Skip to main content

United States's fondness for China’s government is enabling North Korea's bad behavior

Americans wondering why North Korea has gotten away with building A-bombs and ballistic missiles—like the one it successfully tested Tuesday—need only consider Jeff Immelt.  The day before the missile launch, the CEO of General Electric and friend of President Obama endorsed China’s economic model and said “state-run communism may not be your cup of tea, but their government works.”
What do the unpatriotic sentiments of GE’s boss have to do with U.S. policy toward North Korea? Both are based on the faulty but soothing assumption held by the elite establishment in American government and big business: that China is our partner.
Two successive administrations—Bush and Obama—have based U.S. policy on North Korea on supposed Chinese cooperation. The theory is that Beijing doesn’t want North Korea armed with effective nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles any more than Washington or its allies, and will thus be of help.
In 2003, Washington kicked off six-way talks hoping to cut a deal that would end North Korea’s nuclear program.  Then-president Bush optimistically noted that Beijing was joining the talks, saying “Now we’ll have other parties who’ve got a vested interest in peace on the [Korean] Peninsula.”
Later that year, Bush welcomed China’s premier to the White House and declared that the U.S. and China were “partners in diplomacy.”
Unfortunately for us, what Beijing wanted above all else—and still wants—is a stable North Korea. China does not want to deal with either a humanitarian disaster or, worse still, another democracy on its doorstep. Furthermore, the Chinese government is indifferent to North Korean repression and probably admires Pyongyang’s belligerence toward Washington. It makes China look tame by comparison, so people like Jeff Immelt can sing its praises.  As a result, and contrary to its promises, China won’t seriously pressure North Korea.
The success of the Bush approach was at least easy to measure. Over twenty seismic stations around the world and one radionuclide test of material drifting from the Pacific over Canada confirmed that North Korea became a nuclear weapons power on October 9, 2006.
But the happy talk about partnership continued. A leaked classified State Department cable shows that in 2007, Bush’s point man on China gushed in a meeting in Beijing “that U.S.-China cooperation in the Six-Party Talks is the best example of our bilateral cooperation on international issues…” His Chinese counterpart wholeheartedly “agreed that bilateral cooperation on this issue has been very good.”
Upon taking office as Obama’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton continued the self-deception. On her inaugural trip to China, Hillary said sticky issues like human rights “can’t interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crises.”  She forecast Chinese partnership on each.
A senior Obama Pentagon official, Michele Flournoy, went further still last year. Speaking from the part of government that Americans might rightly expect to be most skeptical of China, she said, “The U.S. does not seek to contain China; we do not view China as an adversary.”  
These sanguine views overlook the fact that Beijing has only once put serious pressure on its client state, North Korea—and only for a very brief time. In 2006, after Pyongyang’s first nuclear test, China halted fuel shipments to remind North Korea who was boss. The country gets ninety percent of its oil from China, and pays via a friendly barter agreement whenever it can.
The move certainly got North Korea’s attention, but was short-lived and has not been repeated. China’s apologists and partnership aficionados point to the fact that Beijing allowed the UN to pass tough sanctions resolutions on North Korea. But these are tough only on paper.  In the real world, China allows them to be circumvented.
The soothing, convenient view that China is our partner will no doubt continue to be held by our big business and government elite. GE CEO Immelt and his equals in countless boardrooms have been major boosters of China long before his revealing statement this week. Immelt recently threw $2 billion of his shareholders’ money at projects there, including for “research and development centers” one can only imagine will avail China of more U.S. technology like the kind it steals so proficiently.
Noticeably absent from the financial reports of GE and companies like it is any solid proof of profitability from doing business in the world’s biggest kleptocracy.  But China remains the ‘it girl’ for our government and business betters. Taxpayers and shareholders get the raw end of this deal, but then who ever cared about that.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Pakistan Army Must Not Intervene In The Current Crisis - Who To Blame For the Present Crisis in Pakistan ?

By Sikander Hayat Another day of agony and despair as Pakistanis live through a period of uncertainty but still I believe that army must not intervene in this crisis. These are the kind of circumstances when army need to show their resolve of not meddling in the political sphere of the country. No doubt that there will be people in the corridors of power and beyond who will be urging the army to step in and ‘save’ the country but let me tell you that country will only be saved if army stays away and let the politicians decide the future of the country, even if it means that there will be clashes on the streets of Islamabad. With free media in place, people are watching with open eyes the parts being played by each and every individual in this current saga. They know who is right and who is wrong and they will eventually decide who stays in power when the next general election comes. Who said that democracy was and orderly and pretty business ; it is anything but. Democracy ...

Mir Chakar Khan Rind - A Warrior Hero Of Baluchistan & Punjab Provinces of Pakistan

By Sikander Hayat The areas comprising the state of Pakistan have a rich history and are steeped in the traditions of martial kind. Tribes which are the foundation stone of Pakistan come from all ethnic groups of Pakistan either they be Sindhi, Balochi, Pathan or Punjabi. One of these men of war & honour were Mir Chakar Khan Rind. He is probably the most famous leader coming out of Baloch ethnic group of Pakistan. Mir Chakar Khan Rind or Chakar-i-Azam (1468 – 1565 ) was a Baloch king and ruler of Satghara in (Southern Pakistani Punjab) in the 15th century. He is considered a folk hero of the Baloch people and an important figure in the Baloch epic Hani and Sheh Mureed. Mir Chakar lived in Sibi in the hills of Balochistan and became the head of Rind tribe at the age of 18 after the death of his father Mir Shahak Khan. Mir Chakar's kingdom was short lived because of a civil war between the Lashari and Rind tribes of Balochistan. Mir Chakar and Mir Gwaharam Khan Lashari, hea...

Azad Kashmir - Is China Taking Extra Interest In Kashmir?

By Sikander Hayat All the pictures are from Azad Kashmir First let’s talk about the geography & political structure of Azad Kashmir. The Azad State of Jammu and Kashmir, usually shortened to Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) or, simply, Azad Kashmir, is the southernmost political entity of Pakistan. It covers an area of 13,297 km² (5,134 mi²), with its capital at Muzaffarabad , and has an estimated population of about four million. The state's financial matters, i.e., budget and tax affairs, are dealt with by the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council, instead of by Pakistan's Central Board of Revenue. The Azad Jammu and Kashmir Council is a supreme body consisting of 11 members, six from the government of Azad Jammu and Kashmir and five from the government of Pakistan. Its chairman/chief executive is the president of Pakistan. Other members of the council are Azad Kashmir's own president and prime minister and a few other AJK ministers. Azad Jammu and Kashmir has its ...