As the Kim Jong-Un regime repeatedly tests missiles and threatens its neighbors, it comes as no surprise that three-quarters of Americans view North Korea as a “critical threat” to U.S. national security. The growing anxiety over the possibility of a global nuclear war has left politicians with a tough job of easing public concerns. Millions of Americans are pressuring their representatives and the Trump administration to find peaceful solutions, but one that is seldom mentioned is the U.S.-South Korean alliance. The alliance serves as a unique relationship due to South Korea’s geographical proximity to North Korea and the abundance of shared democratic values between the United States and South Korea. American presence on South Korean soil not only protects South Koreans from physical threats, but maintains American hegemony in wake of North Korean pressures. Yet another diplomatic asset that deserves more attention is the alliance between North Korea and China. Although China is not a vocal advocate of the Kim government, it supplies the country with military defense and basic necessities, such as energy and food, and has historically opposed more stringent international sanctions against North Korea. The partnership indirectly facilitates North Korea’s nuclear development, but simultaneously acts as a bargaining chip for China if North Korea were to step too far out of line.
The split of Korea in 1949 led the United States to develop diplomatic relations with the ROK (Republic of Korea/South Korea). Four years later, after North Korean troops invaded the South, the United States and South Korea signed a Mutual Defense Treaty that remains a critical piece of the U.S.-ROK alliance today. The main role of the United States as part of the treaty is to protect South Korea from any threats stemming from North Korean aggression. As a result, the treaty explicitly allows the United States to deploy troops or any form of militarization on South Korean soil. In fact, over 20,000 American military personnel are on duty in the country, making it the third-largest host of American troops. Additionally, the United States maintains wartime control over local military efforts, transferring command responsibility to American leaders over South Korean forces in the instance of war. Although the United States provides a great deal of financial assistance, the ROK contributes around $800 million annually to sustain 83 various military bases. The bases have been strategically located across the country, with the biggest, Camp Humphreys, situated right outside Seoul in Pyeongtaek. In fact, it is the single largest U.S. military base abroad, which will soon match the size of central Washington D.C. after renovations are complete.
One aspect of the partnership in particular has faced controversy and condemnation from a handful of other states. The deployment of antimissile defense systems in South Korea, initiated by the United States, has cultivated numerous economic dilemmas and provoked Chinese backlash. The Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, otherwise known as THAAD, has the ability to intercept and destroy short and medium-range ballistic missiles in midair to prevent a nuclear crisis. However, debate has ensued over which country will bear the bigger financial burden for its use. Uncertainty continues to surround the issue as President Trump insists the South Koreans pay the one billion dollar cost, while H.R. McMaster (U.S. National Security Adviser) indicates that the United States will cover the costs. China’s initial response to THAAD was less than desirable. With a heavier United States military presence in South Korea, China reacted with sanctions that quickly jeopardized the stability of the ROK economy. While China's stern response regarding THAAD has ameliorated somewhat with Moon Jae-in's assumption of the ROK Presidency, China has certainly maintained an economically coercive approach with the enforcement of an informal economic embargo against South Korea, which has continued to negatively affect the ROK economy.
Although both are mutual defense agreements, the China-DPRK relationship establishes a quite different tone in comparison to the U.S.-ROK alliance. The 1961 Mutual Defense Treaty between China and North Korea ensures joint defense efforts between the two nations in the case of an armed attack against either party. The document legally binds Beijing to “immediately render military and other assistance by all means at its disposal,” establishing a somewhat vague mandate. However, a key development regarding this treaty has been China’s decision to reinterpret the document’s provisions in 2010. China advised North Korea that any physical provocation against the ROK would not receive assistance from the Chinese military. Clearly, the recent modification of the treaty’s original framework by both parties comes as a consequence of North Korea's path to heightened nuclearization. At the same time, China does not intend to remain apathetic in response to intensified U.S. intervention near its borders. The United States is China’s paramount competitor in the Asia-Pacific, and China would not sacrifice its own status by siding with the United States against the DPRK. However, American presence in the region is not the sole dimension of the China-DPRK partnership. China currently supplies 95% of North Korea’s imports, including an overwhelming majority of its oil reserves. Chinese President Xi Jinping argues that completely turning its back on North Korea would ultimately lead to its collapse or the breakout of war, an extremely unfavorable situation for China. A key reason why a North Korean collapse would be problematic for Beijing stems from an almost inevitable refugee influx from the DPRK border. Additionally, a war in North Korea would require Chinese intervention, which is both a physical and financial resource drain on the country.
At the end of the day, the solutions world leaders and their constituencies are searching for pertain to curbing the North Korean threat while avoiding the large-scale use of force. The U.S.-ROK alliance presents two different outcomes, which are being strongly weighed against each other to determine the most strategic solution. On the one hand, augmented U.S. militarization closer to the North Korean border may heighten the Kim regime’s aggressive tendencies. Antithetical to this argument is the idea that the security blanket provided by the United States results in renewed confidence displayed by the ROK government and allows South Korea to utilize its leveraging powers. Despite the controversial nature of the mutual defense partnership, it offers the United States unique geographical and diplomatic advantages. Moreover, China is clearly the dominant power with regard to its relationship with the DPRK due to North Korea’s heavy reliance on its economic resources. Therefore, China’s actions have the potential to significantly influence the direction of Kim’s regime. The mutual defense treaties that exist in the Asia-Pacific region are rarely given the same attention as Trump’s rhetorical statements, but they are essential in facilitating progress to counter the emergent North Korean threat and provide greater stability to the Asia-Pacific region.