Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

english.yonhapnews.co.kr

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 127 posts

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#111

Post by stouset »

thevardanian wrote: post #61
gumby wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. I don't see why you say this. I wouldn't say they are especially competent, but they seem to have stayed in existence and played off various larger rivals successfully for 70 odd years.

Put another way. They're not going to play ball. Things cannot be solved diplomatically. Unless you call breaking all diplomatic promises, and developing nukes diplomacy. A rational actor is a nation that is predictable, and is willing to uphold their word, and agreements. If promises are broken, agreements torn a part I don't think that state is a "rational" actor.

You’re redefining the term “rational” to mean “honorable”. A rational actor is someone who acts in their own self-interest.

North Korea acting unpredictably and dishonestly has little inherently to do with the rationality of those actions, and there are strong arguments to be made that those actions are rational from the perspective of the North Korean ruling class.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#112

Post by newsmania »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #73
thevardanian wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

No they’re not. The only reason they are still there is because China wants them there. And they are being very dumb by making China angry.

Secondly treating your people like dirt is also a very bad idea. Singapore remains a monarchy while not being anything like NK. The man drives his country into the dirt for bombs when they are completely unnecessary. He could either a) treat his people better then wouldn’t need bombs, or b) keep China happy and still wouldn’t need bombs.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#113

Post by devdoomari »

sangnoir wrote: post #109
devdoomari wrote: post #40

I've been wary about the Chinese gov's honesty after the economic reparations after THAAD deployment in Korea. (NK made nukes, so US deployed THAAD to defend against NK nukes, and PRC gov. got angry for some defense-only 'weapon') Moreover, the Chinese gov. has been sending NK refugees back to NK, even though it knows those people won't end well. But anyway, +1 for Chinese gov. on this stance - I guess this might be…

> NK nukes, and PRC gov. got angry for some defense-only 'weapon' This "defense-only" weapon upsets the decade-old nuclear balance of M.A.D. because the THAAD radar is sensitivity and location weaken China's nuclear retaliatory ability.

then the Chinese gov. should have forced NK to give up its nukes in the first place. It can, but didn't, so US and Korea have the reason to deploy THAAD.

Chinese gov. should explain why it let NK have nukes before blaming 'power balance'

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#114

Post by acjohnson55 »

vorg wrote: post #57
Clubber wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Perhaps China wants to annex NK. This makes sense. NK is valuable to China as a buffer from Western countries. I'm surprised by this announcement simply because from that strategic perspective, it hurts China. If they plan on annexing, that makes more sense. If they do, I'm sure we won't do much to stop them. We'll complain (us Westerners) but when the rubber meets the road, China is a better holder of that territor…

>Perhaps China wants to annex NK If China was considering this type of thing, it would be a split of NK territory between itself and South Korea. China would be holding secret talks with South Korea about militarily assisting them to reunite with the North, in return for China getting some of North Korea's territory. After the initial show of strength, China would offer top NK leaders and military officers lifelong r…

Why would the US care? At this point, the situation is an anchor around our neck. Talks behind our backs are unlikely to happen due to SK's deep distrust of China, whose fault it is that Korean war ended in stalemate (after US intervention), as well as SK's deep military integration with the US.

The Kim dynasty has shown zero inclination to give up power, which would make such a concept a nonstarter. If DPRK could be solved by all parties other than the Kim regime (say, by decapitation of the regime and containment of the resultant chaos), it would be a done deal. Everyone's been hoping the regime would collapse before becoming a credible nuclear threat, but that hasn't happened and the temperature keeps rising.

I think we ultimately will live to see this play out. I have to assume it's being negotiated even now, because it will be require unprecedented coordination to defuse NK without massive civilian deaths in Seoul or a refugee crisis in Manchuria.

As far as I know, China does not want NK territory. The last thing they need is an extremely insular ethnic group to integrate. They want containment of NK and less US presence in Asia. They also want Taiwan, but I think a much diminished US presence on the peninsula would be more than enough for them.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#115

Post by acjohnson55 »

tooltalk wrote: post #42
thevardanian wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

I second oh_sigh's view on this matter. As FP notes, http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/04/26/kim-jong-un-is-a-survivo... , they are doing what they doing to survive. annex what? I don't think China's interested in maintaining a peaceful region, as much as they are scared of losing control of their country and desperately trying to keep their country in one piece, having witnessed the fall outs from the collapse of the So…

China is very interested in a peaceful region. They have demonstrated very little interest in belligerence outside their claimed territory and a great deal of interest in stable export markets that give them trade advantages.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#116

Post by acjohnson55 »

crdoconnor wrote: post #56
thevardanian wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

>What else is their development of nuclear arms about? It dates back quite a long time. Development started as a response to the US putting nuclear artillery on the border with North Korea in 1958 and pointing it directly at Pyongyang. >What else is their development of nuclear arms about? NK is a signatory of the NPT. They withdrew from the NPT in the run up to the totally provoked and necessary invasion of Iraq. Ar…

They already have parity, because they hold Seoul hostage with conventional weapons. Otherwise, there'd be no problem to talk about. But they also have every reason to seek more leverage.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#117

Post by rasz »

adanto6840 wrote: post #19
bgun wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about the economy at large, but this will certainly be more than an inconvenience to many of the Kim family's wealthy and influential friends.

This is borderline off-topic, maybe a bit naive even, but I can't help but ask as I'm genuinely curious and don't know. What do the 'wealthy' look like in NK? Is there an upper class of non-relatives and, if so, via what means -- government ties (business or personal)? What do they do on a daily basis, for work, fun, etc? It just seems to isolated, and perhaps that's my internet adoration speaking -- but is there a c…

In East Bloc under Russian occupation the privileged class (party officials, high ranking bureaucrats, top of military command, security service/interior ministry, government run company directors etc) had access to special chain of shops full of western goods with special prices, additionally they were rewarded with cars/flats/homes/summer cabins at substantial discounts, automatically skipped all queues/lists/quotas, used special government owned hospitals/hotels/resorts for free, not to mention had get out of jail unless you murder someone important card, the list goes on and on.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#118

Post by chickenfries »

krapp wrote: post #110
chickenfries wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They always were belligerant, untrustworthy, lying bullies. And US policy towards Korea has been something else?

South Korea seems to be doing just fine, and the US seems to be honest about the contempt with which it views the North Korean regime, so I don't really see the purpose of the equivocation you're trying to set, here.

I'm not trying to equivocate I'm trying to point out the a-historicism of throwing our hands in the air and saying "well I guess there's just no reasoning with them!"

The reason our diplomatic options are so poor now is because we have constantly failed to deliver our end of the bargain when it comes to nonproliferation in North Korea, see the Agreed Framework. Saying that they're "just crazy bullies" has always been a stupid over simplification that gets us nowhere closer to not blowing each other up.

> and the US seems to be honest about the contempt with which it views the North Korean regime

And DPRK is not? What are you even talking about? The DPRK literally uses inflammatory rhetoric about the USA all the time.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#119

Post by cryptonector »

newsmania wrote: post #112
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

No they’re not. The only reason they are still there is because China wants them there. And they are being very dumb by making China angry. Secondly treating your people like dirt is also a very bad idea. Singapore remains a monarchy while not being anything like NK. The man drives his country into the dirt for bombs when they are completely unnecessary. He could either a) treat his people better then wouldn’t need b…

China isn't angry at NK for building nukes. They're angry because now they have to be given that the U.S. wants them to be "or else". I'm not sure that the "or else" is real, but China has a lot to lose, while NK only has Kim to lose, so I expect China will continue attempting to appear angry at NK.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#120

Post by cryptonector »

smsm42 wrote: post #81
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

It looks like currently their estimation is that the West is too weak to oppose them and by taking a bellicose stance they can extract concessions, payments and other benefits. This is basically a blackmail/hostage situation.

They haven't been wrong about that in the past...
Post reply on HN