, the launch, already the fourth missile fired by the DPRK after the announcement of THAAD's deployment on July 8, could be interpreted as a protest against the planned installation of the system.
It also serves a reminder to policymakers in Seoul that by allowing the THAAD deployment, South Korea is putting the cart before the horse in their pursuit of national security, as the key to security lies in good neighborly and friendly relations with its neighbors, rather than a bunch of US-made missiles.
The increasingly complicated and stinging situation in East Asia needs to be cooled down before it is too late, and at this moment, what the region needs is cool heads instead of miscalculations. The ongoing trilateral meeting among Chinese, Japanese and South Korean foreign ministers offers a golden opportunity. - Xinhua
Aug 11, 2016 ... The deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile
defense system will not neutralize the threat of North Korea's ...
Jul 22, 2016 ... More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be
deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on ...
MEDDLING by foreign powers is an established phenomenon for as long as one can remember. They are not limited only to the Muslim countries and communities. For example, last year at the Seventh Summit of the Americas in Panama City, President Barack Obama indirectly admitted this when he publicly stated that the days of US interference in the affairs of Latin America were coming to an end. Reportedly, he said, "the days in which our agenda in this hemisphere presumed that the United States could meddle with impunity, those days are past". Some traced this to as far back as the conquest of the Americas by the Europeans in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries especially after its so-called "discovery" by Columbus. Perhaps, the major difference is that there are many more Latin American leaders and populace who are more "resolute" than their Muslim counterparts in resisting any attempt to meddle.
More generally "colonialism" is one form of meddling that many parts of the world have experienced, and are still suffering from it. Malaysia is no exception, no denying that there are some benefits to be learnt from the process. But where it hits the "mind" is where it is more toxic to the extent that it can debilitate. Even long after achieving independence the "colonised" mindsets are still clearly felt whether at the level of the leadership or the population at large. The post-Merdeka generations are more vulnerable when they are shut out from the larger discourse affecting the future of the nation, ironically due to yet another form of "meddling" that left them disenfranchised. In the days of social media, the impact of this can be phenomenal, what with other contending parties that are more than eager to attract their attention, as we have seen recently.
Social media is an excellent platform for yet another form of meddling – soft power. Coined a few years ago, soft power describes "the ability to attract and co-opt using persuasion (mind-twisting) rather than by coercion, notably by bullying and arm-twisting (hard power). To the disenfranchised, soft power is said to be very appealing especially when "credibility is the scarcest resource", as explained by Joseph Nye, who introduces the concept. In fact more recently, the term has expanded to include "changing and influencing social and public opinion through relatively less transparent channels and lobbying through powerful political and non-political organisations."
Of the six factors that are often associated with enhancing soft power, education and culture seem to be pivotal. In other words, meddling can be carried out discreetly using these two dimensions. Indeed, Nye did suggest how higher education leaders might enhance American soft power by increasing international student and cultural exchange programmes. Viewed this way, soft power is a very subtle extension of the colonial process without even realising it. A case in point is when in 2007 the Rand Corporation in the US developed a "road map" for the construction of moderate Muslim networks and institutions "that the US government and its allies need, but thus far have failed, to develop clear criteria for partnerships with authentic moderates". It therefore proposes "the building of moderate Muslim networks an explicit goal of US government programmes".
More explicitly, it listed who the "moderates" are to be targeted according to priority, namely: liberal and secular Muslim academics and intellectuals, young moderate religious scholars, community activists, women's groups engaged in gender equality campaigns, and finally moderate journalists and writers. It argued that "the US should ensure visibility and platforms for these individuals." For example, to ensure that individuals from these groups are "included in congressional visits, making them better known to policymakers and helping to maintain US support and resources for the public diplomacy effort." If these sound like "meddling", it is because it is one – effectively disguised as "soft power". It is without doubt, yet another attempt among many to continuously interfere and manipulate the situation from the perspective of the authors and the sponsoring institution. Despite this it is very sad if Muslims are oblivious to the sleight of hand, and succumb to the form of endless meddling. Only to realise that it causes more confusion and divisiveness among the community.
In the days ahead before Aug 31, it is incumbent upon us to deeply ponder what Merdeka means beyond the routine parade and march-past, flag-raising ceremony and singing the national anthem.
By Dzulkifli Abdul Razak, theSundaily
With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
Both Beijing and Manila have kept a low profile over the visit of
former Philippine president Fidel Ramos to the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region in the past couple of days, but his mission has
been evident: to seek the possibility of easing the strained bilateral
relations.
Jul 22, 2016 ... More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be
deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on ...
Jul 19, 2016 ... South China Sea arbitration award won't hamper China-ASEAN cooperation: ....
China hardens after illegal tribunal ruling on South China Sea.
PLA Air Force conducts combat air patrol in South China Sea
Jul 19, 2016 ... South China Sea arbitration award won't hamper
China-ASEAN cooperation: .... China hardens after illegal tribunal
ruling on South China Sea.
Jul 18, 2016 ...China hardens after questionable tribunal ruling on South China Sea ....
Permanent Court of Arbitration clarifies role in South China Sea case THE
HAGUE, July 16 ... 不合法的裁决不过废纸一张, Illegal ruling but a waste paper.
Public opinion in the Republic of Korea is divided over whether the deployment of the United States' Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense anti-missile system is in the national interest.
Many of those in their 20s, 30s or 40s disagree with the decision. And anti-THAAD lawmakers have demanded an open debate in the National Assembly to discuss whether the THAAD is really in the ROK's interests militarily, diplomatically and economically.
THAAD is incapable of defending against the potential missile threat from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, as the DPRK's missiles travel at a lower altitude than those THAAD is designed to intercept. Even if that was not the case, one THAAD battery would not be able to provide protection against all the DPRK missiles. The capital Seoul and its adjacent metropolitan area, the country's most populous regions, are even outside the protection range of THAAD.
However, the system's X-band radar has a range of at least 2,000 km, which is the real reason the United States wants it deployed in the ROK as it will be able to snoop deep into Chinese and Russian territories.
Seoul claims that it will adopt the radar with a detectable range of 600-800 km, but the mode change can be made at any time in accordance with the needs of the US military that will operate the THAAD battery in the ROK.
If THAAD is deployed, it will sour the ROK's relations with China and Russia, trigger an arms race and damage trade. It will make it difficult for the country to seek cooperation from China and Russia in denuclearizing the peninsula.
Seoul should heed the voices saying the only way to denuclearize the peninsula is through peace talks and changing the armistice treaty after the 1950-53 Korean War into a peace treaty. - China Daily
The UN Security Council failed to agree on a US-drafted statement that condemns North Korea's latest ballistic missile launch on Tuesday, because China demanded the statement oppose any provocative moves that take advantage of North Korea's nuclear threat and missile project to enable a deployment of anti-missile systems in Northeast Asia.
China's proposition is aimed at the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system that will be stationed by the US in South Korea. Since the US and South Korea announced the plan, the UN Security Council has failed twice to reach agreement over North Korean missile launches because of the major split between China and the US.
The planned deployment is adding a new challenge to the vulnerable geopolitical landscape of Northeast Asia. The international collaboration against North Korea's nuclear project has been crippled. A degenerative aura of the Cold War is emanating from the US-Japan-South Korea alliance.
China does not have a motive to encourage North Korea to develop nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles, because at the cost of its ties with the North, it has been a backer of the UN Security Council's sanctions against it. However, the US and South Korea went too far and made use of North Korea's nuclear threat to deploy THAAD, which will cause great harm to China's national security. Given China's cooperation in sanctioning North Korea, it is nothing but a stab in the back.
North Korea's nuclear ambition was primarily triggered by long-standing military pressures imposed by South Korea and the US. The escalating pressures have met bolder nuclear projects. China being a well-intentioned and responsible mediator has been paid back by a threatening advanced military system.
The US and South Korea are strongly convinced that they are absolutely right in this case, and any disagreement is totally wrong. The narrow-mindedness renders all proposals fruitless and futile.
The Korean Peninsula is intertwined with too many complications and concerns. The deployment of THAAD is a selfish and reckless move that will break the fragile balance with terrible outcomes: There will be a huge setback in the Sino-South Korean relationship; the susceptible Sino-US collaboration over Northeast Asia will collapse - all will result in a reconfiguration of each stakeholder's policy on the region.
Although unwilling to go to war, all players in the big game should reflect on their policies as growing tensions have turned them more defensive rather than open.
The major-power rivalry between China and the US is behind many disputes in East Asia. Beijing and Washington seem to have a tacit understanding that their rivalry won't explode into a physical conflict. However, some countries cannot look at the big picture, and are eager to pick sides, but they will only find that they are cannon fodder.
China and the US are exchanging blows over THAAD, but they won't get into a real fight. However, if South Korea leaps headlong into this round of games and becomes a US agent, it will put itself in the middle of a new crisis.
South Korea is a confused player in the big game. It might eventually find out that THAAD will not bring about what it really expects.- Global Times
Sino-US ties should surmount saber-rattling
US naval ship visits Qingdao after disputed South China Sea ruling
A US Navy guided missile destroyer has arrived in the
northern Chinese port of Qingdao. This is in the first visit by an
American warship to China, after China refused to accept an arbitration
ruling on the South China Sea dispute.US Navy guided missile destroyer the USS Benfold arrived in the northern Chinese port of Qingdao on Monday, marking the first visit by a US military ship to China since the South China Sea arbitration. This visit is believed to be a signal and an opportunity for both countries to ease tensions between them.
Before the arbitration award was announced, Washington deployed two aircraft carriers in and around the South China Sea, an obvious move to flex their muscles, pile pressure on China and encourage its allies. China responded in kind with a large military drill in the region and a routine combat patrol. Both countries have engaged with each other in a fierce tug of war.
This is not the whole picture of Sino-US relations, not even their military relationship. Not long ago, the US kept its invitation for China to participate in its Rim of the Pacific military exercise, which is mainly attended by its allies.
The Chinese shouldn't always push the USS Larson's provocations in the South China Sea into the limelight, nor can they easily turn over a new leaf with the US as the USS Benfold came in peace. We shouldn't be tricked by a single gesture from Washington. Both China and the US must admit that the undefined Sino-US ties will continue being shaped in the future.
China and the US are exercising more precautions against each other, and they should get used to the new developments, such as a limited arms race, and not having to take the other's defensive actions as unacceptable.
Throughout the history of human civilization, China and the US have engaged in the most peaceful rivalry between an emerging power and an established power. The Chinese should know as a dominant powerhouse, the US is relatively rational, and has not opted for harsh gambits. Washington also admits that China is a rational and careful emerging power, and pays enough respect to US national interests.
However, both China and the US still feel their own national security is being challenged by each other. Frankly speaking, China feels more insecure than the US. The US doesn't have to overreact as for a long time to come, China won't be powerful enough to launch a showdown against the US.
China should speed up its military modernization and narrow the gap with the US in military strength. The priority should be an increase in strategic military deterrence. The US shouldn't see this as a hostile move. It must know that it cannot sustain an overwhelming military advantage over other countries forever. A strategic balance is essential to world peace in the nuclear age.
China has no plan to dominate Asia with its military prowess. What is happening in the East and South China Seas are simply territorial disputes, not a prelude for China to overturn the current world order.
China and the US should nurture a strong awareness of risk control and strategic trust to ensure the incessant frictions won't become a real conflict.
Saber-rattling remarks do not mean both sides are ready for a war. Both sides must strive to avoid a military showdown. Whether they like it or not, they should respect the other's core national interests. - Global Times
Jul 22, 2016 ... More than 2,000 people from Seongju county, where one THAAD battery will be
deployed, gathered at a square in Seoul for a rally on ...
Jul 19, 2016 ... South China Sea arbitration award won't hamper China-ASEAN cooperation: ....
China hardens after illegal tribunal ruling on South China Sea.
PLA Air Force conducts combat air patrol in South China Sea
Jul 19, 2016 ... South China Sea arbitration award won't hamper China-ASEAN cooperation: .... China hardens after illegal tribunal ruling on South China Sea.
Jul 18, 2016 ...China hardens after questionable tribunal ruling on South China Sea ....
Permanent Court of Arbitration clarifies role in South China Sea case THE
HAGUE, July 16 ... 不合法的裁决不过废纸一张, Illegal ruling but a waste paper.
On April 6, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi expressed severe concern over the current tense situation on the Korean Peninsula to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon over the phone, and said Beijing "does not allow troublemaking at the doorsteps of China."
In wake of the rising tensions on the Korea Peninsula, for the regional peace and stability and to safeguard China's national interest, it is necessary to address relevant sides over the issue:
To DPRK: do not misjudge the situation
The Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) has many reasons to strengthen the arms and technology, and there are legitimate concerns of their own national security, but there is no reason to violate the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council to engage in nuclear testing and launch missile using ballistic missile technology, which cannot shirk its responsibility in upgrading tensions on the peninsula last year.
The DPRK has its own special circumstances, political needs, policy choices and political language style, which is its internal affairs and the outside world has no right to interfere in. But if its choice and words intensifies the Korean Peninsula tensions and affects peace and stability in the region, it becomes the international issues. The situation’s development on the peninsula will not necessarily go according to the ideas and expectations of the DPRK.
To the United States: do not add fuel to the flames
Even with the United Nations Security Council’s resolution on the Korean Peninsula issue, and has legitimate concerns over the nuclear non-proliferation and security issues, unilateral sanctions from the United States against the DPRK which are beyond the UN resolutions would be counterproductive and will add pressure to the situation.
For decades, sanctions, pressure, isolation against the DPRK initiated by the United States is one of the root causes of conflicts on the peninsula. Since the 1990s, U.S. government policy toward the DPRK has swung between engagement and isolation, making the DPRK doubtful of the sincerity of the United States, and giving an excuse to the DPRK in violation of the agreement.
The United States, as the superpower whose comprehensive national and military strength is far stronger than the DPRK's, is in a strong position; therefore, any strong move will only increase tension on the peninsula.
To South Korea: do not miss the focus
With the "protective umbrella" provided by the U.S., South Korea’s security is still fragile. Due to the geographical location and military deployment, South Korea would become the biggest victim if any conflicts and wars break out on the peninsula.
The south and north peninsula have had a period of increased contacts and exchanges, and South Korea's new government has repeatedly expressed its willingness to implement policy toward the DPRK which are different from the Lee Myung-bak government.
Being one of the major parties of the Korean Peninsula issue, South Korea should play the role to cool down the tensions on the Korean Peninsula, rather than pushed by the DPRK or the United States.
To Japan: do not fish in troubled water
Every time North Korea test-fired a satellite or missile, Japan will deploy so-called "interception" in a big way. This is largely a move of Japan taking the opportunity to adjust and increase in arms.
During the process of the Six-Party Talks in the past, Japan sometimes played the role to hold back the process by entangling in some particular issues. This short-sighted strategy and using the pretext of the DPRK "threat" to develop armaments and adjust security strategy will only increase complicated factors in the regional situation.
Warfare and chaos on the Korean Peninsula does not meet the interests of any party. The war caused by trouble will have impact on regional peace and stability, endangering regional cooperation and win-win situation, hurting any party that causes trouble.
Although the situation on the peninsula has not come to the point when conflicts can be triggered at any moment, it has brought harm to regional peace and stability.
Not allowing troublemaking at the doorsteps of China means to stop the vicious circle of tension on the peninsula, to prevent any party from stirring up trouble, to oppose creating tension on purpose, and to say no to render the use of force to resolve the problem. Words and deeds that intensify the tensions on the Korean Peninsula should be condemned and opposed.
Not allowing troublemaking at the doorsteps of China is not China's "Monroe Doctrine". China does not seek spheres of influence. China intends to maintain regional peace and stability on the Peninsula, and determine its own position and actions in accordance with the Peninsula situation on its own merits. At present, it is not without hope to maintain peace and stability on the peninsula.
The pressing matter of the moment is that all parties should calm down and restrain, move to ease the tension as soon as possible to create the conditions for the situation to change.
Provoking Pyongyang - Shen Lan/GT: Pyongyang is provoked by US and South Korea
Joining the club - Illustration: Shen Lan/GT
Pawn of the USA 
