China Proposes 2 Koreas Hammer Out Peace Treaty

[Aepsilons]

@TaiShang @Shotgunner51 @Arryn @Kiss_of_the_Dragon --- Now this is what I'm talking about. Pragmatic, practical, comprehensive, holistic.

----------

China Proposes 2 Koreas Hammer Out Peace Treaty

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Thursday proposed that the two Koreas begin formal consultations to replace the truce on the peninsula with a peace treaty.

His proposal came at a press conference following talks with Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop in Beijing.

Wang said a peace treaty between the two Koreas would help resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis.

North and South Korea are still technically at war since the 1950-53 conflict ended in a ceasefire.

The North has repeatedly demanded a peace treaty, but the terms are unfeasible. "The peace treaty the North is talking about includes the withdrawal of U.S. troops, and the North Korean regime is seeking to prolong its lifespan by getting the U.S. to sign a bilateral treaty," a security official here said.

Wang's comments came as the international community discusses tougher sanctions against North Korea. A government official said, "China's sudden proposal for a peace treaty could take the focus away from the need for strengthened sanctions against the North."

The Foreign Ministry here stressed that North Korea must first demonstrate its resolve to give up its nuclear weapons. "Our position is that the issue of establishing a peace treaty can be discussed at a separate forum by relevant parties in accordance with progress in denuclearization," ministry spokesman Cho June-hyuck told reporters.

The Chosun Ilbo (English Edition): Daily News from Korea - China Proposes 2 Koreas Hammer Out Peace Treaty

 

[C130]

Hahaha a Peace Treaty with North Korea


good luck with that

you better hope your buddies have enough leverage to stop this fat piece of crap from nuking Seoul and Tokyo.


I don't trust the Norks and neither should you.

 

[TaiShang]

you better hope your buddies have enough leverage to stop this fat piece of crap from nuking Seoul and Tokyo.

From our vantage point, your leadership looks just like how you described the DPRK leader. Only difference is that your leaderships have proven time and again to be capable of being genocidal, from post 1st Iraq War sanctions on Iraq to the extra-judicial killings in Pakistan.

Apparently, feelings are mutual.

***

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Thursday proposed that the two Koreas begin formal consultations to replace the truce on the peninsula with a peace treaty.

In a way, China has taken the required step to prepare the Peninsula for the post-US setting.

Take out the US military factor which is capable of staging false flags and provocative acts, the region will be inclined to a peaceful solution even within the confines of a one country, two systems.

The North has repeatedly demanded a peace treaty, but the terms are unfeasible. "The peace treaty the North is talking about includes the withdrawal of U.S. troops, and the North Korean regime is seeking to prolong its lifespan by getting the U.S. to sign a bilateral treaty," a security official here said.

What is wrong with the desire to prolong the government. Is it because the US cares about the DPRK common folks? Pulling out the US regime military from the Peninsula will indeed facilitate peace talks with China, Japan, Russia as guarantors for both sides. That's better than the destructive and destabilizing presence of the US regime forces. After all, their presence only justifies an ever growing mistrust and arms-race.

Wang's comments came as the international community discusses tougher sanctions against North Korea. A government official said, "China's sudden proposal for a peace treaty could take the focus away from the need for strengthened sanctions against the North."

I am happy to know that, as opposed to how it looked a few days ago, China also held a position similar to that of Japan with respect to sanctions. China knows the destructive and destabilizing nature of sanctions and hence makes a proposal to do away with the US plan.

The Foreign Ministry here stressed that North Korea must first demonstrate its resolve to give up its nuclear weapons. "Our position is that the issue of establishing a peace treaty can be discussed at a separate forum by relevant parties in accordance with progress in denuclearization," ministry spokesman Cho June-hyuck told reporters.

Obviously, denuclearization needs to go hand in hand with the removal of the US contingency from the Peninsula to where they originally came from. Otherwise, deescalation is not possible and won't happen.

 

[Ewok6102]

The North has repeatedly demanded a peace treaty, but the terms are unfeasible. "The peace treaty the North is talking about includes the withdrawal of U.S. troops, and the North Korean regime is seeking to prolong its lifespan by getting the U.S. to sign a bilateral treaty," a security official here said.

Nihonjin san, all of us knows the cause for this tension. For some reason the culprit likes to think their military are there for 'all the good and noble' intentions the world can think of. But the facts and ground reality says otherwise. Just look at the displaced Indigenous Chagossian and what they are doing to Japan's Okinawan population.

 

[TaiShang]

China-ROK energy co-op may defuse peninsular risk
By Kim Sangsoon

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang (L) holds talks with South Korean President Park Geun-hye (R) in Seoul, capital of South Korea, Oct. 31, 2015. [Photo: Xinhua/Yao Dawei]


How can South Korea's "Eurasia Initiative" and China's "Belt and Road Initiative" mesh? If the two governments could reach a consensus, synergy will produce multiple effects in regard to Northeast Asian peace, common development and modernization.

New type of international public products

South Korean President Park Geun-hye proposed the "Eurasia Imitative" under various slogans of "one continent," "creative continent," and "peaceful continent," on Oct. 18, 2013 in a bid to strengthen cooperation across Eurasia. Park's proposals seek to expand transport, energy and trade networks and boost innovation-led growth while deepening personnel and cultural exchanges, and promote a trust-building process on the Korean Peninsula, and Northeast Asia peace and cooperation.

Meanwhile, on March 28, 2015, Chinese President Xi Jinping said his "Belt and Road Initiative" would meet the demand for development of China as well as countries along the proposed routes as it is in the interest of all parties and complies with the global trend for cooperation.

To finance "Belt and Road" development projects, China initiated the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which was formally launched in January.

The Six-Party Talks, which China has actively promoted for a peaceful resolution to security concerns as a result of the North Korean nuclear weapons program, will prove to be the inescapable mechanism to achieve results. China needs to participate more creatively in international affairs, but the key is how to provide more and effective strategic aid and public products - such as the "Belt and Road Initiative" and the AIIB - for the international community.

The "Belt and Road Initiative" focuses on "common modernization." It is based on the principles of "common consultation, common development, and common benefit," and is dependent on enhanced connectivity in international cooperation through the so-called new diplomacy

New stage for strategic co-op on the South Korea-China FTA

The ROK-China Free Trade Agreement (FTA) represents a milestone in economic cooperation between the two countries with expectations of multiple supply-side effects since both countries will reap the benefit in the macro-economy and in industries involved in the FTA.

This is the first FTA in Northeast Asia where the international division of labor is already working well, and is also a long-term vision of the "East Asian Economic Community."

Based on the ROK-China FTA, the two governments should enhance cooperation on agriculture, manufacturing and services based on a docking of the industrial, value, and supply chains, creating industrial clusters with a certain scale in which cooperation on R&D and patents will be carried out.

Mechanism for economic co-operation and energy exploration in NE Asia

The ROK has been striving for railway projects that connect the peninsula to Russia, China, Mongolia, and on into Central Asia and Europe. At the same time, Seoul has also been mulling undersea tunnels linking China and Japan and docked with the Bering Straits Tunnel still in the concept stage. Once completed, the Korean Peninsula would be a central part of the Europe-Asia-America railway chain.

Although Northeast Asia is known for big power confrontation that hinders establishment of a multilateral cooperation mechanism, the economy is common ground.

Seoul-Beijing relations keep warming up following South Korea's willingness to join the AIIB and President Park's participation in China's V-Day Parade on Sept. 3 last year. The "energy exploration and economic cooperation mechanism in Northeast Asia" is where the two governments could work together for continuous growth amid current difficulties.

To make it happen, the "Eurasia Initiative" needs to mesh with the "Belt and Road Initiative." Second, South Korea should invite Russia and Mongolia to join the quadrilateral cooperation of energy exploration and economic cooperation, before sending an invitation to North Korea.

The essence of this cooperative mechanism lies in that the energy exploration applies to a wide range of investment opportunities. This cooperation, economic in nature and detached from political influences, can get round the various big power contentions.

Purely economic cooperation offers a new driving mechanism for "common modernization" in Northeast Asia, starting from docking different development strategies. Connecting the "Eurasia Initiative" and the "Belt and Road Initiative" then becomes a typical development mode in the new normal and a model for others to follow.

Kim Sangsoon is a research fellow at the Charhar Institute.

The article was translated by Chen Boyuan. Its unabridged version was published in Chinese.

***

An interesting article @Nihonjin1051, which talk about Northeast Asian peace and cooperation. It should not be simply a coincidence that this sort of articles and public statements have increased in number ever since the new momentum is achieved in CJK FTA.

There is an undercurrent, my friend, as you pointed out before, that is slowly being constructed in the Northeast Asian geopolitical and economic space. I guess part of the reason is China growth which squeezes the US space in the region, opening up extra room for maneuver for its northeast Asian neighbors.

 

[somebozo]

North Korea is like a leech on China now and with China aspiring for global ambitions it needs least amount of conflict in its foreign policy at the same time needs to foster close ties with Japan and S.Korea..

So its time for N.Korea to wake up and normalize its relations while opening its market for reforms and real economy. N.Korea is the most embarrassing failed experiment of Communism and the world is no longer impressed.

 

[Aepsilons]

Obviously, denuclearization needs to go hand in hand with the removal of the US contingency from the Peninsula to where they originally came from. Otherwise, deescalation is not possible and won't happen.

Absolutely, in fact with advent of economic integration of Pyongyang to Beijing (what i mean is that when the barriers to full economic integration is removed; through a bilateral FTA) as well as economic integration of Pyongyang to Seoul (what i mean is that when the barriers are removed; through a bilateral FTA), then ultimately through a Pan-Korean-China multilateral FTA -- will serve as a conduit to eventual reforms in Pyongyang that will cultivate a spirit of Korean integrationism. I believe that such a framework that China has with South Korea in the recent promulgation of the SK-CN FTA will serve as the benchmark and landmark decision upon which further economic analysts in NEA will convene upon. In fact such recent decision consists as particular departure from the former derision-based analysis made by pro-Washington analysts in Tokyo.

The success of the CN-SK FTA was viewed upon with much consideration and in great elation amongst the leadership in Japanese politics throughout the political parties in Tokyo (LDP, Komeito, DPJ, JIP, IFO, KM, JCP et al). Honestly the reason for this is because Japanese leadership tends to view an observant position in terms of political systems processes and wanted to see the success of the CN-SK FTA as a measure to which policies that Tokyo can calculate upon. The FACT that CN-SK FTA has passed, and the FACT that Japan has yet to sign into law nor even fully agreed to the terms in TPP, means that there is a monolithic position Japan will place on equidistancing reliance on Washington - led trade pact for that of the Trilateral FTA mechanisms in East Asia. That we are students and analysts of International Relations leads us to understand that political maneuverings requires time and specific , minute developments actually are a tell tale sign of shifts. Japan will , eventually join the CN-SK FTA mechanism into the realization of the trilateral CN-SK-JP FTA. But what I think we shall consider , also, is the , with the integration of Pyongyang, CN-PANKOREAN-JP FTA.

Would that we know how Japan operates is through benevolent harmonization processes and never direct and totalitarian in foreign relations responses. The fact that Tokyo's Higher Levels agreed on this recent policy initiatve is symbolic of the underlying shift in thinking within Tokyo, and upon Greater Japan.

This is a , truly, paradigm shift in regards to Tokyo's perceptions of Washington - based foreign policy directives, which Tokyo has seen all too well may not be beneficial to Greater Japan.

------------

In olive branch to North Korea, Japan to let in women's soccer team despite sanctions | The Japan Times

 

[Jlaw]

It's a good gesture and could work provided the US want this to happen. I do not think they want this to happen.

 

[Aepsilons]

An interesting article @Nihonjin1051, which talk about Northeast Asian peace and cooperation. It should not be simply a coincidence that this sort of articles and public statements have increased in number ever since the new momentum is achieved in CJK FTA.

There is an undercurrent, my friend, as you pointed out before, that is slowly being constructed in the Northeast Asian geopolitical and economic space. I guess part of the reason is China growth which squeezes the US space in the region, opening up extra room for maneuver for its northeast Asian neighbors.

I am in a position that sees this calculation @TaiShang . It seems all too coincidental that after Seoul and Beijing signed their CN-SK FTA this past year , the North Korean threat was exacerbated by the west. I believe that recent publications of South Koreans claiming that Russia provided the launch vehicles were made under pressure and that --- Beijing , Moscow and Tokyo must understand that such comments made by junior foreign relations bureaucrats should be taken lightly. In light of the recent and growing Tokyo-Moscow entete-ism, the growing Seoul-Tokyo entente-ism, and the overarching Beijing-Seoul-Moscow-Tokyo Entente-ism, we should rest assured that we , regional partners in Northeast Asia, will find a way to minimize any threat perceptions by Pyongyang.

That we know Pyongyang is actually a struggling economy and open to economic integration and compromise indicates that a peaceful resolution is attainable. What is clear, @TaiShang , and as what you have noted to me in prior threads -- is that over-securitization and military-based processes to Pyongyang will not solve the situation, but merely induce and persecute Pyongyang even more.

I also believe that further sanctions on Pyongyang is antithetical to regional development. Afterall we have seen how lifting sanctions can do to regional cooperation and holistic development (i.e, the UNSC-R sanctions being lifted in 2015, led to greater development of Tehran-EU, Tehran-Beijing, Tehran-Tokyo, Tehran-Moscow relations, even Tehran-Washington relations). And have seen how sanctions can hurt regional security (ie, sanctions on Russia). By sanctioning an already economically depraved nation, North Korea, we will only further deepen animosity and erode bridge mechanisms set in place.

Thus i must say that Japan will implicitly depend and require China's proposal (in behalf of the region, to the United States) to resist more sanctioning actions on Pyongyang, and to take a more diplomatic approach; that is the formal peace treaty between Pyongyang and Seoul. Which, by the way, is a necessary step to realize a common and fundamental goal that both North and South Korean yearn for --- which is NATIONAL UNIFICATION vis-a-vis the landmark June 15th North South Joint Declaration, which states:

In accordance with the noble will of the entire people who yearn for the peaceful reunification of the nation, President Kim Dae-jung of the Republic of Korea and National Defense Commission Chairman Kim Jong-il of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea held a historic meeting and summit talks in Pyongyang from June 13 to 15, 2000.

The leaders of the South and the North, recognizing that the meeting and the summit talks were of great significance in promoting mutual understanding, developing South–North relations and realizing peaceful reunification, declared as follows:

1. The South and the North have agreed to resolve the question of reunification independently and through the joint efforts of the Korean people, who are the masters of the country.
2. For the achievement of reunification, we have agreed that there is a common element in the South's concept of a confederation and the North's formula for a loose form of federation. The South and the North agreed to promote reunification in that direction.
3. The South and the North have agreed to promptly resolve humanitarian issues such as exchange visits by separated family members and relatives on the occasion of the August 15 National Liberation Day and the question of unswerving Communists serving prison sentences in the South.
4. The South and the North have agreed to consolidate mutual trust by promoting balanced development of the national economy through economic cooperation and by stimulating cooperation and exchanges in civic, cultural, sports, health, environmental and all other fields.
5. The South and the North have agreed to hold a dialogue between relevant authorities in the near future to implement the above agreements expeditiously.

June 15th North–South Joint Declaration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​

This is why I believe that Tokyo, and Seoul, are implicitly resting on Beijing's ability to shoulder and take the preliminary alternative route to the one that Washington has chosen.

 

[TaiShang]

The success of the CN-SK FTA was viewed upon with much consideration and in great elation amongst the leadership in Japanese politics throughout the political parties in Tokyo (LDP, Komeito, DPJ, JIP, IFO, KM, JCP et al). Honestly the reason for this is because Japanese leadership tends to view an observant position in terms of political systems processes and wanted to see the success of the CN-SK FTA as a measure to which policies that Tokyo can calculate upon. The FACT that CN-SK FTA has passed, and the FACT that Japan has yet to sign into law nor even fully agreed to the terms in TPP, means that there is a monolithic position Japan will place on equidistancing reliance on Washington - led trade pact for that of the Trilateral FTA mechanisms in East Asia. That we are students and analysts of International Relations leads us to understand that political maneuverings requires time and specific , minute developments actually are a tell tale sign of shifts. Japan will , eventually join the CN-SK FTA mechanism into the realization of the trilateral CN-SK-JP FTA. But what I think we shall consider , also, is the , with the integration of Pyongyang, CN-PANKOREAN-JP FTA.

Tokyo's approach suggests a "wait and see" position. As CN-SK FTA moves on smoothly and is reflected positively on the bilateral trade figures, then, it will likely be warmer to the idea of a CJK FTA. As you pointed out, it appears that the success of CN-SK FTA also provides Japan with a stronger hand in TPP negotiation because there is a viable alternative that is no less promising. Apparently, TPP is not an obstacle for Japan to continue with CJK FTA, but, still, the terms and conditions of the TPP might force Japan to seriously reconsider full participation the TPP. And your point regarding considering CJK FTA with the DPRK as an integral part (as you formulated CN-PANKOREAN-JP FTA) is very original and must not be glossed over. Such an institutional economic framework will definitely facilitate greater inter-Korean dialogue with certain invisible institutional walls keeping outside actors away from derailing the progress. In any case, the Korean situation must be further economized while the hard/security aspects being sidelined. People (politicians) in our region need to for a second pretend there is no such thing as existential North Korean threat and stress economic development and integration. I think, change in the political discourse is important. With that, perception will slowly change. In the final analysis, the same threat perception (such the existence of nuclear weapons) can be rendered into a perception of security. Think about the Europeans -- how secure they feel because the US stores some nuclear warheads on their lands. A change of perception would easily render this an existential threat.

Would that we know how Japan operates is through benevolent harmonization processes and never direct and totalitarian in foreign relations responses. The fact that Tokyo's Higher Levels agreed on this recent policy initiatve is symbolic of the underlying shift in thinking within Tokyo, and upon Greater Japan.

This is a , truly, paradigm shift in regards to Tokyo's perceptions of Washington - based foreign policy directives, which Tokyo has seen all too well may not be beneficial to Greater Japan.

I am personally optimistic about Japan's further steps toward normalization with respect to the shift in its foreign policy formulations -- the more the US is sidelined from Japan's immediate regional calculations, the larger the room for maneuver will become for Tokyo. I guess, the effects will be huge on the Japan's decision makers' perception -- I had a nose operation with certain medical device remaining fixed on my nose for a whole month, making me unable to breathe through nose. Then, when the surgeon finally took the apparatus away, the first breath felt like I was standing atop the Himalayas.

Perhaps an extreme analogy, but, I believe distancing from the decades old Washington chokehold will create/or perhaps is already creating a similar feeling of freedom and limitlessness of possibilities.

We should think about it: Just a little distancing enabled Japan to talk to Russia. A little bit more distancing will enable Japan to strike a CJK FTA deal.

It seems all too coincidental that after Seoul and Beijing signed their CN-SK FTA this past year , the North Korean threat was exacerbated by the west. I believe that recent publications of South Koreans claiming that Russia provided the launch vehicles were made under pressure and that --- Beijing , Moscow and Tokyo must understand that such comments made by junior foreign relations bureaucrats should be taken lightly. In light of the recent and growing Tokyo-Moscow entete-ism, the growing Seoul-Tokyo entente-ism, and the overarching Beijing-Seoul-Moscow-Tokyo Entente-ism, we should rest assured that we , regional partners in Northeast Asia, will find a way to minimize any threat perceptions by Pyongyang.

This is why I believe that Tokyo, and Seoul, are implicitly resting on Beijing's ability to shoulder and take the preliminary alternative route to the one that Washington has chosen.

This also explains the moves by Japan and then China to revert from early strong statements to more calculated statements, urging to abstain from unilateral action on the DPRK and stressing the importance of economic interaction. Obviously, the state is not a monolithic entity; hence, it is understandable that various (often conflicting) voices might be heard because different groups might have conflicting interests. NEA actors at the higher offices must be very careful in their words and actions, however. In this case, China's job appears to be a tough one; balancing and harmonizing relations with the DPRK and South Korean partners, especially, as you pointed out, in the wake of the CN-SK FTA. The US pressure will increase, I believe.

Japan, Korea, and increasingly China, are economically very capable nations. This is a unique developmentalist capacity. Interestingly, no other politically-historically defined region enjoys such a privilege. NEA is unique in terms of ots capacity to promote development through financing, infrastructure build-up and logistics. Why not use this advantage to deal with the (seemingly) the most urgent regional crisis in the Korean Peninsula? Why not develop an economized discourse to replace US' securitized discourse in our immediate region? Why not capitalize on our strength and advantages but pursue a US-led discourse that is, essentially, socially and culturally foreign to us, and not our best strength? (Hard) securitization gives the US upper hand at the cost of our own indigenous advantages.