Skip to main content

The Stability of Insecurity: China and North Korea


The supportive relationship China has with its neighboring country North Korea dates back to the Korean War. China’s political approach to supporting North Korea arose from the mindset of ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend.’ During the Korean War, China fought in support of Communist North Korea in retaliation of the United States interfering in South Korea. While the US and China have an unspoken pact to try and keep peace, it is quite clear that the two super powers disagree far more than they agree. Ultimately, China supports North Korea merely because they do not want to suffer from the instability it might cause if the state were to collapse under its current regime. While the human and individual security in North Korea is at risk from all the humanitarian injustice it’s people are enduring, the national security of the state has been far more constant with this regime. The insecurity of its people is only one cost of maintaining stability of the nation. To the North Korean government and China, infringing on their people’s personal security is but one of the many ways national peace and security are obtained and maintained throughout the ages.  
China and North Korea both disregard their citizens’ humanitarian rights. Whether this infringement comes from the lack of free speech, wrongful imprisonment, unlawful death, or countless other wrongs, the moral injustices are still flourishing in both countries. North Korea is obviously much more infamous for their mistreatment of their citizens, yet both are guilty of creating this insecurity for their citizens. In North Korea’s case, the leaders are seen from an outside view point where the world refers to them as ‘crazy’ or ‘over the top.’ As Americans, we see North Korea and Kim Jung-un as punch line in a comedy skit more than an actual threat. While just to the north we see China, a world super power in a far different light. For the rest of the world, when China issues a threat it is taken seriously, yet they have just as much humanitarian issues as North Korea. This idealism comes from the impact these two nations have on the world. When North Korea issues a bomb threat, cyber-attack, or threatens the United States in any way we tend to treat them like an annoying mosquito; we swat them away, apply bug spray, and move on with our day. But if China were to issue a threat or to attack the national security of the United States we would respond much more seriously. This is because of the economic and political powers each of these separate countries hold globally. China is a much greater actor in the global economy. When China threatens to remove their support from a project or country there would be incredible economic and political repercussions. Yet for North Korea, there is far less impactful repercussions if they were to pursue the same actions.   
The main reason that China often throws their support behind North Korea and the DPRK is because of the instability that would arise if North Korea no longer had the support of a world super power. China has too much at stake to not back North Korea. If they were to stand against the DPRK and condemn their humanitarian issues, then China would open the flood gates for the rest of the super powers to condemn their own humanitarian issues. Also, if China were to disturb the instable balance of the DPRK regime it would be responsible for an influx of refugees along with the economic and political disruption they would bring with them if Kim Jung-un’s Regime were to fall. This mindset allows to peace and national security to be maintained in both countries and ultimately sacrifices individual security for overall stability.

This ideology of support between China and the DPRK is in favor of national stability over individual securities. Both countries are far more interested in the security of the nation state than they are with the securities of their citizens. North Korea is simply focused on national power, while China is lead to this action plan in hopes to maintain peace and economic and political balance within their own borders through ensuring North Korea’s borders remain intact.

Comments

  1. UnknownOctober 26, 2017 at 10:05 AM

    I thought your analysis was very well constructed and put together. It really is interesting to learn about the complex relationship between China and North Korea. You mention the humanitarian, economic, and refugee issues that would be inflicted upon China were North Korea to fall. I wonder if China's communist ideology would also be impacted. In some ways, North Korea is viewed as the best example of a communist country in the world. Would the fall of North Korea threaten the single-party republic that the leaders of China hold so dear? Would the citizens of China start to view communism as a failure, especially considering the fact that North Korea's communist state was really aided and influenced by the ideology of China. I think that the dynamic between communism in China and the fall of North Korea is an interesting angle to explore. I wonder if this ideological connection is another factor keeping China from withdrawing support of North Korea. Especially considering the fact that China is already facing threats to its communist state through external and internal state actors including the WTO and Taiwan.

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownOctober 28, 2017 at 5:36 PM

    After talking in class, writing about, and reading your analysis on the situation in North Korea, I have reached the decision that there is absolutely no clear or easy way to handle this situation (as some media sources can make us believe). I like how you mentioned the web of different internal and external forces that are complicating the North Korean situation on all fronts. I find it fascinating how China cares so much about keeping North Korea stable, because the Chinese government almost selfishly does not want to have to deal with the issues that would accompany the fall of the Kim family: refugees and their need for food, water, and work, to reiterate a few examples. I am very interested to see how this situation in North Korea will play out in the coming years.

    ReplyDelete
  3. UnknownOctober 29, 2017 at 4:01 PM

    This post goes along very well with what we discussed with the class time where it was very easy to point out problems that have risen through both of these countries but the route that people would like to take to fix these problems are fuzzy. We cannot address one after the other since any attempt to fix one the other would see as a potential shot at them and would create conflict within the area. The point that you said that the officials care more about 'overall stability' rather than the citizens stability goes along with my essay and perfectly sums it up. Also the point where you compare North Korea to a mosquitoes for the United States shows how little people in the United States either cares about North Korea or even the effect that they can cause.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousOctober 31, 2017 at 8:42 AM

    I like your analysis as it correlates to different ideas of security. The issues occurring in China and North Korea are both a global security crisis, yet individual/human security is being threatened ultimately. What are ways to combat this humanitarian crisis? It seems subjective and different for every international actor involved. Economic and trade implications are a major fear of being jeopardized. For example, China and US have a very dependent relationship economically. Should this be compromised in order to secure human rights within DPRK and China? Another interesting point you bring about is this idea of peace almost like a band-aid between the US and China. Essentially, there is more to the relationship that goes much deeper. Will this facade endure or will humanitarian concerns interfere?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Revisiting my Security Essay

Entering this class with no previous political science experience, I had an extremely open mind about security. In my security essay, I argued that human security should be prioritized above all other types of security; using history to prove my point. I am advocating for this view of security because I see how in history and in modernity, a lack of human security can directly result in the eventual collapse of a system of rule. Two sources covered in this class which illuminate the importance of human security are Pervenia Brown’s Worldpress article “Blood Diamonds” and Christian Bueger’s article “Practice, Pirate and Coast Guards: the grand narrative of Somali piracy”. Both of these works focus on the importance of human security through examining Sierra Leone’s diamond operation and the rationale behind Somali piracy. Aside from the two sources I chose for this discussion, I believe that most if not all of the cases we examined for this class involve aspects of human security at th...
1 comment
Read more

The problem IS in our own backyard

When thinking about the global issue of sex trafficking, many Americans believe that the issue is not pertinent to American politics, and therefore dismiss the issue on the grounds of irrelevance. However, sex trafficking is actually a major problem in the US, with an estimated 100,000-300,000 american children affected by sex trafficking a year, not including immigrants that were brought into the U.S., or exploited upon entering the U.S.. Sex trafficking is a huge infringement on a person’s human rights, and is a major problem in the US as well as the rest of the world. It should not be ignored by the American populace, but must be addressed at home instead of just being considered ‘their problem and not ours.’             Many people associate problems with underdeveloped countries as exacerbating the sex trafficking trade, believing that sex trafficking is something that only occurs in countries in Africa, Asia, and South Amer...
3 comments
Read more

Security Essay Revision

In my security essay I argued that national security should remain the definition of security and not be modified to include human rights and environmental issues. Instead of expanding the definition of security to contain these issues, I argued that those issues should be simply elevated in standing and viewed as just as or more important than national security by governments and citizens alike. After taking this class, I am now arguing that security should move away from national security to focus more on global security, and that human rights should be included in the definition of global security. However, the global community should never completely override the sovereignty of the state in which it is working, but should include that state in all decisions. I am changing my argument after learning about the Sierra Leone blood diamond conflict and the after effects of the earthquake that destroyed Haiti in 2010. Both countries were unable, by themselves, to effectively deal with t...
1 comment
Read more