North Korea: IAEA Vote Sheds Light on Russian, Chinese Global Maneuvering
Feb 13, 2003 stratfor.com

Summary

China and Russia both have expressed concern that the U.N. Security Council is not the best place to deal with the North Korean nuclear issue, despite a Feb. 12 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) vote to refer Pyongyang's noncompliance to the council. Yet despite their common position, Moscow abstained from the IAEA vote and Beijing approved the decision. The difference in approach reflects the two nations' broader geopolitical interests and emphasizes their different priorities and concerns.

Analysis

Russia and China both said Feb. 13 that the U.N. Security Council is not the best place to deal with the North Korean nuclear issue, instead encouraging direct talks between Washington and Pyongyang. The Russian Foreign Ministry called the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) decision to refer Pyongyang's noncompliance to the Council "premature and counterproductive," adding that Moscow would support efforts to establish a dialogue on the sidelines of a Security Council meeting. China's Foreign Ministry said the Security Council shouldn't be involved at this stage and called for a political settlement "by means of the two sides talking."

The commonality of Moscow and Beijing's positions appears in stark contrast to their actions a day earlier, when Beijing voted to support the IAEA decision and Moscow abstained. Their mutual opposition to Security Council interference, and their different voting positions, reflects the countries' broader geopolitical interests, and emphasizes their different priorities and concerns.

Neither China nor Russia supports Security Council intervention at this time, as the North Korean nuclear issue serves to keep Washington distracted and re-evaluating its true abilities to prosecute a war in Iraq and remain prepared for contingency plans in Korea. And neither Moscow nor Beijing wants to see Washington succeed in Iraq, though neither would be altogether adverse to watching the United States get bogged down or repelled in Iraq.

Yet China and Russia have very different priorities regarding their relations with Washington, Pyongyang and the rest of the world. Russia has taken a more vocal stand against the war in Iraq, publicly siding with France and Germany in opposing an early U.S.-led attack. China, while tacitly backing the Franco-German position, has remained more circumspect in its opposition. China sees its economic and political future more closely tied to the United States than Europe, while Moscow is placing its future in Europe.

More important, Russia remains a waning power, desperately trying to claw its way back up to its former status as a global -- or at least regional -- power. China, in contrast, is an ascending power, and stands a much greater chance than Russia of being the next global competitor with the United States -- economically, politically and militarily. The longer Beijing can hold off or at least weaken Washington's suspicions and preparations for this eventuality, the better prepared China can be to stand on its own.

But the Chinese have another, subtler reason for taking the seemingly contradictory position of supporting the IAEA hand-off of North Korea to the Security Council and calling on the council not to act. Beijing has made it clear it supported the IAEA vote because, under U.N. guidelines, that is what the IAEA needed to do. In other words, while Beijing doesn't support Security Council intervention, it strongly supports U.N. protocols.

Beijing is, in essence, making a commentary on the United Nations itself -- reiterating China's stance that the United Nations MUST remain the real and functional center of all international disputes. Like Beijing's support of, and even active lobbying for, the recent Security Council resolution on Iraq, China is trying to keep the United Nations at the center of global politics -- constraining Washington's ability to push its own agenda as the only viable international position.

The U.N. Security Council is unlikely to pass sanctions on North Korea; even the United States has said it will not press for such a resolution. Thus, neither Beijing nor Moscow had anything to lose in passing the IAEA vote, particularly as both nations hold veto power in the Security Council.

But while Russia was trying to regain some leverage in North Korea -- coincidentally on the same day a Russian envoy was presenting three horses to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il as a personal birthday gift from Russian President Vladimir Putin -- China already has a grip on North Korean relations.

And while China no longer wields the influence it once did in Pyongyang, it does constrain North Korea's actions, giving Pyongyang plenty of room to play but reeling it in before it oversteps its boundaries. For China, then, the key variable was re-emphasizing the importance of the United Nations, with the added bonus of ingratiating itself to the United States and positioning itself as a champion of the international system.

Related Headlines
War in Iraq: What's at Stake for China?
Dec 13, 2002
China's Subtle Stance on North Korean Nuclear Crisis
Dec 31, 2002
IAEA Request Puts Moscow in Lose-Lose Situation
Jan 15, 2003
Iraq Resolution: China's Shifting Policy
Nov 08, 2002
War in Iraq:
What's at Stake for Russia?
Nov 22, 2002