The Tragedy of the Triple Power Game in the Pacific: Why UN-Diplomacy Will Not Remove the North Korea Menace.

It has been days since the North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il in a blatant defiance of its so-called closest ally China and other major players in the region. There is NO soft or strong word from the United Nations and the United States government reaction at best has yet to meet minimally acceptable American response, why? First, one needs to understand the three great powers relations in the region that is the United States, Russia and PRC. And second, diplomacy is impotent without the threat of military coercion; more so in case North Korea.

The United States is the singular superpower today because it is the only state that currently possesses great power in all the main grouping of power (economic, military, informational, and political) and the will to exercise such power to advance its national interests and offer global leadership.

The EU has economic strength (its GDP exceeds that of the U.S.) and two of its members have strategic nuclear weapons, but it presently lacks the unity and will to attain a state of the art military with sizeable power projection capability. Russia and China have strategic nuclear weapons, but lack economic potency; though China’s economic trends are striking.

Russia’s instability and economic crisis also have greatly weakened its previously frightening conventional military power capabilities. China’s military is large but ancient. The United States is the world leader in soft power given the pervasiveness of American culture around the world and the pre-eminence of the American-championed ideas of democracy and capitalism—as well as in the information technologies through which such ideas and culture are so widely disseminate. Globalization, therefore, tends to reinforce U.S. power. To challenge U.S. ascendancy, a state or alliance of states must above all be able to rival the U.S. militarily, for which economic strength is essential.

Russia and China feel exposed by U.S. dominance, each of these power centers perceives it to be in their interest to be able to balance U.S. power and is taking steps in that direction, though they differ in their motives and in their capacity for success. Japan currently does not appear to be seeking to balance U.S. power, though there are elements within Japan that have voiced support for doing so. Japan may choose to do so in the future. India’s size and nuclear weapons give it great power potential, but it is likely to be preoccupied and inhibited by internal challenges for the predictable future.


Russian loathing toward U.S. dominance stems both from hurt pride and perceived threats to real interests. Universal recognition of the United States as the world’s sole superpower since the Soviet Union’s demise is a constant, bitter reminder to the Russians of just how far they have fallen. Early hopes held by Russia that the United States would continue to treat them like a superpower, and those held by the United States that Russia would support the U.S. vision for a New World Order—hopes that made possible the broad coalition that removed Iraq from Kuwait in 1991 have since been dashed. Russia’s incapacitated military and heavy dependence on Western lending have compelled it to give ground to U.S. pressure on a number of issues important to it, most recently Chechnya and Central Asia, which has only intensified Russian resentment.

Other than pride, Russia recognizes that the United States is the essential proponent for NATO expansion, a development that Russians widely perceive as threatening to their national interests. Cash-strapped Russia, with its few internationally competitive industries, also resents and is economically constrained by U.S. pressure not to make profitable arms and commercial nuclear power sales to U.S. defined rogue states, e.g. Iran.

For China, the United States is the prime foreign obstacle to the achievement of some of China’s most important foreign policy goals, including reunification with Taiwan and supremacy, in Asia. U.S. criticism of China’s human rights performance has been a continuing source of tension. China also has made its concerns about the recent strengthening of the U.S.-Japanese security relationship and U.S. theater missile defense cooperation with Japan and Taiwan. Pride is likely another motivating factor for China, given its great power past and more recent humiliations by stronger powers.

Why UN-Diplomacy Will Fail? Politics


China’s uncertain intentions in the region: Though U.S. officials have praised
China’s assistance in recent U.S. interactions with North Korea, Beijing is wary both of U.S. intentions in Northeast Asia and of increasing Japanese-South Korean collaboration, whether military cooperation or concerted efforts to try to influence North Korean behavior through food aid. At the same time, the PRC wishes to continue its lucrative trading relationship with South Korea and, ultimately, would like to see the departure of U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula. China, which has suffered from North Korean refugee inflows since the mid-1990s, would logically prefer a stable, non-threatening, self-sustaining North Korea.

Russia wants the United States to continue being bogged down in conflicts and hatred from other nations. The more Russia seems to differ on a policy issue, the worse US look to the rest of the world. Like China, Russia has consistently blocked US diplomatic initiatives on Iran and North Korea. It may seem counter-productive to many of us that Russia and China would fail to take proliferation activities seriously, however, for China and Russia—these two rogue states represent the spinal-cord of their political fortunes. Both these countries have absolutely nothing noteworthy to undermine the United States, except using their UN-Security Council to relentlessly render it unable to resolve international threats.

The United State's relation with Japan and South Korea makes it unlikely that a strong diplomatic front could be mustered. Japan to her credit want a clear—resolute international response, South Korea is still unable to shake off her tendency to view threats as only originating from Tokyo. Although the history between Seoul and Tokyo is quite complicated, it is regrettable that the recent provocative moves by the Stalinist regime up north on the Korean Peninsula would be treated with laughable outrage from the Blue House. Here again, the United States cannot move diplomatically decisively because of another layer of complication induced by Seoul and US’s commitments to Both ROK and Japan.

What should be done?

The United States with preferably, or without a UN-Resolution should move in with tougher-punitive sanctions against North Korea—for example, the US Navy should enforce a blockade on all shipments but humanitarian cargos. Second, we should destroy North Korea missile launch pads promptly, they should not be able to announce to the world their launches, in defiance, and proceed without grave repercussions. Third, surgical strikes on the leadership and nuclear or other WMD plants should be an option, and the United States forces in Japan and South Korea should be put the highest level of alert. In a meantime, diplomatic venues at the United Nations should be explored to avert a large scale confrontation shoot out on the Peninsula. If the possibility of war imminent the Russia, PRC, ROK and DPRK are likely to show deliberate sense of urgency in diffusing the situation. North Korea violated the NPT, Framework Agreements, other protocol and pronouncements with the United States, and the International community in general. If the PRC, Russia and ROK cannot band together to arrest this tide, and the UN-Security Council is still under siege from China and Russia; the US as a pacific power, as it has done on numerous occasions in her 230 year history must act and act soon to remove the menace.