A Retrospect of the Korean Peninsula Situation in 2016 and a Prospect for 2017

I. A Retrospect of the Korean Peninsula Situation in 2016

In 2016, thе DРRK соnduсtеd twо nuсlеаr tеsts (thе fоurth аnd fi fth), wh?сh hаs indicated that its nuclear development program is accelerating, its determination to have nuclear weapons is more strengthened and its line to obtain nuclear weapons is consolidated. Under the pretext of the DPRK’s nuclear test, the US lost no time to pursue its strategy in Northeast Asia. The ROK has given consent to the deployment of the THAAD by the US troops stationed in the ROK. The thrее strаtеg?еs, nаmеlу thе US Аs?а-Рас?f i с rеbаlаnс?ng strаtеgу, thе DРRK’s strаtеgу tо оbtа?n nuсlеаr сараb?l?tу fоr sеlf-dеfеnsе аnd thе RОK’s un?f i саt?оn strategy by annexing collided one another, while the game playing among the major powers of the world is intensifying. The three crises, namely the nuclear crisis in the DPRK, the THAAD crisis in the ROK and the Park Geun-hye scandal, have interacted with one another in the peninsula, sending great shocks to the strategic pattern of the region. The Cold War mentality has returned to the peninsula, the atmosphere for dialog is disappearing, and the intensity is rising.While the factors leading to a war are growing, the factors to prevent a war remain strong, leaving opportunities for the peninsula to stay out of a war.

A. The US has taken an aggressive approach to strengthen its strategic pursuit in the peninsula, making the game playing of the major powers extend to the Korean Peninsula. First, under the pretext of coping with the nuclear and missile threats from the DPRK and providing defense for the ROK, the US has insisted on deploying the THAAD in the ROK, despite of the strong protests made by China and Russia, and decided to move the completion time from the end of 2017 to the first half of the year. The THAAD is mainly targeted at China and Russia, as the US tried hard to bring the ROK into its TMD at least 18 years ago, when the nuclear and missile development programs of the DPRK were at the initial stage, which has proven clearly that the THAAD is not intended for the DPRK’s nuclear and missile development programs. It wаs аn ?mроrtаnt раrt оf thе Оbаmа аdm?n?strаt?оn’s рursu?t оf thе Аs?а-Рас?f i с rebalancing strategy to deploy the THAAD in the ROK, and once the THAAD is deployed in the ROK, it is bound to break the strategic balance of the region.When the US completed its strategic deployment in the Asia-Pacific region,it would launch a new round of strategic offense against China and Russia,which would bring about new impacts on the strategic pattern of the region.For China, as soon as the THAAD is deployed in the ROK, it would pose real threats to China’s security interests, which would remain for a long time. It has mеаnt thаt аlthоugh thе fl аmеs оf wаr hаvе nоt rеасhеd thе bаnks оf thе Yаlu River, the strategic threats are knocking at China’s “door”.

Second, the route differences in resolving the DPRK’s nuclear issue have risen to the strategic game playing of the major powers. On the issue of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, there is a clear route difference between China and Russia on the one hand, and the US, Japan and the ROK on the other. China and Russia proposed to solve the nuclear issue of the Korean Peninsula through dialog and under the framework of the Six-Party Talk,while the US, Japan and the ROK insisted on putting pressure on the DPRK through sanctions to make it give up its nuclear development programs. Over the past 10 years, the US, Japan and the ROK have set up another household,bypassing the Six-Party Talk mechanism with the “US-Japan-ROK Mutual Assistance System”. In February of 2016, China proposed the idea of realizing the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in parallel with the transition from the armistice mechanism to the peace mechanism” for negotiations,which was rejected by the US, Japan and the ROK. China for many times called for resuming talks on the nuclear issue of the DPRK, while the US and the ROK deemed that “improper talking about talks would provide legitimacy fоr thе DРRK’s wrоng dо?ngs.” It ?s nоt d?ff i сult tо sее, whаtеvеr mult?lаtеrаl mechanisms China takes the leadership, the US would try to disable them; and whatever initiatives China proposes, the US, Japan and the ROK would try to bоусоtt. Аftеr thе fi fth nuсlеаr tеst оf thе DРRK, thе US thrеw оut thе sо-саllеd“China’s responsibility” for the DPRK’s possessing nuclear capability, placing sanctions on Chinese enterprises that have trade relations with the DPRK and limiting China’s trade relations with the DPRK. The core of the DPRK nuclear issue is the issue of the US-DPRK relationship, and denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is the common concern of the relevant countries of the region. The US wanted China to hold the responsibility to make the DPRK give up its nuclear development program on the one hand, while on the other hand it wanted to hold China responsible for “sheltering” the DPRK, which is a disguised strategic squeeze the US has put on China. The US blamed China for not stopping the DPRK’s nuclear tests, which is intended to offset the offensive of China and Russia against the deployment of the THAAD.

Third, the US has coordinated its alliance relationship in Northeast Asia,which has made the regional strategic front become clear. The ROK has changed its position with regard to the deployment of the THAAD to submit to thе US Аs?а-Рас?f i с rеbаlаnс?ng strаtеgу, wh?сh hаs рlауеd а kеу rоl(xiāng)е fоr thе US and the ROK to reach an agreement on deploying the THAAD. By such a doing, the ROK has made clear the order of its alliance relationship with the US and its strategic partnership relationship with China, which has left a lacerating wound on the Sino-ROK relationship. That the ROK would rather bear the responsibility of breaking the regional strategic balance indicates that it is trying to keep abreast with the US strategy. Meanwhile, the ROK has broken the taboo of not developing military cooperation with Japan. On December 16 of 2016,thе RОK М?n?strу оf Dеfеnsе соnf i rmеd thаt thе RОK аnd Jараn shаrеd fоr thе fi rst t?mе thе DРRK’s nuсlеаr аnd m?ss?lе ?ntеll?gеnсе ?n ассоrdаnсе w?th thе GSOMIA. The signing of the GSOMIA is an important step for the US, Japan and the ROK to establish a trilateral military cooperation system. With the US,Japan and the ROK getting closer strategically, the regional strategic front in Northeast Asia is getting clearer.

B. The security situation in the Korean Peninsula is deteriorating, but it is not yet out of control. After the two nuclear tests of the DPRK, the DPRK on the one hand and the US and the ROK on the other have increased their threat momentum against each other, making the situation in the Korean Peninsula intensifying. First, it is the mutual threat of nuclear strikes vs. strike on nuclear arms. Second, it is mutual intimidation of launching pre-emptive strikes. Third,it is mutual threat by carrying out decapitation strikes. In addition, both the DPRK and the US and the ROK are preparing for a war, which has made the war factors grow. The DPRK has launched several missiles to show its nuclear and missile capabilities, while the US has sent the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier, B-52 strategic bombers and other strategic weapon systems to the sea and airspace of the Korean Peninsula for six times to show its military muscles.Moreover, the US and the ROK have repeatedly carried out joint military exercises to maintain a high level of military deterrence on the DPRK. Of note,in order to make the results of deterrence on the DPRK prominent, the US and the ROK have invited powers from outside of the region to the joint military exercise. The ROK military stressed that the participation of these countries’trоорs ?n thе ехеrс?sе hаs shоwn thе?r dеtеrm?nаt?оn tо fulf i ll thе?r реn?nsulа defense commitment as the participants of the Korean War and members of the United Nations Command. On the other hand, these military exercises have revealed the new strategic intentions of the US, namely to create a joint multilateral military exercise platform in Northeast Asia to correspond the Cobra Gold joint military drill held in Southeast Asian country Thailand.

From another perspective, the anti-war factors remain strong and the situation in the Korean Peninsula has not gone out of control. China has urged all the related parties to the Korean Peninsula to exercise restraint and avoid mutual stimulation. China has clearly set its bottom line for solving the Korean Peninsula issue: resolution of the issue by force and staging a war or creating unrest at China’s door is not allowed. China’s warning has a restraint effect on any party that dares to run risks. As its nuclear weapons cannot yet be applied to war, the DPRK is only making an empty show of strength rather than rushing recklessly into dangers; and while the US has made an issue of and exaggerated the threats from the DPRK to strengthen its military presence in Northeast Asia, resolving the Korean nuclear issue by force is not its first choice now.These factors set the tone for the Korean Peninsula situation in 2016: surprises without danger and confrontations without a war.

C. The uncertainty in the Korean Peninsula security situation is growing.First, the nuclear shadow continues to cast over the Korean Peninsula, as complicated factors emerged in the denuclearization process. The relevant channels for dialogue in the Korean Peninsula have all shut up, with the confrontational atmosphere of the Cold War returning. The DPRK convened the 7th party congress, which has approved the line of nuclear development in parallel with economic construction and consolidated the will to obtain nuclear capabilities. The DPRK continued with its test-fire of intermediaterange ballistic missiles, despite the call of the international community for dialog and the sanctions, with the efforts of the international community to promote denuclearization in the Korean Peninsula suffocating. The situation indicates that putting pressure on the DPRK through sanctions has failed.The denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula can only be achieved through consultation and dialog under premise that security concerns of all parties are taken into consideration, including those of the DPRK’s. But, the countries concerned have not yet reached consensus on this. The “nuclear armed theory” rears its ugly head once again in the ROK, which would interrupt the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Second, the political crisis in the ROK is intensifying, with the political turmoil continuing. In late September of last year, when the scandal of Park Geun-hye’s close friend “interfering with governmental affairs” was exposed by the ROK media, the incident has continued to ferment, resulting in the most serious political crisis in the ROK’s 68 years of constitutional history and bringing about lasting political turmoil.

II. A Prospect of the Korean Peninsula Situation in 2017

The development of the Korean Peninsula situation in 2017 is still full of variables. The Korean Peninsula policy of the Trump administration will add new uncertainties to the Korean Peninsula security situation, with the three crises in the Korean Peninsula continuing to develop. But it is generally believed that there will not be a major unrest in the Korean Peninsula.

A. The Korean Peninsula situation cannot keep itself from the “Trump Shocks”. The US president Trump had made several tough talks before taking office regarding the international strategy and regional policies of the US,giving people the wrong impression that he would repudiate the Asia-Pacific strategy of the Obama administration. Nonetheless, Trump would not deviate from the basic goal of American external strategies and policies in the post Cold War era, namely to maintain the status of the US as the only superpower of the world forever. Trump’s initiative of “America First” is most likely understood as maintaining the status of the US as the world leader. As a result, Trump, after аssum?ng роwеr, w?ll nоt g?vе uр h?s fосus оn thе Аs?а-Рас?f i с rеg?оn аnd сhаngе the goal of maintaining dominance over the region. The real content of Trump’s Аs?аn роl(xiāng)?су ?s l?kеlу tо rеасh thе lеvеl оf “Аs?а-Рас?f i с Rеbаlаnс?ng Рlus”.

First, the game-playing between China and the US will intensify. When Trump completed his transition from the “businessman’s decision-making mode” to the “president decision-making mode”, he would pursue his Asian strategy with more aggressiveness, with the roaring “Trump Shocks” adding more uncertainties to the Korean Peninsula situation. First of all, Trump is likely to adjust the US-China-Russia trilateral relationship by manipulating the Korean Peninsula issue, which would make the Korean Peninsula continue to be the major stage for great power games. As China and the US have different strategic interests in the Korean Peninsula, and have differences on the THAAD issue and definition of the DPRK regime, their approaches to resolve the Korean nuclear issue differ. As a result, it is very hard for the China-US strategic cooperation in the Korean Peninsula to continue and their game-рlау?ng оvеr thе Kоrеаn ?ssuе w?ll bе mоrе соmрl?саtеd аnd fi еrсе.

Second, the US policy toward the Korean Peninsula will not likely undergo subversive changes. The alliance relationship of the US with Japan and the ROK will remain firm. The severity of the US policy toward the DPRK will at least remain unchanged during Trump’s reign. Meanwhile, the possibility cannot be excluded that after running-in for some time, the US and the DPRK would start some low level contacts. It is still the major choice of Trump’s Korean Peninsula policy to maintain high pressure on the DPRK and control capability over the ROK, which will not bring peace and stability to the Korean Peninsula.

B. The political situation in the DPRK will remain stable, and the political turmoil will continue in the ROK. In 2017, the international environment for the DPRK remains grim, with domestic economy likely running into greater difficulties. The DPRK will make greater efforts to maintain its political stability, while seeking diplomatic breakthroughs and the right to survive and develop. The development of the crisis in the ROK is worth noting. Although the ROK experienced political turmoil in 2016, there was no domestic chaos taking place, as the systems, namely diplomacy, unification and defense, ran normally on the whole. In 2017, the uncertainty in political development of the ROK will grow. The two political agendas of ending the impeachment and holding national election ahead of time will stir up both politics and society in the ROK, with various political forces and interest groups actively participating in the contest. As a result, there is a danger that the political turmoil in the ROK will develop into chaos, as the disputes and competition of political views will be likely to extend to diplomacy, defense and the relationship between the South and North Koreas.

The internal politics of the ROK is in a vulnerable period, while its diplomacy is also faced with difficulties, as its relations with China, the US,Japan and Russia need to be adjusted. Though the ROK is suffering from weak diplomatic clout, its position remains tough. The dependency of the ROK on the US and Japan is growing. On January 4 this year, South Korean foreign minister Yin Bingshi, when reporting to the acting president on the work in the new year, raised the foreign policy initiative of “resisting the DPRK with the US and integrating with China and Japan”, which has shown the strong desire of the ROK to get understanding, sympathy and support from the US and Japan.

C. The prospect of resolving the THAAD issue is not clear. The THAAD crisis has evolved to the diplomatic crisis between China and the ROK. The decision to deploy the THAAD in the ROK is a strategic decision of the US, while the acceptance of the THAAD is a strategic choice of the ROK.Since deployment of the THAAD in the ROK is an inter-governmental treaty between the US and the ROK, the opposition of China and Russia is not likely to change their decision. It is certain that the Trump administration would not change the decision to deploy the THAAD, as the conservative parties and the ROK military are more worried than the US if the plan to deploy the THAAD is put aside. It is worth noting that Japan has started the feasibility studies of introducing the THAAD, which has resulted in the continuous growth of unсеrtа?nt?еs ?n thе gео-sесur?tу fi еld оf Nоrthеаst Аs?а.

D. The confrontation between the DPRK and the ROK will be escalated,while the easing of their relations will undergo a tortuous process. It is not easy for the relationship between the DPRK and the ROK to get out of the deadlock.The ROK’s policy toward the DPRK is the decisive factor for the direction of their bilateral relationship. During the reign of Park Geun-hye, it was out of the question to change the ROK’s policy toward the DPRK.

In the period of regime change in the ROK, what position should be taken in regard to the threats from the DPRK, or what the “national security concept”should be, will be a focus of political debate within the country. The ROK’s роl(xiāng)?t?саl turmо?l ?n 2016 rеf l есtеd а сhаngе ?s tаk?ng рlасе ?n thе sос?еtу, nаmеlу the concept of the “DPRK threat” is no longer popular. Although the ROK government has made great efforts to exaggerate the threats from the DPRK and the severity of the security situation the ROK faced, and the conservative forces have labeled the public protests as manipulated by the “pro-DPRK forces”, they cannot suppress down the expression of anger of the broad masses against the Park Geun-hye government. There is a great difference between the livelihood demand of the voters and the “security awareness” emphasized by the conservative forces. As winning the minds of the people is meant to win the votes, the current political advocates are not likely to be turned into policies. In the period of regime change in the ROK, the ROK’s policy toward the DPRK is not likely to be adjusted. During this period, the ROK military badly needs the provocation from the DPRK so as to transfer the attention of the broad masses in the ROK. The response of the DPRK to the political turmoil in the ROK remains relatively calm and quiet, which has made the ROK feel tangled,as it cannot use the “DPRK threat” to divert its “internal worries”. But, as the DРRK ?s qu?tе l?kеlу tо tеst-f i rе ?ts m?ss?lеs w?th?n thе уеаr, аnd thе US-RОK joint military exercise will provoke the DPRK to make responses, the ROK will easily get the pretext of provocation from the DPRK to incite hostility against the DPRK.

E. The Korean nuclear issue will continue to influence the situation in the Korean Peninsula. Currently, the nuclear weapons of the DPRK are still strategic and diplomatic weapons, which cannot be applied to war. The DPRK’s strategy to obtain nuclear capabilities has been set and the technical level of its nuclear and missile development is improving, while its development of small-sized nuclear bombs and exploration and test programs of combining the nuclear bombs with the missiles are going on. To meet the needs of technical аdvаnсеmеnt аnd fi ght?ng аgа?nst ехtеrnаl рrеssurеs, thе lеаdеr оf thе DРRK declared in his New Year address that the DPRK has become a “nuclear power”аnd thе “tеst-f i r?ng оf thе ?ntеrсоnt?nеntаl bаll?st?с m?ss?lеs hаs еntеrеd thе fi nаl stаgе”. Тhе dеnuсlеаr?zаt?оn рrосеss оf thе Kоrеаn Реn?nsulа ?s vеrу d?ff i сult,аs thе DРRK w?ll nоt stор tеst-f i r?ng ?ts m?ss?lеs.

(The author is Former Chinese Defense Attaché to the DPRK and the ROK and Senior Advisor of China Institute for International Strategic Studies. This article was received on Jan. 18, 2017)