Is China’s ‘Frontline State Strategy’ going out of Control or North Korea Crazy? Affected Countries struggle to Resolve Crisis

Is China’s ‘Frontline State Strategy’ going out of Control or North Korea Crazy? Affected Countries struggle to Resolve Crisis

Author: Major General Ashanta about the potential role of India in the ongoing Northkorean crisis and how the conflict could be resolved. General Ashanta is leading member of the staff of the United Services Institute (USI). USI, the  Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses (IDSA) and the Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS) are the three most premier defense and security think tanks in India. IDSA is funded by Ministry of Defense and CLAWS is under the administrative control of the Indian Army. An excellent article, also the question: What is the way out and India´s potential role. Interesting to see in this context that Xi Jinping called Angela Merkel and asked the EU to be a neutral, non-hemispheric intermediator. However: Merkel is engaged in the German elections, the Brexit, the coming crisis due to the independence referendum in Catalonia/Spain , the reform of the EU and may be too busy that she could shoulder the Northkorean crisis.General Ashanta quotes US Pacific commander Harris that India could play an important role in this conflict. However, General Ashanta wants to persuade China that its frontlinestate strategies in Northkorea are as desperate as in the case of Pakistan.India should promote a dual track diplomacy which restarts the 6 party talks and should concentrate on a moratorium about Northkorea´s nuclear programme.  The Indian point of view also addresses the interconnectivity between proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Northkorea, Pakistan and the Kashmir crisis– perceived as China´s frontline state strategy which only leads to confrontation and destabilization in Asia.Therefore the Indian point of view wants to convince the Chinese to give up its frontlinestate strategy in Pakistan via the Northkorean example. Therefore the question is if India can play a intermediator role as it would prefer its regional antagonisms with Pakistan. On the other side, India´s interest that China is weakening its ties to Northkorea and Pakistan could also be a contribution for the stability of Asia. However, the question is if Trump is really  interested in multilateralism, intermediators or prefers a two-men-show with personal relations between him and Kim Yongun as he cancelled multilateral trade agreements, the Paris clima treaty and wants to cancel the multilateral Iran deal. He already said that Merkel had a German position on the Northkorean conflict and that he had the American position on it and that the Germans shouldn´t interfere. Therefore the question is if Trump is interested in an Indian role in this affair as his US Pacific commander is.Here the article:


The Frontline State Strategy of China

When President Trump on taking over tried to outsource the problem of resolving North Korean Crisis to China presumably in exchange of some trade concessions, his administration overlooked the fact that China was part of the problem. The disappointment which his Administration suffered and expressed later was an expected outcome. The Chinese Strategy of  North Korea being used as a ‘Frontline State’ against US and its ally South Korea, dates back to Korean War of 1953, when China entered the War with an aim to avoid US/South Korea to be its neighbour, as a permanent continental military threat. This deep rooted strategy continued helping North Korea a militarily strong nuclear state with autocratic regime, making it a major global threat. The strategy is still applicable to the same extent, with China’s overt and covert support to North Korea involved in nuclear and missile test misadventures, growing strong enough to pose a threat to its greatest competitors. This strategy now seems to become a liability with North Korea irresponsible actions post UN sanctions, and Beijing’s announcement that ‘If North Korea invades another country, China will not defend them’.

In fact China has adopted this successful ‘Frontline State Strategy’ to Pakistan in a different, modified form by getting warm water connectivity to gulf with port facility. They have been able to buy over the strategic choices of Pakistan, by potentially getting them into long term debt trap. In this case also China reaps the fruits of Pakistan’s Kashmir fascination and keeping its regional competitor (India) engaged by ongoing export of terror by Pakistan, by continuously ignoring it. The worldwide criticism of Pakistan’s role in harboring terrorists, and China’s criticism of supporting an irresponsible regime sponsoring it  has led to actions like condemning some Pakistan based terror groups in BRICS Summit, as a midcourse correction. The risk of propping up a semi autocratic power (Pakistan being a sham democracy, with autocratic power of Pakistan Army) having nuclear power is marred with uncontrollable risks, slightly similar to its Frontline State North Korea.    

Current State of North Korean Crisis

On 11 September, 2017, the United Nations Security Council passed new resolution with fresh sanctions, considered toughest against North Korea so far to rein its nuclear weapons program.

Bottom of Form

  • Under these sanctions, the annual export of oil and fuel products to the country would be cut from about 8.5 million barrels to two million. Donald Trump sees UN sanctions as “Just a small step towards what is ultimately needed to rein in Pyongyang over its weapons programmes”.
  • The resolution came a week after Pyongyang conducted its sixth and largest nuclear test, having launched 13 ballistic missiles this year. North Korea claims to have tested an extremely powerful H-bomb.
  • Ahead of the UN Security Council meeting Pyongyang says that it would cause the US “the greatest pain and suffering it had ever gone through in its entire history”. Sanctions against North Korea have so far been ineffective to deter them.
  • China agreed to fully enforce the resolution after it was presumably watered-down. The US-drafted resolution initially called for an oil embargo on North Korea, an asset freeze and travel ban on its leader Kim Jong-un. But media reports said it had been toned down to win the support of China supported by Russia, both holding UN veto power.
  • Post sanctions, North Korean state agency threatens to use nuclear weapons to „sink“ Japan and reduce the USA to „ashes and darkness“ in retaliation against harsher UN sanctions.
  • On 15th September 17, North Korea fired an intermediate-range ballistic missile that flew over Hoakkaido, Japan before landing in the northern Pacific Ocean, which rattled Japan. North Korea firing of ballistic missiles into the sea over Japan certainly keeps South Korea and Japan on their toes, besides demonstrating its capability to strike Guam, signaling US.
  • US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson urged China and Russia to do more to rein in North Korea. He said „China and Russia must indicate their intolerance for these reckless missile launches by taking direct actions of their own.
  • China said it „opposes“ the test, but reiterated its call that „all parties“ should exercise restraint. 
  • The Security Council continues to condemn the highly provocative action of North Korea, with no effect. Pyongyang continues to defy sanctions. US also continues to give threatening statements like “If forced to defend  itself/allies, it will have no choice but destroy North Korea completely” (Presidents speech in UNGA on 19 September 19), and examine all options including military options to deal with it.
  • The situation on the Korean Peninsula continues to be complicated and sensitive enough to ignite a conflict.



Is the Logic of   North Korea to continue Nuclear Misadventure justified?


While North Korea justifies it, as a defensive, survival measures against US threat of their regime changes efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and other countries not having nuclear capabilities, and not following its dictate. The threat from US regional allies has also been given as an excuse. The Korean war is also an unforgettable historical event when US might was used against them.
The North Korean ambassador while speaking to an Indian News Channel WION on 21 June, 2017, had expressed their willingness to talk to US, but without preconditions. He also indicated their willingness for being open to the idea of moratorium and talking about it.

Washington Post in its article “These 5 things help make sense of North Korea’s nuclear tests and missile launch”had brought out  five basic reasons, as possible logic for nuclear misadventure by repeated nuclear tests in Southeast Asia. Basically it all amounts to Kim Jong-un trying to retain unhindered autocratic use power, and demonstrating his strength to his countrymen, keeping his ‘Nuclear program’, and ‘Hate America tag’  as a rallying point for his leadership, generating faith in him, and generating spirit of nationalism and anti-American sentiments. The alleged assassination of his brother in Malaysia is also being linked to a possibility of eliminating any future contender for power.

The recent threat of missile attack on Guam by North Korea (later called off), and renewal of missile attack by them on 15 September, 2017 over Japan, demonstrating its capability to attack Guam, indicate that North Korea is going well beyond the justification of its survival need. It is perhaps an effort by Kim Jong-un to just to save himself, his regime and his power, sacrificing regional peace and perhaps national interest of North Korea, with innocent people of the country getting deprived of their basic needs. Kim’s fantasy of seeking ‘Military Equilibrium with US’ seems to be driving him crazy.

Chinese Sanctions not Effective (Is North Korea a liability or it’s a Chinese Double game?)

The renewed missile test besides isolating Pyongyang has put China in Tight spot, for not putting enough pressure on them. Despite China’s announcement earlier to suspend all imports of coal from North Korea for the rest of the year, to deprive North Korea financially (Coal exports makes up about 35 percent of North Korea’s economy. 90 percent of its trade is with China which is based on coal export) is being viewed as ‘Too little and too late’ because it is also estimated that China’s trade with North Korea has increased tenfold over last 15 years. This indicates that North Korea prospered with China’s help to reach the current stage of being capable of creating a global crisis in line with its Frontline Strategy. North Korea is continuing with its nuclear misadventure, and despite China being party to UN Resolution is being looked upon to put more pressure on them, being their economic lifeline.

The continuation of nuclear adventure by North Korea means either China does not have enough leverage on North Korea, or China is deliberately not putting pressure on them, with a view to use them as front line state against influential US including South Korea. Now China as well as Russia are concerned about deployment of THAAD in South Korea, post visit by General Mattis, arguing that the system could be used to spy on Chinese missile flight tests. In my opinion China or Russia may not be keen to invite and support a nuclear war by North Korea, will be looking for a peaceful solution, but may not be in a position to address the insecurities of North Korea (especially their leader). China’s current domestic occupation may also not favor inviting such a trouble. How sincerely will China implement the UNSC resolution is anyone’s guess, but it will redefine its credibility, global image and its future dream of being a responsible world power.

Possible China’s Response In case North Korea attacks US or Vice Versa

If North Korea initiates a conflict, I do not visualize Chinese significant involvement except asking all parties to calm down, which it is doing even now. They have already made it clear that if North Korea invades another country, China will not defend them. The dilemma will be if US attacks North Korea, where I feel that China may give moral and material support to North Korea and not enter the war directly like 1950-53, because getting into a war in which there are almost no chances to win may risk Xi Jinping regime itself. The possible advantages are not worth the risk. Chinese psychological warfare machinery and propaganda will definitely become more active to deter US and its allies. This idea has also been adopted by North Korea, which continues to issue provocative statements on daily basis.  


 Is there a Role for India?

Admiral Harry Harris, commander of the US Pacific Command, feels that India could play some role in this crisisas he said “I think India’s voice is a loud voice, which people pay attention to. So, I think that India could help North Korea, perhaps, understand the seriousness by which the United States views that threat,”

While India had some historical, diplomatic and trade links with North Korea, and it entertained some space science students in the past, India has repeatedly raised its concerns against North Korea’s nuclear tests, and continues to do so. India’s has been raising issues about Pakistan having reportedly sold nuclear technology related documents to North Korea. If North Korean Technology develops further, a reverse flow to Pakistan may be a serious concern for India. North Korea has been more supportive towards Pakistan on Kashmir issue.

In this crisis India continues to condemn the North Korean missile tests, has been implementing the sanctions imposed against it by the US and has strapped its trade links ( which is even less than a billion USD) with North Korea early this year. While the expectations are welcomed, but Indian leverage in this crisis is very limited. In case all concerned parties feel appropriate there may be a future need of diplomatic link between India with North Korea, hence it should be kept intact.

What is the Way out of the Current Crisis?

As per New York Times (13 September,2017), North Korea has resumed work at its underground nuclear testing site, as the country vowed to keep expanding its nuclear arsenal despite the latest United Nations sanctions. Despite heavy sanctions, North Korea remains in defiant mode saying that it would “redouble the efforts to increase its strength to safeguard the country’s sovereignty and right to existence” and establish “practical equilibrium with the U.S.”  As per Sputnik News (11 September,2017) ‘Pyongyang appears to utilize the „Bluff and Bluster“ strategy. Create a geo-political crisis and request compromise from opposing forces, assuming they can be rewarded since other nations want to prevent war’.

Russian President Vladimir Putin refuses to recognize North Korea’s ‘nuclear status‘ on the grounds that Pyongyang „poses a security threat in Northeast Asia.“ He having gone along with UN sanctions, however on a pragmatic note has said that North Korea would choose to “eat grass” before giving up its nuclear programme, indicating that sanctions alone will not help. Some authors have gone to other extreme, talking of a third world war with North Korean crisis serving as a trigger. I do not subscribe to this fantasy that so many responsible matured nations can start fighting a war due to irresponsible actions of one country/leader.

Tough implementation of sanctions along with smart diplomacy involving all concerned parties, who have direct concerns in this crisis, is a more positive and hopeful way forward to diffuse the crisis. The Russian role is often underplayed but is significant in this crisis, as they are equally affected by THAAD, and were also a player in watering down the sanctions, besides the key players to include US, North Korea, China, South Korea and Japan. In my opinion a track 2 talks between six parties must commence immediately. While it is understandable that US will not like to talk directly with North Korea under pressure of their irresponsible actions or give in to their blackmailing, but someone on their behalf will have to convince the present regime of North Korea that the threat to their survival may not be the US strategic aim, so long they give up their nuclear misadventure. Conversely someone has to convince Kim that he can neither save himself or his regime if he continues with such provocative activities, despite China repeatedly advising US to tone down the threat. US expectations of North Korea totally giving up their nuclear arsenal is also “Too ambitious, too late”. China cannot be relied much for resolution due to their own interests as explained earlier.

The hopeful part is that through the conversation of its Ambassador to India, North Korea has conveyed their willingness to talk to US, but without preconditions, and being open to the idea of moratorium. This can be taken forward diplomatically, without giving an impression of US and other global players falling prey to North Korea’s „Bluff and Bluster“ strategy. Posturing of US for military action also needs to be on the card, but military action must be the last resort. I do not subscribe to the idea of $ 8 million humanitarian aid by South Korea to deserving people of North Korea, at a time when their own leader, who is responsible for their welfare is going around threatening other regional countries, showing no mercy towards their own people. Any softening up of any affected country will embolden North Korea for more irresponsible misadventures, and will not go well with US and affected allies.  The tendency of nuclear blackmailing either by North Korea or Pakistan must be arrested. The Trump administration continues to struggle for a viable solution, and statements like ‘Effective and Overwhelming response’ alone will not help. As of now it will have to be seen how US will respond in next few days.

Major General S B Asthana,SM,VSM

Chief Instructor

USI of India, New Delhi

(The views expressed are of the author and do not represent views of any organization.

The author is reachable on Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter and Google+ as Shashi Asthana, also on wordpress website Asthana Writes and USI website )



About the author: Indian General Asthana

Inline image

Highlights of Experience within India:

An Infantry General with 36 years of Defence experience at national and international level. Held various key appointments in Army and UN during military carrier. Awarded twice by President of India, and twice by UN.
Retired from active Army Service in 2014, presently the Chief Instructor of all Courses for military officers in United Service Institute of India.
Life member of various Think Tanks like Institute of Defence & Strategic Analysis, USI of India, Center for Land Warfare Studies. Has been interviewed by various National and International media channels in various appointments in India and abroad, including NewsX, Rajyasabha,Sputnik, Bloomberg, SCMP, Washington Post. Writing for Economic Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, and SCMP in different forms.

Currently on Board of Advisors in International Organisation of Educational Development (IOED), and Confederation of Educational Excellence (CEE).

Researches on International issues mainly China, has authored over 26 publications and 55 blogs, mostly on international issues. Delivering talks on strategic issues in various universities, and is external examiner for M Phil, with Panjab University, in institutes like Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi.

Doctoral researcher with JNU, holds two M Phil degrees with outstanding grade, PGDHRM and various management degrees.

Kommentare sind geschlossen.