Brian M Downing
Presidents Trump and Xi met last week at the former’s estate in Florida and discussed bilateral trade and world conflicts. Conversation was interrupted briefly as word came of the missile strikes on Syria. It was an opportune moment as the two powers discussed North Korea during the meeting.
Shortly thereafter, the US sent a carrier force to the waters off the Korean Peninsula and China began issuing less than supportive statements about its client in Pyongyang. Conflict may be at hand.
North Korea and China
Having a belligerent ally in North Korea has long benefited China. The Kim dynasty ties up huge amounts of American, South Korean, and Japanese military assets that could be allocated against China. This has allowed China to act more forcefully elsewhere in the region.
A belligerent ally is one thing, but an irresponsible one rattling ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons is another. It endangers regional stability and China’s ascendancy to world greatness. Hence the candid talk at the Trump estate and subsequent actions. Things may be coming to a head as Pyongyang is thought to be preparing a nuclear test in coming days.
Pressure points
The US dropped an immense GBU-43 bomb over ISIL targets in eastern Afghanistan yesterday. The device’s cousin, the GBU-57, is capable of burrowing deep into the ground before detonating. It was once considered for use on the Iranian enrichment facility at Natanz, 
which lies beneath hundreds of feet of sheetrock. The US was signaling North Korea that such weapons could be used on its underground sites that manufacture nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles.
An American attack would almost certainly lead to immediate, devastating responses on South Korean targets, including Seoul. Several GBU-43s and GBU-57s dropped on the mountains and caves holding North Korean weaponry could only limit Pyongyang’s reprisal. A Chinese attack on North Korea would be preferable as it might not bring the same response, though Beijing cannot be sure of that.
North Korea is heavily dependent on China for energy resources and raw materials. It also benefits from coal exports to China. Over the years Beijing has restricted trade with its irksome neighbor to register displeasure, and in recent weeks it has done so again. It’s capable of devastating the North’s already dismal economy and forcing Pyongyang to dismantle its nuclear program, or at least to refrain from further provocations.
The US and China may play good cop/bad cop on the North, with Xi urging restraint and Trump in the predictable role. Longer-term, China may be able to engineer a coup that would bring in a more temperate leadership.
The US and South Korea would like to see the end of the Kim dynasty and political unification of the peninsula. China would find this objectionable as it wants a deeply chastened yet strong ally in the North. A unified Korea aligned with the US and other states along China’s periphery would be a major strategic setback.
Implications
Washington and Beijing are not entering a period of greater comity and cooperation. China remains determined to supplant the US as the dominant power in the region and given that most countries around China are appalled by this prospect, conflict will continue for many years. Beijing is continuing to militarize small islands, many of them of contested ownership.
China and Russia will remain in partnership to expand power at America’s expense, especially in the Middle East. However, from the Kremlin’s outlook, shaped or misshaped as it is by a history of encirclements and invasions – a history never far from Vladimir Putin’s mind – Sino-American cooperation on North Korea will bring concern.
The two capitalist giants may one day see Russian resurgence as an obstacle to the world economic order they dominate. They have already speedily put aside the matter of China’s currency manipulation, and Beijing did not support Moscow on a recent UN vote regarding the Syrian gas attack.
Putin may worry that the two powers will one day agree, if only privately, that eastern Russia was stolen from China when the power of the tsars greatly exceeded that of the emperors. They may further agree that Chinese expansion can proceed there rather than in East Asia or other areas deemed in the American sphere.
Copyright 2017 Brian M Downing
Brian M Downing is a national security analyst who has written for outlets across the political spectrum. He studied at Georgetown University and the University of Chicago, and did post-graduate work at Harvard’s Center for International Affairs.