Why did the North Korean issue drag on for a long time? This paper analyzes the attitudes of all parties to the DPRK nuclear issue from the perspective of national interests and international strategy.
I. North Korea
As the problem party of North Korea's nuclear issue, it is obvious that North Korea will not give up its established nuclear weapons policy. Especially after many successful nuclear tests, North Korea has been convinced that its development of nuclear weapons will not be attacked by the United States, and the opposition of the international community can be basically ignored, because North Korea has never relied on the international community to obtain resources. China's constant assistance to the DPRK out of humanitarianism and traditional friendship between China and the DPRK is the most important external reason why the DPRK is not afraid of blockade, sanctions and threats. Even if North Korea participates in the Six-Party Talks, it is only to save China's face. Since North Korea is not afraid of war, it is obvious that it will not give up nuclear weapons at the negotiating table.
Second, China.
Many international researchers, economists and media people have pointed out that it will be impossible for North Korea to possess nuclear weapons if China completely cuts off its supplies to North Korea, stops its investment in projects and takes severe sanctions.
But the reason why China didn't do that is simple. First of all, China has always regarded North Korea as a buffer zone between China and the outside world, which is reflected in Mao Zedong Zhou Enlai's consideration of "his lips are dead and his teeth are cold" in the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea. Therefore, China is extremely worried that too severe sanctions will lead to the collapse of North Korea due to domestic economic difficulties and material shortages. The consequences of a large number of Koreans flooding into the northeast border of China are unimaginable, which will bring great difficulties and an unchangeable public security environment to the northeast of China. At the same time, the Koreans who moved to the Korean-inhabited area on the northeast border of China may not give up their efforts to restore the historical Koguryo Kingdom, threatening the border unity and national unity of China. Secondly, the North Korean nuclear issue exists as the focus of security in Northeast Asia, which provides a very good stage for China to exert its traditional influence in Northeast Asia. If the North Korean nuclear issue is hastily resolved, China will lose this influence. Thirdly, even in the worst case, North Korea, like India and Pakistan in 1998, finally has the nuclear power to attack other countries. Based on the friendly relations between China and North Korea, North Korea is unlikely to threaten China with nuclear weapons, and South Korea and Japan should be most worried about North Korea's nuclear weapons.
Third, South Korea.
Compared with North Korea's nuclear weapons, South Koreans are more worried about the 10,000 guns deployed by North Korea on the military demarcation line. These rockets and anti-aircraft guns with a range of about 100 km directly pose a substantial threat to the economic and political center of South Korea. Limited by the geographical features of the Korean Peninsula, the depth of the Korean Peninsula is quite limited. Even if the military strength of the two countries is asymmetrical, they can still destroy each other. In the initial stage of the war.
The considerations of the Korean government and Korean nationals may be surprisingly consistent. From the perspective of national sentiment, the possession of nuclear weapons by North Korea is something that the Korean nation can be proud of. North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons may also accelerate the reunification of the Korean peninsula or promote the permanent separation of the two countries in the opposite direction-both of which are in the interests of the two peoples. South Korea obviously lacks the will of reunification than North Korea. Its economy has developed to a high level, and its political system has long been democratic. On the other hand, North Korea on the other side of the dividing line is still a very backward, poor and autocratic country, and North Koreans may be afraid that their compatriots from the north will cause them economic and cultural burdens. North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons has at least given the South Korean government a favorable excuse not to do anything to promote the reunification of the peninsula.
Fourth, Russia.
Some experts pointed out that North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons poses a serious threat to the security of the Russian Far East. I think this may be alarmist. Russia and North Korea have nothing to do with each other, but there are some homosexual feelings in the Eastern Group during the Soviet period. Russia has never been an Asian country, although it has paid more attention to Russia's Far East and the entire Asia-Pacific region since Yeltsin's double-headed eagle diplomacy. East Asian countries are generally unaccustomed to the fact that after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, outsiders from East Asia once again intervened in peace in East Asia in other capacities. Russia wants to find reasons to exert influence in the Asia-Pacific region, and the DPRK nuclear issue is one of them.
The border between North Korea and Russia is only15km, and there is no fishery or demarcation dispute between the two countries at sea. Russia does not take a hostile attitude towards North Korea like the United States, and it is an international force that North Korea can actively strive for. It is hard to imagine the North Korean leader frantically launching an attack on the world's second nuclear power without any dispute with this country.
Therefore, Russia's attitude towards the DPRK nuclear issue is that although North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons may threaten the security of Russia's Far East, the Far East is not Russia's political and economic center, or even a military center. The greater threat to North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons comes from Japan, South Korea or China. From this perspective, North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons will offset the comprehensive national strength advantages of China, South Korea and Japan over North Korea and promote the rebalancing of Northeast Asia.
Verb (abbreviation of verb) Japan
After World War II, the Japanese government has been trying to break through the framework of the peaceful constitution to expand its armaments, and the DPRK nuclear issue just provides a golden excuse. Perhaps the Japanese Defense Ministry can tell Japanese parliamentarians that we are facing a nuclear threat from North Korea, and it is necessary to increase the defense military budget, expand Japan's Self-Defense Forces, and accelerate Japan's nuclear technology research so that Japan can also possess nuclear weapons in the shortest possible time.
Therefore, we can see that in response to the North Korean nuclear crisis, the United States, Japan and South Korea have conducted more frequent military exercises and frequently reported the latest equipment of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces.
Sixth, the United States
North Korea's leaders have regarded the United States as North Korea's greatest enemy, probably to stimulate the patriotic enthusiasm of the domestic people and to serve the needs of the Kim regime. In the international society after the Cold War, the war of words in the ideological field rarely occupies the mainstream and becomes the source of national conflicts.
The United States also understands this. The existence of the DPRK nuclear issue has kept the United States in Northeast Asia, and the protracted DPRK nuclear issue has kept the United States alive. If one day, the North Korean nuclear issue is finally resolved, and North Korea abandons its nuclear weapons and begins to actively destroy its nuclear facilities and the nuclear warheads and delivery vehicles it has acquired, then it is really unnecessary for the United States to remain in East Asia. Residents of Okinawa Prefecture in Japan and patriots in South Korea have expressed doubts and objections to the US garrison from time to time, which reflects the legitimacy crisis of the United States in Northeast Asia. The appearance of the North Korean nuclear crisis gave the United States reason to tell its partners that you needed me, and then I came.
To sum up, all parties to the DPRK nuclear issue do not want to solve the DPRK nuclear issue for their own national interests and international strategic realities, so the problem has always existed and will not be solved. This is my conclusion.