By Huang Panyue - China Military Editor
BEIJING, April 7 (ChinaMil) -- Global Times mentioned the bottom line of China on DPRK nuclear issue in an article titled Commentary: The United States Must Not Choose a Wrong Direction to Break the DPRK Nuclear Deadlock on Wednesday, triggering wide speculation.
According to the article, China very much hopes that the DPRK nuclear issue can be solved as soon as possible. But no matter what happens, China has a bottom line that it will protect at all costs, that is, the security and stability of northeast China.
In connection with this, DPRK's nuclear activities must not cause any pollution to northeast China. In addition, the DPRK must not fall into the turmoil to send a large number of refugees, China will not allow the existence of a government that is hostile against China on the other side of the Yalu River, and the US military must not push forward its military forces to the Yalu River, the article said.
Some experts interpret this as China’s acquiescence to the United States’ strikes to the DPRK. Is this really the case?
First, “DPRK's nuclear activities must not cause any pollution to northeast China.”
Is this sentence designed for the United States? Maybe, but it is designed for the DPRK more. We all know that the DPRK's sixth nuclear test is imminent, and various parties, especially China, are generally worried about this.
It is very insidious for the DPRK to select Punggye-ri, located in Kilju County of North Hamgyong Province in DPRK, as the site for the nuclear test. The place is the farthest point from Pyongyang within the DPRK territory, but near the border of China and DPRK.
Residents in northeast China suffered every time DPRK launched a nuclear test. The news may remain fresh to us: buildings showed cracks, and students in classes were evacuated to the playgrounds.
With the increase in nuclear equivalents, the threat to the Chinese people nearby also surges. In particular, if by any chance nuclear leakage or pollution incidents happen, the damage to northeast China environment will be catastrophic and irreversible.
This is the bottom line of China, which means China will never allow such situation to happen. If the bottom line is touched, China will employ all means available including the military means to strike back.
By that time, it is not an issue of discussion whether China acquiesces in the US’ blows, but the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will launch attacks to DPRK nuclear facilities on its own.
A strike to nuclear facilities of the DPRK is the best military means in the opinion of the outside world.
Firstly, the locations of DPRK nuclear facilities are fixed and known to the outside.
Secondly, once the attack is launched, the DPRK’s nuclear weapons process will be permanently suspended. It has limited resources of nuclear materials and is strictly blockaded in the outside world, erasing the possibility for DPRK to get the materials again.
Thirdly, nuclear weapons is DPRK’s trump card for its defiance of China and the United States. Once this card is lost, it will become obedient immediately.
Finally, if DPRK's nuclear facilities are destroyed, they will not even fight back, but probably block the news to fool its domestic people. The DPRK will freak out if its nuclear facilities are destroyed.
Second, “the DPRK must not fall into the turmoil to send a large number of refugees, it is not allowed to have a government that is hostile against China on the other side of the Yalu River, and the US military must not push forward its forces to the Yalu River.”
This sentence is meant for the United States, because the premise of it is that the US military has launched attacks to the DPRK. We can understand it from two aspects.
First, the 16th Group Army and the 39th Group Army of the Chinese PLA are both responsible for armed isolation of DPRK refugees. There is more than one such armed isolation zone which will not be laid exactly along the Sino-DPRK border, nor in China, but a few dozen kilometers from the border in the territory of DPRK.
Second, the statement of “the US military must not push forward its forces to the Yalu River”, and that the US's ally Republic of Korea (ROK) must not push forward troops to the Yalu River as well is actually understood by the United States and ROK militaries that their troops will not encroach on the Yalu River.
During the Korean War in the 1950s, the United States-led united army troops from multiple countries announced that the united troops would not advance the battlefront to the Yalu River, but would stop at 40 miles (64 kilometers) south of the Sino-DPRK border. They called this line MacArthur Line back then.
The Global Times editorial also mentioned "it is not allowed to have a government that is hostile against China on the other side of the Yalu River." What does that mean?
This is implying that once the US and ROK initiate the strikes, the Chinese PLA will send out troops for sure to lay the foundation for a favorable post-war situation.
From this perspective, the Chinese PLA’s forward operations beyond Pyongyang, capital of DPRK, are for sure.
China will not allow the situation in which areas north of the 38th Parallel are unified by the US and ROK.
Now who do you think this editorial by Global Times is deterring?