UCR Forum 2016 Caroline Pratama Miso Lee U.S-China Relations: “Parallel Tracks” for Peace and Stability in the Korean Peninsula UCR Forum 2016 Caroline Pratama Miso Lee

Structure Background Simultaneous Pursuit of Denuclearization and Peace Treaty: What’s New? China’s Take on Denuclearization U.S Response, or the Lack Thereof Possible Roles for South Korea Discussion

1. Background UCR Briefings 2012-2015 Trends found in statements made by both governments on the North Korean issue UCR Briefing Feb 2016 China’s proposal of “parallel tracks”

U.S China Common themes in official statements 2012-2015 Denuclearization as main priority (in line with China’s interest) Asking North Korea to fulfill its international obligations, namely referring to complying with September 2005 Joint Statement and UN Security Council sanctions Indicates that China uses its “unique influence” on North Korea China Denuclearization (in line with the US’ interest), peace and stability in the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia as main priority Dialogue and consultation as the way to solve the issue (bringing back Six-party Talks, September 2005 Joint Statement as reference) Exercising restraint in light of North Korea’s nuclear provocations, opposing actions that may escalate tension in the region Limited Chinese influence on North Korea

U.S-China Statements on North Korea- related Issues in early 2016 U.S-China’s perspective on each other's roles in the issue UN sanction and its effectiveness Diverging perspectives on THAAD China's "parallel track" suggestion US emphasis on China’s “unique influence” while China believes it has “limited influence” on the issue

China’s Statements on Parallel Tracks The Chinese side has proposed to pursue in parallel tracks the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the replacement of the Korean armistice with a peace agreement. China sees the parallel-track approach as a reasonable one. It highlights the overriding goal of denuclearizing the Peninsula, at the same time it seeks to address the major concerns of the various parties. The Chinese side would like to have further discussions with interested parties about the specific steps in the approach. FM Spokeperson Hua Chunying, Feb 24, 2016 The Chinese side has proposed to pursue in parallel tracks the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the replacement of the Korean armistice with a peace agreement. The approach will help denuclearize the Korean Peninsula, address various parties' reasonable concerns and realize enduring peace and stability on the Peninsula. We would like to have further discussions with all parties about the approach. FM Spokeperson Hong Lei, Feb 26, 2016 Wang and Kerry agreed that the goal is to go back to negotiation. Wang talked about China's new basic proposal of pursuing in parallel tracks the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the replacement of the Korean armistice with a peace agreement. He said China is open to new ideas, but added that the parallel track approach is a reasonable one. “No more US military presence in South China Sea, says FM”. China Daily, Feb 24, 2016 March 2016 “In light of the development of the situation, we proposed to pursue in parallel tracks denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and the replacement of the armistice with a peace agreement. We stand ready to have further consultations on this proposal with relevant countries, including on the concrete means and steps to advance this proposal.” -Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on March 3, 2016 “Wang Yi said the idea to simultaneously pursue the denuclearization of the Peninsula and the replacement of the armistice agreement with a peace treaty put forward by the Chinese side firstly shows China's responsible attitude to stay with the negotiation, and embodies the implementation of Resolution 2270 .” -Wang Yi: Staying with Negotiation Is Also Implementing the UNSC Resolution

2. Simultaneous Denuclearization and Peace Treaty: What’s New? What does “parallel tracks” in this definition has to offer? New Hope? Possible solution to the current stalemate (aim to denuclearize, sanctions) “Conditional Peace Treaty” Based on Anthony DiFilippo’s research, simultaneous pursuit of denuclearization and peace treaty replacement might work

“A conditional peace treaty that becomes permanent would therefore be a quid pro quo: for Kim Jong-il and other North Korean officials, the end of what they perceive as a hostile U.S policy and the beginning of improved relations with the United States; for Washington, the denuclearization of DPRK [...] Pyongyang has directly linked peace treaty, which it views as a trust and confidence-building mechanism, to denuclearization.” Washington is not about to sign a permanent peace treaty as long as the DPRK has nuclear weapons and the capability to produce them. For its part, Pyongyang will never accept disarmament as long as it perceives a hostile U.S policy, since it reasons that this would imperil the DPRK’s highly valued sovereignty that it believes needs to be constantly protected, sometimes by juche-based, songun demonstrations, such as missile and nuclear testing. A conditional peace treaty, one signed immediately and giving the DPRK a reasonable period--say between one and two years--to get rid of its nuclear weapons and the capability to produce them before the accord becomes permanent gives both Washington and Pyongyang what they want. Pyongyang has directly linked -Anthony DiFilippo, North Korea’s Denuclearization and a Peace Treaty, p. 16-17

3. China’s Take on Denuclearization When China inciting the idea of “parallel tracks”, what does it really signify? “Denuclearization” “Nuclear Freeze” as opposed to the term “Complete, Verifiable, and Irreversible” denuclearization “Peace Treaty” Demanding U.S. to normalize bilateral relationship with North Korea

What is the China’s Main Priority? To keep North Korea as a strategic buffer state? To transform North Korea into an economically reformed, China-friendly neighboring regime? The Chinese side hopes that relevant parties could react with calm and caution, refrain from taking actions that may further escalate tensions on the Korean Peninsula… Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying, Feb 7, 2016 We do not accept the DPRK's nuclear missile program and we do not recognize the DPRK as a nuclear weapons state . China FM Wang Yi, Feb 24, 2016 (China Daily) A principle of China is that we never approve unilateral sanctions in international affairs. Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lu Kang, Feb 5, 2016 The Chinese side always maintains that dialogue and consultation is the only way to ensure lasting peace and stability in the region. Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying, Feb 7, 2016 The key to the development of the situation in the future still depends on what kind of political decisions will be made by the US and the DPRK. China FM Wang Yi, Feb 6, 2016

4. The U.S Response... … or the lack thereof The U.S Stance towards North Korea Denuclearization as a singular aim Response to “Parallel Tracks”? 2016 official statements

Denuclearization as Main Priority of the U.S Today, Foreign Minister Wang and I also discussed ways that we, along with our partners in the UN and the Six-Party Talks framework, can deepen our cooperation not only to respond to the actions that DPRK took but equally importantly because those reactions have a purpose and that purpose is to bring the DPRK back to the table for the purpose of the Six-Party Talks and particularly discussions about denuclearization. Secretary Kerry Remarks with China FM Wang Yi, Feb 23, 2016 We carefully considered their proposal, and made clear that denuclearization had to be part of any such discussion. The North rejected our response. Our response to the NK proposal was consistent with our longstanding focus on denuclearization. State Department Spokesman John Kirby, Feb 22, 2016 (Reuters) Denuclearization is our no. 1 priority. U.S Ambassador to Korea Mark Lippert, Mar 13, 2016

5. Possible Roles for South Korea Should South Korea stick with the US and its own current position on demanding denuclearization first? Should South Korea seek to work with China more by moving toward the “parallel track” option? Will SK see it as a chance to break the impasse and also a pioneer at that? That’s another problem

Talks for Progress South Korea to exercise its “middle power diplomacy” Initiating talks with the U.S and China “Parallel Tracks” as a potential way out of stalemate South Korea as forerunner of negotiations between both powers One of the core roles of a middle power is to serve as a bridge among big powers and small powers to coordinate different interests and seek common goals. In order to thaw the current icy situation on the Korean Peninsula, South Korea should stick to its middle power diplomacy initiative in multilateral forums, the UN, and in the mini-lateral table in Northeast Asia. It is necessary to revitalize trilateral dialogue among South Korea, the U.S., and China as an alternative to the stalled six-party talks. If may be difficult at first to move forward with a trilateral dialogue at the highest level of officialdom, therefore it is necessary to start at the 1.5 track and gradually expand the dialogue channel to include the government level. Through this, South Korea can retain an opportunity to create a mechanism in which it can share regional and global issues with the U.S. and China. Furthermore, South Korea can use this as a platform in seeking avenues to expand a South Korea-U.S.-China trilateral dialogue to include other significant actors, creating possible dialogues such as South Korea-U.S.-Japan, South Korea-China-Japan, or South Korea-China-Russia forums. In the absence of the Six-Party Talks, the U.S.- ROK-China strategic triangle has become an increasingly salient mechanism for managing regional crises in the short term and for shaping a future security structure in Northeast Asia over the long term. Enhanced cooperation and coordination among these three nations can lead to a more effective diplomatic approach to negotiating the denuclearization of North Korea.

Discussion Questions Prospect? With the preponderant lack of trust between the stakeholders, do you think there is chance for the idea of “parallel tracks” to materialize? After denuclearization, what’s next? What is the aim of denuclearization of North Korea? Peaceful coexistence or eventual unification? How would this affect the development of “parallel tracks”?

Thank you!