An Analysis of Affairs on the Korean Peninsula

Recently, tensions on the Korean Peninsula have escalated with no clear end in sight. On March 7, just as the U.N. Security Council passed its third resolution tightening sanctions against North Korea in response to a nuclear test, the North Korean Foreign Ministry issued a statement claiming that a second Korean War was unavoidable and that it had already made all necessary preparations. Previously, on March 5 the North Korean National Defense Commission declared that effective March 11, when the U.S. and South Korea were set to carry out a joint military exercise, North Korea would no longer recognize nor be restrained by the Korean Armistice Agreement. It further stated that it would have the right to adopt any measures to protect itself, and would attack Seoul and the “strongholds of the aggressors.” Under these circumstances, it is impossible for the international community not to take a serious view of developments on the Korean Peninsula.

North Korea’s Show of Strength a Bid To Increase Leverage

The Korean Peninsula currently exists in a state of truce, and any talk of peace and stability is all relative, fragile and requires all states involved to uphold it well. As we all know, in the beginning of the 1950s, a war broke out between North and South on the Korean Peninsula. The U.S. spearheaded the formation of the United Nations Command and joined the war, and when bordering China was threatened, it dispatched the People’s Volunteer Army to “oppose the U.S. and aid North Korea”; the war ultimately lasted for over three years. On July 27, 1953, after two years of negotiations, China and North Korea on one side and the predominantly U.S.-United Nations Command on the other signed the Korean Armistice Agreement to end the war. In the past few decades, there has been constant friction between North and South Korea. The overall situation, however, has remained relatively stable in accordance with the ceasefire agreement, without the occurrence of major incidents or extended conflict.

Of course, we have seen global circumstances change considerably compared to the year in which the truce was signed, and the implications of the agreement have also evolved. Per North Korea’s request, representatives from Poland and Bulgaria, who previously served as members of the Neutral Nations Supervisory Commission for China and North Korea, have long since withdrawn.* The remainder of China’s People’s Volunteer Army stationed at the liaison office in Kaesong has also pulled out. North Korea has made repeated calls in the past for the signing of a peace agreement with the U.S. to replace the armistice in order to protect peace and security on the Korean Peninsula. This proposal has received China’s support. However, because relations between North Korea and the U.S. have not fundamentally improved, the signing of a peace accord to replace the truce has been delayed continuously and remains an important topic to protect the peace and stability of the peninsula still awaiting resolution.

This is not the first time that North Korea has declared that it will no longer recognize the armistice, nor the first time that it has declared that it will turn Seoul into a “sea of fire.” The only difference is that this time, it has tacked on a statement regarding the “stronghold of aggressors,” flexing the power gained from its nuclear test not long ago. However, it is my belief that North Korea cannot be unaware of the fact that using these means cannot resolve the problem of peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, nor can they improve relations with the U.S. These hardline statements were issued just as the U.N. Security Council was preparing to pass a resolution on sanctions and also just as large-scale U.S.-South Korean joint military exercises were set to commence. In my view, this was done largely in order to present a strong image toward the U.S. and South Korea, as well as to indicate that North Korea will not submit to threats of violence or pressure. At the same time, we cannot eliminate the possibility that it is increasing its bargaining power with an eye to future diplomatic talks.

War Is in Nobody’s Interest

As to the U.N. Security Council’s resolution on sanctions, it was a response to the nuclear test done in violation of a Security Council resolution by North Korea, a member state of the U.N., and was a necessary step to take. The breadth of sanctions has increased somewhat, primarily aimed toward preventing North Korea from staging another nuclear test. As a member of the U.N. Security Council, during deliberations China explicitly pressed for moderation when imposing sanctions, as well as caution so as not to have a negative effect on the development of the North Korean economy, the lives of its citizens or peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. China has done its utmost in this regard.

With respect to the state of affairs on the Korean Peninsula, I remember that when Deng Xiaoping was still alive, he said that at the time the Korean Peninsula was not in a state of war. I believe that this assessment is still applicable today. Of course, the situation stands on a razor’s edge. If either side loses its head, it may spark a war. However, this is something we are not willing to see come to pass, as the outcome will not be beneficial to any party. In modern society, the resolution of international disputes, including realizing the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the signing of a peace treaty in place of the armistice, must be obtained through diplomatic channels, dialogue and negotiation. Regardless of what circumstances may arise, when facing complex and sensitive situations, calmness and rationality must prevail at all times; this is vital above all else.

The author is a former senior diplomat and ambassador of China.

*Translator’s note: Czechoslovakia, not Bulgaria, was one of the original neutral nations.