Body
Yesterday, we offered brief comment on Kerry’s Korea visit; here we repeat the exercise with respect to the China leg of the trip.
Kerry’s visit included meetings with Xi Jinping, Premier Li Keqiang, State Councilor Yang Jiechi and Foreign Minister Wang Yi. In his press conference in Beijing, Kerry led with North Korea. He sounded almost ebullient about China’s response to his entreaties on the DPRK. “I’m pleased that at every level in all of our conversations today, China could not have more forcefully reiterated its commitment to that goal, its interests in achieving that goal, and its concerns about the risks of not achieving that goal.” Kerry repeated his ask in Seoul that Beijing use “every tool at their disposal” to move the process forward.
As with Secretary Kerry’s observations on other issues—including the South China Sea—the press naturally wanted to know what, if any, concrete commitments had been made. Even on this more specific question, Kerry sounded upbeat. He claimed that “if the North doesn’t comply and come to the table and be serious about talks and stop its program and live up to an agreed-upon set of standards with respect to the current activities that are threatening the people, that they’re prepared to take additional steps in order to make sure that their policy is implemented.” He demurred on what these “additional steps” might be, but said that both sides had put concrete suggestions on the table.
Xinhua's coverage of Kerry's talks with his counterpart Wang Yi tells a subtly different story. While reiterating China’s commitment to denuclearization, Xinhua leads with the fact that China will never permit instability on the peninsula—in which it has “major interests and concerns”—and that the way forward is through dialogue, meaning that the US should relax its preconditions for a resumption of the Six Party Talks.
The International Crisis Group report from December, “Fire on the City Gate: Why China Keeps North Korea Close,” restates the more cautious received wisdom on where China stands in its usually careful and well-documented way. Yes, China is piqued, and yes, they have taken some marginal steps directly in line with prior UNSC resolutions, which are delimited largely to WMD-related trade. But Beijing has resisted US calls to “deliver” North Korea in the absence of some give from the US as well. Remember Sunnyland? It didn’t take more than a month for Stephanie Klein-Ahlbrandt (at 38North) to walk us through the bursting of expectations on North Korea coming out of the summit.
The one piece of good news that emerged after Kerry’s Seoul leg is that despite the exercises, the family reunions will go ahead as scheduled; the Foreign Ministry spokeswoman had her own ebullient moment, saying that the agreement added “festivity” to Lantern Day. It is possible that North Korea’s current behavior is a result of Chinese pressure we are not seeing directly. And it is possible that Beijing might present developments on the peninsula as a kind of deliverable. A Chinese delegation that quietly headed out to Pyongyang a few days ago could be carrying some messages, in addition to assessing the post-Jang landscape. But our guess is that Kerry’s remarks have to be read more as nudges rather than as an assessment of where we actually are. As always with North Korea, it's "wait and see."
