Via One Free Korea comes the latest story of yet another group of rogue North Korean soldiers rampaging within China:
Wanted poster of North Korean soldier.
Two armed North Korean border patrol guards from Sinuiju in North Hamkyung Province reportedly escaped the country and crossed over into China’s Dandong on Tuesday, Daily NK has learned. Of the two, one was captured on Thursday by Chinese public security officials, while the other is still on the run, according to local sources.
Upon discovery of the incident, North Korea’s military authorities immediately alerted Chinese authorities in the border city of Dandong, leading to a large-scale manhunt on the same day and the plastering of posters featuring the soldiers’ images around heavily trafficked areas of Dandong. Going AWOL, particularly while armed, is considered an offense of great magnitude in both North Korea and China.
Three days into the search, one of the soldiers was arrested in a small rural village near Dandong. “A North Korean solider carrying a gun was apprehended in quiet village near Dandong Singu District,” a source based in the border city told Daily NK. “At the time, there were large numbers of public security officials and soldiers on the streets.”
He added, “The solider held a woman hostage shortly before he was captured, creating a standoff with security officials. But in the end he was subdued.” [Daily NK]
You can read the rest at the link, but One Free Korea has much more on how this is a sign of how the crackdown on the border to prevent guards from accepting bribes from defectors could be leading to these crime sprees within China.
This is another example of the rise of China where they are continuing to get nations to join AIIB which is a competitor to the western led World Bank:
South Korea on Thursday became the latest American ally to announce its intention to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank despite Washington’s qualms about the Chinese-led regional development bank.
The South Korean Ministry of Strategy and Finance said in a statement that Asia needed a new regional source of development money like the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank because the existing multilateral lenders, like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, could not meet the demand for infrastructure investment funds in the region.
The United States has expressed misgivings about the proposed regional lender, which it sees as a threat to the Washington-led World Bank. American officials have also worried that the new bank would lack governance and transparency in enforcing lending, environmental and labor standards.
But in its statement, the South Korean ministry said a founding membership in the regional bank would help expand the country’s influence in the international banking sector. It also said membership would help its companies win deals in large-scale construction, telecommunications, transportation and other development projects in the region.
“Our government, together with its allies, has been urging China to improve its plans for the bank so that its governing structure and safeguards will meet international standards,” the ministry said. “We have seen significant progress in that regard.” [New York Times via the Marmot’s Hole]
You can read the rest at the link, but this is also another example of how South Korea’s balances their relationship with China and the US. They prioritize economic issues with the Chinese and security issues with the US.
A ceremony is under way at Incheon International Airport on March 20, 2015, for the delivery of the remains of Chinese soldiers killed in the 1950-53 Korean War for repatriation to China. (Yonhap)
That is what the Hankyoreh is claiming that Chinese military planners are planning for:
China is ratcheting up the tenor of its opposition to the possible deployment of a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system on the Korean peninsula in the wake of a recent visit by Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Liu Jianchao. Meanwhile, South Korea and the US are responding on increasingly firm notes. After previously sending the cautious message that nothing had been decided or discussed, they are now bluntly insisting that Beijing keep out the matter. US Forces Korea also looks to be speeding up its preparations, delivering its first confirmation of recent surveys of THAAD candidate sites. It is still too early to tell what the specifics of Beijing’s response will be. But it appears unlikely to remain passive if the US deploys THAAD, a missile interception system, on the Korean Peninsula, as China sees it as a threat to key military security interests.
Beijing has yet to speak publicly about the specific reasons for its opposition. But its concern appears to be that the USFK system is a response to its own A2/AD strategy for preventing the introduction of US troops in the event of an emergency. A2/AD, which stands for “anti-access/area denial,” is a strategy for preventing US troops from accessing sites like Taiwan or the Senkaku Islands (called Diaoyu in China) under an emergency scenario (anti-access) and preventing effective mobile operations by US forces (area denial). As part of the strategy, China has reportedly developed and deployed the Dong-Feng 21 (DF-21) ballistic missile, new anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), and nuclear-power submarines and drafted scenarios for preventing US naval and air forces from reaching a second island chain (maritime defense line) and first island chain.
The focus of attention for many is the inclusion of both US bases in South Korea and Japan as targets for A2/AD strikes. China is also reportedly working on a strategy for potentially ambushing and knocking out Air Force bases in Osan, Gyeonggi Province and Gunsan, North Jeolla Province, which it fears could be used as scrambling bases for US aircrafts. China’s concern has long been that USFK bases could be used against it, rather than simply as deterrents against North Korea. Its fears were fanned after South Korea and the US reached a “strategic flexibility” agreement in Jan. 2006 that guaranteed free access to the peninsula for USFK. The move was an official signal that USFK was not just a fixture of the peninsula, but a force that could be deployed anywhere to suit US needs. [Hankyoreh]
You can read more at the link, but if China is planning to attack USFK bases in a Taiwan contingency it seems it would further justify why additional missile defense assets are needed on the peninsula, not less.
It looks like the Chinese just received a major diplomatic win with the United Kingdom deciding to join their Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) which will be a competitor to other international financial institutions such as the World Bank:
It is time for Washington to take a step back and regroup. Its Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) strategy, ill-considered from the get-go, has now taken a major hit with the announcement this past week by the United Kingdom that it plans to join the Chinese-led AIIB. Washington’s concerns over the AIIB are well-established: the competition the AIIB poses to pre-existing development institutions such as the World Bank and Asian Development Bank; concern over the potential for weak environmental standards and social safeguards within the AIIB; and the opportunity for China to use AIIB-financed infrastructure for greater leverage in the region. From all accounts, the Obama administration has expended serious energy trying to dissuade its allies from joining the bank at least until greater clarity is offered as to the decision-making structure of the institution. With the defection of the U.K., however, it appears likely that Washington’s carefully constructed coalition will gradually unravel—both Australia and South Korea are apparently reconsidering their earlier reluctance to join the bank and could well use the U.K.’s decision as political cover for deciding to join the bank.
At this point, therefore, Washington has three choices:
1) Continue to press its allies not to join the AIIB until governance procedures for the bank are assured;
2) Join the AIIB itself; or
3) Drop the issue.
You can read what option the author thinks the US should go with at the link.
I guess just the fact that all three foreign ministers are meeting is progress, but I don’t expect anything to become of it:
Ships assigned to Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, Indian navy, and U.S. Navy steam alongside Ticonderoga-class guided-missile destroyer USS Shiloh in the East China Sea on July 27, 2014. Abby Rader/U.S. Navy
For the first time in nearly three years, the foreign ministers of China, South Korea and Japan will meet Saturday for trilateral talks that could pave the way for a new era of cooperation – or prolong festering animosities rooted in the World War II era.
South Korean Foreign Minister Yun Byung-se will host his Chinese and Japanese counterparts, Wang Yi and Fumio Kishida, in Seoul for the discussions, which were last held in 2012.
The meeting is seen as a possible prelude to a three-way summit between leaders of the countries later this year. Chinese President Xi Jinping and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe met briefly on the sidelines of the APEC world leaders’ gathering in Beijing in November, but have never had a bilateral summit since they both came to power in 2012. Nor has Abe had a summit with South Korean President Park Geun-hye. Park and Xi, however, have met repeatedly, and warmly.
The 70th anniversary of the war’s end will be marked this summer in Asia with a variety of high-profile events, including a military parade in Beijing. Seven decades since Tokyo’s surrender, Japan, South Korea and China have strong economic ties, but deep strains remain, inhibiting collaboration on a range of matters including maritime issues and North Korea.
Frostiness between South Korea and Japan – both U.S. allies – and closer relations between South Korea and China have complicated Washington’s diplomacy in the region amid China’s continuing rise. [LA TImes]
Here is why it is not in the interest of China or South Korea to resolve these issues with Japan:
At the same time, leaders in China and South Korea often see an advantage to stirring up nationalist, anti-Japan sentiments at home as a way of shoring up political support. Blatant anti-Japanese propaganda appears regularly in state-run media in China, for instance. And conflicting claims to uninhabited islands have also marred relations between Tokyo, Beijing and Seoul.
Whether the three nations now have the will to break their cycle of recriminations and defensiveness remains to be seen. World leaders from German Chancellor Angela Merkel to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon have been urging all three countries in recent weeks to forge a new path.
To be fair members of the Japanese government also use the historical issues to push their own domestic agendas as well. Just visit the Yushukan Museum next to the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo and see the absurd historical revisionism going on there that many on the Japanese far political right support. If the Japanese government was serious about resolving these historical issues this is what I recommend they should do.
