The
Russia-China Plan For North Korea
Moscow
has been busy building agreements that would extend Eurasian
connectivity eastward. The question is how to convince the DPRK to
play along
By
Pepe Escobar
September
15, 2017 "Information Clearing House" - The United Nations
Security Council’s 15-0 vote to impose a new set of sanctions on
North Korea somewhat disguises the critical role played by the
Russia-China strategic partnership, the “RC” at the core of the
BRICS group.
The
new sanctions are pretty harsh. They include a 30% reduction on crude
and refined oil exports to the DPRK; a ban on exports of natural gas;
a ban on all North Korean textile exports (which have brought in
US$760 million on average over the past three years); and a worldwide
ban on new work permits for DPRK citizens (there are over 90,000
currently working abroad.)
But
this is far from what US President Donald Trump’s administration
was aiming at, according to the draft Security Council resolution
leaked last week. That included an asset freeze and travel ban on Kim
Jong-un and other designated DPRK officials, and covered additional
“WMD-related items,” Iraqi sanctions-style. It also authorized UN
member states to interdict and inspect North Korean vessels in
international waters (which amounts to a declaration of war); and,
last but not least, a total oil embargo.
“RC”
made it clear it would veto the resolution under these terms. Russian
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told the US’ diminishing Secretary
of State Rex Tillerson Moscow would only accept language related to
“political and diplomatic tools to seek peaceful ways of
resolution.” On the oil embargo, President Vladimir Putin said,
“cutting off the oil supply to North Korea may harm people in
hospitals or other ordinary citizens.”
“RC”
priorities are clear: “stability” in Pyongyang; no regime change;
no drastic alteration of the geopolitical chessboard; no massive
refugee crisis.
That
does not preclude Beijing from applying pressure on Pyongyang. Branch
offices of the Bank of China, China Construction Bank and
Agricultural Bank of China in the northeastern border city of Yanji
have banned DPRK citizens from opening new accounts. Current accounts
are not frozen yet, but deposits and remittances have been suspended.
To
get to the heart of the matter, though, we need to examine what
happened last week at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok –
which happens to be only a little over 300 km away from the DPRK’s
Punggye-ri missile test site.
It’s
all about the Trans-Korean Railway
In
sharp contrast to the Trump administration and the Beltway’s
bellicose rhetoric, what “RC” proposes are essentially 5+1 talks
(North Korea, China, Russia, Japan and South Korea, plus the US) on
neutral territory, as confirmed by Russian diplomats. In Vladivostok,
Putin went out of his way to defuse military hysteria and warn that
stepping beyond sanctions would be an “invitation to the
graveyard.” Instead, he proposed business deals.
Geo-economics
complements geo-politics. Moscow has also approached Tokyo with the
idea of building a bridge between the nations. That would physically
link Japan to Eurasia – and the vast trade and investment carousel
offered by the New Silk Roads, aka, the Belt and Road Initiative
(BRI) and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU). It would also complement
the daring plan to link a Trans-Korean
Railway to the Trans-Siberian one.
Seoul
wants a rail network that will physically connect it with the vast
Eurasian land bridge, which makes perfect business sense for the
fifth largest export economy in the world. Handicapped by North
Korea’s isolation, South Korea is in effect cut off from Eurasia by
land. The answer is the Trans-Korean Railway.
Moscow
is very much for it, with Putin noting how “we could
deliver
Russian pipeline gas to Korea and integrate the power lines and
railway systems of Russia, the Republic of Korea and North Korea. The
implementation of these initiatives will be not only economically
beneficial, but will also help build up trust and stability on the
Korean Peninsula.”
Moscow’s
strategy, like Beijing’s, is connectivity: the only way to
integrate Pyongyang is to keep it involved in economic cooperation
via the Trans-Korean-Trans-Siberian connection, pipelines and the
development of North Korean ports.
The
DPRK’s delegation in Vladivostok seemed to agree. But not yet.
According to North Korea’s Minister for External Economic Affairs,
Kim Yong Jae: “We are not opposed to the trilateral cooperation
[with Russia and South Korea], but this is not an appropriate
situation for this to be implemented.” That implies that for the
DPRK the priority is the 5+1 negotiation table.
Still,
the crucial point is that both Seoul and Pyongyang went to
Vladivostok, and talked to Moscow. Arguably the key question – the
armistice that did not end the Korean War – has to be broached by
Putin and the Koreans, without the Americans.
While
the sanctions game ebb and flows, the larger strategy of “RC” is
clear – a drive aimed at Eurasian connectivity. The question is how
to convince the DPRK to play along.
Largely
unreported by Western corporate media, what happened in Vladivostok
is really ground-breaking. Moscow and Seoul agreed on a trilateral
trade platform, crucially involving Pyongyang, to ultimately invest
in connectivity between the whole Korean peninsula and the Russian
Far East.
South
Korean Prime Minister Moon Jae-in proposed to Moscow to build no less
than “nine bridges” of cooperation: “Nine bridges mean the
bridges of gas, railways, the Northern Sea Route, shipbuilding, the
creation of working groups, agriculture and other types of
cooperation.”
Crucially,
Moon added that the trilateral cooperation would aim at joint
projects in the Russian Far East. He knows that “the development of
that area will promote the prosperity of our two countries and will
also help change North Korea and create the basis for the
implementation of the trilateral agreements.”
Adding to the entente, Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Kono and South Korean Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha both stressed “strategic cooperation” with “RC”.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.