Renowned commentator Zheng Zhen has recently provided an in-depth analysis on the state of play within the China-Russia-North Korea triad, sparked by the recent high-level visit from China to Pyongyang. This analysis offers a fresh perspective on the evolving dynamics among these three nations and the emergence of unpredictable factors within their relationships.
This year marked the 70th anniversary of the Korean War armistice, a significant event that brought both Chinese and Russian delegations to North Korea. While this visit served to put on a show of unity among the three nations, Zheng suggests there’s much more to read between the lines. He argues that, unlike the standard alliance model such as the U.S.-Japan-South Korea relationship, where the U.S. is the clearly defined leader, the China-Russia-North Korea relationship is far more complex.
The tripartite relationship is characterized by a lack of dominant leadership and distinct bilateral emphasis. Each pairing – China-North Korea, China-Russia, and Russia-North Korea – holds its own distinct set of priorities and focus, which makes any unified action difficult. This complexity contrasts starkly with the simplicity of alliances like the U.S.-Japan-South Korea, where the United States is the definitive center of gravity.
Zheng illustrates this point by drawing attention to the separate diplomatic threads that were followed during the visit. Despite the public appearances that featured representatives from all three countries, there were clearly two distinct lines of interactions: China-North Korea and Russia-North Korea. This suggests that there may be separate diplomatic undertakings at play between these nations, under the guise of unity.
Delving further into the diplomatic nuances, Zheng highlights how North Korean leader Kim Jong-un seemed to give more attention to Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu over the Chinese delegation. Kim had four separate meetings with the Russian delegation compared to just one with the Chinese delegation, a divergence that underscores the shifting dynamics within this geopolitical triad.
Going beyond the surface-level display of unity among the three nations, Zheng interprets the commemoration of the armistice as a significant breakthrough in the Russo-North Korean military relations. He perceives Kim Jong-un’s special attention to the Russian delegation as an indicator of a deepening military bond between Russia and North Korea, adding a layer of complexity to China’s diplomatic endeavors within this triad.
Zheng’s analysis indicates a need for China to carefully navigate this intricate relationship. As a rising global power with a complex relationship with the U.S, China’s stance on various issues diverges from Russia and North Korea. As Russia and North Korea seek China’s support in their dealings with the U.S., there is an independent trend in Russia-North Korea cooperation, which is outside China’s control.
In Zheng’s view, China needs to recognize this reality and maintain its principles, creating a delicate balancing act in this complex geopolitical landscape. China must strive to avoid unnecessary alignments, mitigating potential diplomatic challenges that could arise from the unpredictability of the Russia-North Korea relationship. This analysis serves as a poignant reminder of the shifting sands of geopolitical relationships, and the nuanced strategies required to navigate them.