Niu Xiaoping Interviewed by South China Morning Post

Niu Xiaoping    source：South China Morning Post

Last month’s US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities could strengthen North Korea’s view that nuclear weapons are vital for its survival, deepening Pyongyang’s distrust and reinforcing its commitment to nuclear arms, security experts have warned.

They added that the attacks were likely to undermine denuclearisation efforts on the Korean peninsula, a goal shared by Beijing, and that increasing US pressure on North Korea risked destabilising the region and encouraging nuclear proliferation.

Stephen Costello, a non-resident fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said, “North Korean leaders may confirm their previous assessment: that [US President Donald] Trump acts for reasons that are not ‘security’ or geopolitical-related. He is therefore an emotional, unpredictable force, and not one that is trustworthy at all.”

According to Niklas Swanstrom, executive director of the Stockholm-based Institute for Security and Development Policy, the US strikes on Iran are likely to drive North Korea to make its nuclear arsenal more “mobile and dispersed”, prioritise second-strike capability, and invest heavily in deep underground facilities and redundant production capabilities.

“Any remaining possibility of North Korean denuclearisation will be effectively terminated, as the regime will view nuclear weapons as the ultimate guarantee of survival,” Swanstrom said.

During his first term, Trump held a series of historic talks with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un on the issue.

The first summit in Singapore in 2018 resulted in a joint statement with vague commitments to denuclearisation, while a second a year later in Hanoi, Vietnam, ended abruptly without a deal.

Washington and Pyongyang remain at odds over the definition of denuclearisation and the steps to achieve it. While North Korea advocates for an incremental approach that trades reciprocal concessions step by step, Washington wants “complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearisation”.

Experts said Beijing now faced “a complex strategic environment” where increased US pressure was likely to create regional instability that would be unfavourable for Beijing.

The impact on China is quite “evident”, according to Niu Xiaoping, an expert on North Korea at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, who said that it deepened concerns in Beijing about the possibility of future strikes targeting North Korea.

She added that although such a scenario was highly unlikely, the US strikes set a dangerous precedent.

“China will also warily watch out for any particular US actions that could increase the escalation ladder, such as US-led joint military exercises or other provocative military posture,” Niu said.

China and North Korea share a border of over 1,300km (808 miles), primarily defined by the Yalu and Tumen rivers and a mountain range. The geographic proximity means Beijing cannot afford instability on the border or any security threats from it.

“China’s primary interest is maintaining stability on the Korean peninsula to prevent refugee flows, economic disruption, and potential conflict near its borders,” Swanstrom said.

Beijing supports denuclearisation of the Korean peninsula and a peaceful resolution through dialogue, while making regional stability a priority. It has also insisted that Pyongyang’s security, economic and political concerns should be addressed as part of any nuclear negotiations.

It has advocated a “dual-suspension” approach, urging Seoul and Washington to halt joint military drills while Pyongyang freezes its missile and nuclear programmes.

Meanwhile, nuclear non-proliferation could be at risk, as Beijing’s commitment to denuclearisation is partly fuelled by fears that North Korea’s nuclear programmes could raise calls for developing nuclear capabilities in South Korea or Japan, according to Niu.

“Under the circumstances where North Korea already possesses nuclear warheads and a certain level of nuclear weapon delivery capability, the focus now should be on preventing further development of its nuclear weapons,” she added.

Analysts have noted that Pyongyang’s nuclear capabilities provide a convenient pretext for heightened US intervention and deeper military collaboration with its regional allies. This, in turn, expands the conventional military abilities of the US and its partners, which also target China and increase insecurity.

The deployment of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) anti-missile system in South Korea nearly a decade ago, aimed at countering North Korea’s missile threats, drew strong opposition from China over fears its advanced radar system could undermine Beijing’s nuclear deterrence.

In early June, North Korea reportedly refused to accept a letter from Trump to Kim that aimed at reopening communication. Despite this, Trump last week said that he had “a good relationship with Kim” and would “get the conflict solved with North Korea”.

Niu, however, said that mistrust, generated from the previous failed talks between Kim and Trump, had been compounded by the strikes on Iran, and Pyongyang was probably reassessing its strategy.

“North Korea is unlikely to return to the negotiating table unless the US makes greater concessions,” she said.

Acknowledging Beijing’s unique leverage over Pyongyang due to their economic ties and proximity, Swanstrom said Pyongyang now held the upper hand with nuclear weapons, partnerships with Russia and China, and a divided Western response to global challenges.

“Pyongyang has significant autonomy in its decision-making. [North Korea] is more likely to pursue independent actions that serve its interests rather than being ‘herded’ by external powers, even China,” he said.

Beijing also tried to play a mediator role in six-party talks aimed at denuclearising North Korea. Initiated in 2003, the talks involved North Korea, South Korea, the United States, China, Japan and Russia.

Beijing hosted all rounds of the talks, providing the venue and often chairing the discussions. This positioned China as the primary facilitator of dialogue between the often antagonistic parties, particularly between North Korea and the United States.

The multiple rounds of talks sought to address North Korea’s nuclear ambitions through diplomatic engagement and reciprocal agreements.

Initial breakthroughs and progress were made, such as North Korea agreeing to disable its nuclear facilities, US assurance of no intention to attack or invade North Korea with nuclear or conventional weapons, as well as Pyongyang’s right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

However, due to mistrust among parties, governments’ differing priorities and disagreements on verification protocol, the talks eventually stalled in 2009 as Pyongyang formally withdrew. It has since carried out a series of nuclear and missile tests, angering neighbours including China.

Costello, who is also a visiting scholar at George Washington University, said that Beijing would unavoidably play a pivotal role in any “next deal” involving North Korea and the United States, given Washington’s inability to “conclude any deal by itself”.

“However, Beijing’s ability to carefully support any next deal will depend on its working with South and North Korea and supporting South Korea’s expanded and leading role. This not only recognises US weakness, but also South Korea’s unique status as a most-at-stake player regarding North Korea,” he said.

He suggested a two-track approach: working with middle powers to manage Trump and guide better US policies, while collaborating with regional players such as Japan and Australia to adopt pragmatic, mutually beneficial strategies led by Seoul.

Newly elected South Korean President Lee Jae-myung has made gestures to ease tensions with North Korea, such as halting propaganda loudspeaker broadcasts along the border and pledging to restore a military hotline with Pyongyang.

On Thursday, he said that his administration would work to improve relations with the North based on cooperation with the United States, while also acknowledging that the work would not be easy.

“When we decided to suspend the loudspeaker broadcasts towards North Korea, I was concerned about how quickly – or even whether – they would respond. But [North Korea’s] response was very swift and exceeded expectations,” he was quoted as saying by Yonhap News Agency.

“Some of the first ways that China could contribute would be with intensive, quiet discussions with its North Korean neighbours. Just because Trump is unlikely to be of help in the coming years, that does not mean that North Korea, South Korea, Japan and China are paralysed into inaction,” Costello said.

However, Niu said that the international community should hold realistic expectations for China’s role in denuclearisation.

“The crux of the issue lies in the US. This has been evident through multiple rounds of negotiations, showing that Pyongyang’s core demand is a security guarantee from the US,” she said.

According to Niu, over the long term, China is likely to position itself as a facilitator in reviving the multilateral dialogue mechanism or to use existing multilateral organisations to encourage the parties to return to talks.

“In the short term, China may prioritise strengthening crisis management on the peninsula, such as improving communication channels through hotlines with other parties.”