Chinese envoy Wu Dawei met with his South Korean counterpart in Seoul on August 26th to discuss the resumption of the six-party nuclear talks on North Korea's nuclear disarmament.  But the meeting merely reaffirmed that the gap in their perception is still wide among the parties.

Wu reportedly proposed resuming nuclear negotiations in three phases, according to South Korean media:

1. Hold U.S.-North Korea direct talks

2.Hold unofficial, preliminary six-party talks privately behind closed doors

3. Hold official six-party talks

Wu reportedly said Beijing and Pyongyang have agreed on this method, and China is now trying to convince Seoul and later Tokyo, Washington and Russia to accept the plan.  The Chinese envoy’s trip coincided with that of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter’s North Korea visit and North Korean leader Kim Jong-il’s China tour.

Reaction to the Proposal?

Seoul and Washington have maintained that Pyongyang must take responsibility over sinking the Cheonan before resuming six-way negotiations.  Many observers believe that Pyongyang is trying to avoid responsibility with China’s help by dangling the possibility of resuming nuclear talks.

Beijing’s handling of the Cheonan incident has upset the other members of the six-party talks (minus Russia). So it may not be easy for China, the chair of the six-party talks, to coax Seoul, Washington and Tokyo. It remains to be seen what card Beijing plays to win the others over.

IF Pyongyang does have the will to denuclearize and proves this with concrete actions, then it will be difficult for Seoul and Washington to endlessly demand an apology before resuming the six-party talks.

The Gap: Still Wide

The problem, which has been so since the first nuclear crisis, is the wide gap in perception between the two sides. On one side, Pyongyang continues to deny its involvement in Cheonan, insist on the lifting of sanctions and insist on signing a peace treaty before denuclearization. On the other side, Washington, Seoul and Tokyo demand denuclearization steps first.

South Korea, the U.S. and Japan are unified in their policy and approach toward North Korea, which has been a rare phenomenon in the past. On the other side is China and North Korea. It is unclear what hidden cards will be played to break the current impasse.

Read more

China, Wu Da-wei, South Korea, North Korea, Kim Jong-il, Cheonan, six-party talks, peace treaty (all tags)

Former President Jimmy Carter has departed Pyongyang to return home with missionary Aijalon Mahli Gomes who was sentenced to eight years of hard labor and fined $700,000 for illegal entry into North Korea, according to a statement released by the Carter Center. "At the request of President Carter, and for humanitarian purposes, Mr. Gomes was granted amnesty by the Chairman of the National Defense Commission, Kim Jong-Il," the statement said. Carter's "private and humanitarian" mission was accomplished, but history has shown that trips by former U.S. presidents to free hostages are hardly ever entirely private and humanitarian.

Kim Jong-il is currently in China (read previous post) and has reportedly continued his tour without heading back home while Carter had reportedly extended his stay in Pyongyang apparently waiting to meet Kim. Some sources say Carter did not sit down with Kim Jong-il as widely expected. One way to interpret this phenonemon is that Kim intentionally did not meet, and never wanted to meet, Carter. If true, then why? Here are some possible scenarios (of course partly based on speculation):

1. Kim Jong-il may have wanted to send a clear message to  Washington: It will also play hardball. In other words, in the face of a tough U.S. that continues to harden its policy of containment toward Pyongyang with additonal sanctions, the regime wanted to snub the U.S. by ignoring a country's most senior-level visitor, a former president; or...

2. Kim Jong-il may have concluded that he would not be able to get the most out of playing the "Carter card" consdering Carter's role and status in relation to the Obama administration. He may have concluded that Carter is not, in reality, Obama's envoy; or...

3. He sees the current geopolitical dynamic as "U.S.-South Korea" vs. "China-North Korea."

If history serves as a lesson in explaining current events and forecasting the future, it may be safe to predict that the current state of tension between the U.S. and North Korea will continue for the time being. Carter's first trip to North Korea led to dialgoue between Washington and Pyongyang after meeting the late founder Kim Il-sung. It could be argued that dialogue is unforeseeable in the near future since Kim Jong-il did not meet Carter this time.

Read more

Jimmy Carter, Kim Jong-il, Gomes, Pyongyang, China (all tags)

North Korean leader Kim Jong-il is reportedly in China and there's speculation his son Kim Jong-un, heir apparent, is traveling with him. Kim Jong-il's China trips are usually confirmed after he returns to the North out of security reasons, but officials have reportedly said they detected signs of his movement. It is also his second visit to China in the same year, and his last one was in May.

Kim's reported trip coincides with that of former U.S. President Jimmy Carter's in Pyongyang (read previous post) to secure the release of an American missionary. Carter was widely expected to sit down with Kim, and it is unclear whether that meeting was held before Kim departed for China. IF Carter and Kim did not meet, then it may be because Kim felt a China trip to be much more urgent.

Why is Kim Jong-il in China? When analysing North Korea, it is always easy to speculate than offer concrete analysis based on confirmed facts because the regime is in a black box. Still, we can do some "brain exercises" and think of possible scenarios:

1. The most widely speculated reason: Perhaps to solidfy Beijing's recognition support for his youngest son Kim Jong-un as his successor since Kim's health is said to be fast deteriorating and ahead of a rare and crucial leadership meeting of the ruling Workers' Party. There has been much speculation that Kim may announce his successor at that meeting. Many experts have speculated they need China's seal of approval for his successor, but some experts argue that Pyongyang does not require Beijing's approval on how to run its internal affairs; or...

2. Kim Jong-il realized the flood crisis is more serious than expected and needs China's help; or...

3. He needs medical treatment in China because of he is said to be very ill; or...

4. He wanted to go down memory lane in China and pass down family stories to his son, heir-apparent Kim Jong-un, before passing away because of his ailing health. Kim visited the middle school his father and nation founder Kim Il-sung attended, which was something he reportedly wanted to do for years.

Read more

Kim Jong-il, China, surprise trip, successor, Kim Jong-un, Carter (all tags)

It was reported at the end of last month that China successfully shot down one of its redundant satellites in January.    Allegedly, the firing took place at nearly the same time as a successful Chinese missile interception test conducted on January 11.   Given the reaction to its 2007 launch, some observers have suggested that the recent launch may have been ordered as a means for Beijing to vent displeasure over recent Taiwanese efforts to buy the Patriot missile defense system from the U.S.  However, others claim that the time needed to prepare for such a launch makes this notion unlikely.  Either way, the news is further evidence of continuing Chinese efforts to boost their space based military capabilities, and given the outcry following the last test, has probably not been met with cheers from countries possessing satellite capabilities.

In context of this news, Beijing’s official position on space might come as a surprise to some:

“The Chinese government has all along regarded the space industry as an integral part of the state's comprehensive development strategy, and upheld that the exploration and utilization of outer space should be for peaceful purposes and benefit the whole of mankind.”

China’s official position is probably guided by the concerns over the prospect of space based missile defense systems which might one day render its relatively few numbers of ICBMs useless.  However, just as in 2007, China risks losing legitimacy in this regard when it destroys its own satellites....

Read more

China, satellite, Security Matters (all tags)

After setting the stage at the UN last week, the US and EU have followed through on their pledge to implement strong unilateral sanctions on Iran.  While decades of US sanctions have eliminated Iran’s reliance on the US market and rendered US sanctions essentially worthless, the implementation of stronger European sanctions is a significant step.

According to an official statement, the European measures include sanctions on “key sectors of the gas and oil industry with prohibition of new investment, technical assistance and transfers of technologies” and related equipment and services.  In addition, Iran's shipping and air cargo companies will be blacklisted and banned from operating in EU territory, and new visa bans and asset freezes will be imposed on Iran's Revolutionary Guard.  Officials say the new sanctions could come into force within weeks.

Prior to this move, the EU has not placed significant trade restrictions on Iran beyond existing UN sanctions.  As a result, the EU is one of Iran’s largest trading partners, along with China, and provides for more than 20 percent of Iran’s trade.  H/T to Max Bergmann here, who makes some great points on the Obama Administration’s containment strategy over at the Wonk Room. Bergmann points out that...

Read more

Iran Watch, Sanctions, Russia, China, EU, UN (all tags)

After a recent delay, the White House has expressed confidence that the UN Security Council will back Iran sanctions in the next week, despite controversy over Israel's Gaza flotilla raid.

While some have all but condemned UN sanctions to a slow and painful death, Robert Gibbs stated yesterday that, “I think the president and the team here remain confident that ... within the next week, we'll have a number that will pass that resolution.”

If a vote does not take place by June 21, as the White House expects, you can bet that Congress will be waiting in the wings to pass its own set of sanctions.

Just prior to the Memorial Day recess, Sen. Chris Dodd and Rep. Howard Berman announced their intention to hold off on Congressional Iran sanctions until the end of June:

With the progress in negotiations at the Security Council, we believe that our overriding goal of preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapons capability is best served by providing a limited amount of time for those efforts – and expected follow-on action by the EU at its mid-June summit – to reach a successful conclusion before we send our bill to the President.

Slowed progress will, no doubt, light a fire under those who disagreed with a delay in the first place.

Read more

Iran Watch, Sanctions, Congress, Flotilla, Israel, China, Russia, UN (all tags)

The United States remains the global leader in defense spending, surpassing the next closest country by more than eight times.

In 2008, the most recent year for which complete global data is available, the US approved $696.3 billion in defense budget authority (fiscal 2010 dollars). This figure includes funding for the Pentagon base budget, Department of Energy-administered nuclear weapons activities, and supplemental appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan.

This number is eight times more than Russia, 15 times more than Japan, 47 times more than Israel, and nearly 73 times more than Iran.

See the full analysis - and the pie chart - here.

Read more

Security Matters, Defense Spending, Gates, FY11, Global Defense Spending, Iran Watch, Russia, China (all tags)

In an effort to avoid Republican delay tactics, the Democratic majority has tended to skip over the whole conference process in recent years in favor of less formal means of reconciling House and Senate bills.  In fact, while the 103rd Congress went to conference a total of 62 times, the 110th went just 10.  So yesterday was a special occasion – Nearly five months into the year, the first conference committee of 2010 came together for – what else? – a discussion of sanctions on Iran.

“It’s been so long since I participated in a conference, I’m trying to remember how they work,” joked Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.  To that, House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank responded that the last time he and Dodd’s committees had met in conference, the Senate panel was chaired by Paul S. Sarbanes (House 1971-77, Senate 1977-2007).  

“Well I feel better,” Dodd replied.  “I thought you were going to tell me Alexander Hamilton.”  Har har.

All joking aside, as CQ Today so aptly put it in this morning’s edition, “Conference committee members spent more time trying to one-up one another’s tough talk on Iran than discussing the differences between the two bills.”

Rubber meets the road on only one issue: The State Department’s request for broad waver authority to exempt “cooperating countries” from corporate sanctions.  Some lawmakers chose to break from their biting language on Iran and vowed to fight against the main change that State wants the conference to make to the legislation.

Read more

Iran Watch, Sanctions, Congress, China, Russia (all tags)

Back in February I blogged about the ongoing delays surrounding the delivery of Russia’s S-300 PMU-1 air defense system to Iran.  At the time, Russia cited technical problems as being the cause of the delay whilst simultaneously promising Tehran that they would still honor the sale.  But according to a new story from Russian media outlet RIA Novosti, it seems that the Iranians are still no closer to getting their hands on the advanced air defense system.  This time the delay has been explained as being caused by ongoing ‘talks’, again with the Russian caveat that ‘contracts have been signed, and they are being implemented’.

Since the S-300 contract was signed in December 2005, it would seem that the only talks that could be delaying delivery are those not involving the Iranians.  As Richard Weitz recently pointed out, in light of the ongoing nuclear impasse, its likely that Israel and the U.S are exerting significant diplomatic pressure on Moscow to delay delivery for as long as possible.  Iran’s hope that ‘Russian officials [are not] swayed by political pressure from other countries’ reflects their frustration at what appears to be the continuing success of Israeli and American efforts.  But as Weitz suggests, these efforts ‘will matter little if China chooses to sell them its HQ-9 surface-to-air missile, which is characterized as "a not-so-bad Russian S-300 for less money."’  Which is where things get interesting…

Read more

s-300, russia, iran, air defense, china (all tags)

After months of negotiations, China has agreed to, er, negotiate.

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner announced on Wednesday that China would join the United States, Britain, Russia, France, and Germany for talks on a fourth round of U.N. sanctions against Iran.

"China will participate in a meeting tomorrow (Thursday) in New York,” said Kouchner, “Whether they will talk about the text, whether it's just to respect formalities, I don't know."

The U.S. and others are hoping to speed up an agreement by sending P5+1 ambassadors directly to the United Nations. In the past, political directors from the six countries have agreed on an outline before negotiations moved to the U.N. to hammer out the final text.

But the buck doesn’t stop there.

Once the six countries agree on a text, it must then be presented to the 10 non-permanent members of the Security Council for further negotiations. Several, including Brazil, Turkey and Lebanon, have already indicated their opposition to sanctions.

Further, both China and Russia have been historically difficult when negotiating Iran sanctions. Just yesterday, President Medvedev reportedly told President Obama in Prague that there remain limits to his country’s support:

“Let me put it straightforward,” Medvedev said, “I have outlined our limits for such sanctions, our understanding of these sanctions.”

China’s opposition has been loud and ongoing, but appears to be waning in recent weeks, and while China does ultimately hold veto power on the Security Council, many analysts agree that its opposition will result in a watered down resolution, rather than none at all.

Read more

Iran Watch, Sanctions, China, Russia (all tags)