From Far & Near Review of International Affairs – June 2020 By Shashi P.B.B. Malla Pandemic Could Escalate the Risk of War The risk of interstate war was already steadily rising even before the Covid-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China and its subsequent spread. Civil wars in various regions of the world were proliferating and intensifying – in South Asia [Afghanistan] and West Asia [Yemen]. Most significantly, the global dynamics that kept the peace for so long were being slowly demolished [above all under U.S. President Donald Trump]. The notion that war between nations is a relic of the past no longer seems so convincing [WPR/World Politics Review, June 16]. North Korea Destroys Its Détente with the South In 2018, North and South Korea held a series of meetings and then agreed to a number of confidence-building measures. This included an inter-Korean liaison office in Kaesong near the bilateral Dimilitarized Zone (DMZ) in North Korean territory. Much of that progress was brought crashing down last week when Pyongyang demolished this liaison building [SCMP/South China Morning Post]. When South Korean President Moon Jae-in and North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un held their historic first summit in April 2018, the two leaders declared the beginning of a new era of peace and reconciliation. Last week, a key symbol of that vision, enshrined in the Panmunjon Declaration promising “peace, prosperity and reunification of the Korean peninsula” literally went up in smoke, when the North – purportedly on the orders of Kim’s younger sister and rising star in the North Korean hierarchy – blew up the inter-Korean liaison office. After staking much of his presidency on inter-Korean reconciliation, Moon’s signature foreign policy initiative now appears to be on life support, with only a narrow path to recovery. The demolition was only the most explosive moment of an escalating pressure campaign by the North intended to coerce Moon to himself persuade the U.S. to ease sanctions aimed at the regime’s nuclear weapons and missile programmes. The show of force followed weeks of threats by Kim’s now influential sister Kim Yo-jong [the presumptive supreme leader-in-waiting, should her brother be incapacitated in any way] against the South for iniquitously allowing defector activists [a couple of whom have even been elected to the South’s lower house of parliament] to fly balloons carrying relief aid and propaganda materials across the DMZ. Moon, the son of North Korean refugees himself [in a self-effacing way, he was a volunteer in the aftermath of Nepal’s deadly Great Gorkha Earthquake, 2015] and a former chief of staff to pro-rapprochement late president Roh Moo-hyun, has little space for manoeuvre to mend fences with Pyongyang. He cannot risk straining relations with the US that has 28,500 troops in the South as a bulwark against North Korean attack, as part of a mutual security treaty signed in the aftermath of the Korean War. US President Trump, in his supreme wisdom, has refused to relax sanctions against the autocratic regime even after two summits with Kim in 2018 failed to achieve any concrete steps towards denuclearization. US officials have urged the North to refrain from further “counterproductive measures”. Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian commented that Beijing supported “reconciliation and cooperation” between the Koreas and was “committed to sustained peace and stability on the peninsula.” Zhao Tong, a senior fellow at the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy, Beijing doubts the likelihood of the U.S. and China cooperating on issues affecting the Korean Peninsula in the foreseeable future, due to their growing “competition for geo-strategic influence.” Japan-China Island Dispute: Asia’s Next Military Flashpoint? While China and India are engaged in a tense border standoff high in the western Himalayas [actually: Karakorum], a small group of islands thousands of miles away in the Western Pacific/East China Sea, could be another military tinder box waiting to explode [CNN/Brad Lendon, June 21]. Both Japan and China lay claim to the largely uninhabited islands called the Senkaku (Japanese) or Diaoyu (Chinese) as their own, but Japan has administered them since 1972. Tensions over the rocky island chain, 1900 km southwest of Tokyo, have simmered for years, and with claims over them dating back hundreds of years. Neither Japan or China is likely to back down over territory considered a national birthright in both capitals. In that respect, the islands are not unlike the rocky heights of the Himalayas, where decades of tension on an ill-defined border between the Sino-Indian territories, erupted in a barbaric brawl on Monday, June 15, precipitating a brutal clash that cost the lives of at least 20 Indian and 43 estimated Chinese soldiers. An unexpected flare-up in the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands could also trigger a military confrontation between China and the United States, which has a mutual defence treaty with Japan. If Japanese territory is attacked by a foreign power [in the current East Asian scenario, either China, North Korea or Russia], the U.S. would be obliged to come to its defence. The situation is further complicated because de facto independent Taiwan [which China doesn’t recognize and considers a breakaway province] also claims the islands which lie about 120 km from its shores. Fears of a possible confrontation have been lately heightened since the Japanese coastguard has spotted Chinese government ships in waters close to the islands continuously since mid-April 2020. Japan’s Okinawa prefecture is about to make some administrative changes, decoupling the islands from the more populous parts of Ishigaki Island from which the Saki island chain (all part of the greater Ryukyu Islands chain) is governed. China has objected to thisnew development. Japan has asserted its right since “The Senkaku Islands are under our control and are unquestionably our territory historically and under International Law.” China’s foreign ministry has echoed the unyielding Japanese stance from the reverse mirror perspective: “The Diaoyu Island and the affiliated islands are an inherent part of China’s territory, and it is our right to carry out patrols and law enforcement activities in these waters.” Even seven years back, it was clear that “the danger will persist while emotions run high and their [armed] forces operate in close proximity. In stressful and ambiguous times, when decision-making is compressed by the speed of modern weapons systems, the risk of human error is higher” [CFR: “A Sino-Japanese Clash in the East China Sea,” April 22, 2013]. According to the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), there are major economic interests involved in the dispute. The islands “have potential oil and natural gas reserves, are near prominent shipping routes, and are surrounded by rich fishing areas.” William Choong, a senior fellow at the ISEAS-YusofIshak Institute in Singapore opines that it all adds up to potential trouble, possibly triggering an unintended clash: “Compared to other flashpoints in the region – the South China Sea, Taiwan, and North Korea’s weapons programme – the East China Sea combines a unique and combustible mix of history, honour and territory.” Consequently, he is quite Delphic: “The question is not whether China…would like to challenge Japan over the islands. The question is when and how.” Can India and China stand down after their worst clash in 45 years? The deadly border clash this month raises the tension between competition and cooperation between the two nuclear-armed Asian behemoths. India’s prime minister Narendra Modi has publicly raved about the prospect of a more robust role for India in the region and the world. Analysts debate whether the new tensions with China will be the litmus test whether India is ready or willing to struggle with a rising world power bent on expanding its interests and territory [NYT/Maria Abi-Habib, June 22]. India has made moves to come closer to the political West. This month, it signed a major defence agreement with Australia, allowing them to use each other’s military bases. It is also expected to invite Australia to participate in joint naval exercises with Japan and the U.S. in the Indian Ocean, to strengthen the so-called Quad , and observe and contain China’s activities in Gwadar (Pakistan), Sri Lanka and Myanmar. The Modi government’s position vis-à-vis China [which has allegedly seized 23 square miles of Indian territory in the Galwan Valley, Ladakh] is that India’s armed forces “have been given a free hand to take all necessary steps.” However, India’s military options may be limited for the foreseeable future. Its military is the world’s second largest, but it has failed to modernize and stay competitive. Ajai Shukla, a retired Indian Army colonel, has directed blistering critique of the Modi government in an opinion piece in The New York Times: “In contrast to the bellicose Indian statements that follow attacks by Pakistani militants, the Indian government’s reactions were mild, almost careful not to offend China” (June 22). Col. Shukla points out that Modi had already set up India as a soft target through his “pusillanimous handling of an earlier border crisis in 2017 at Doklam, at the disputed tri-junction of China, India (Sikkim) and Bhutan.”His government has also chosen to do nothing about the re-militarization of Doklam. Modi is now confronted with the difficult choice of appearing to stand up to China while preventing a full-scale war. For Col. Shukla, Modi’s embrace of Mr. Xiwas a grave misjudgment [and with that the much touted “Wuhan Spirit”], and his China policy now lies in tatters. Nepal’s Ludicrous Leaders in the Time of the Pandemic In the meantime, Nepal’s Communist government under the ludicrous leadership of Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli is making a fool of itself in its response to the deadly Coronavirus. Like his soulmate Trump, Oli has time and again downplayed Covid-19, saying – also in parliament – that no one need be afraid of the pandemic…it is just like the common cold and cough…and just a glass of warm water regularly will make it go away [!] He has made Nepal a laughing stock in the region, and perhaps in the wider world. But the Communist comrades are holding on to their ‘Dear Leader’ come what may. It is incredible that the Communist Party of China (CPC) would stoop to have a joint virtual meeting with their counterparts in Nepal. The leaders and ministers of the Communist Party of Nepal (CPN) may be impeccably dressed in ‘daura sural’ [the Nepali national dress, which Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who fancies himself as ‘Prachanda’, the fierce one, steadfastly rejects], but their heads are filled with crap. Just imagine holding such a Sino-Nepalese meeting when Sino-Indian tensions are so high! It does cement the notion that Nepal’s ‘cartographical encroachment’ had been taken at the behest of China! The main opposition, Nepali Congress party has rightly pointed out that the CPN has compromised Nepal’s foreign policy of ‘equidistance’ from both Beijing and New Delhi. In the face of blatant mismanagement in all sectors – the economy, administration, health – the Oli regime or “Oli-garchy” is hiding its flagrant shortcomings behind drummed up jingoism. With its ‘cartographic manipulation’, it has literally closed the doors for a meaningful dialogue with Bharat. As for the Maoist faction of the CPN, they have now bitten the hand that fed them, and are, therefore, no longer relevant. Dahal-Prachanda famously declared [incorrectly]that the Communists would bring back sacred Nepalese territory that the monarchy had erstwhile wantonly sacrificed. This will remain a pipe dream as long as the utterly corrupt Communists remain at the helm. Some of our brave Nepali youth are protesting, but this is not enough for regime change. To paraphrase an apt quotation: ‘Mahendra, Thou should be living at this hour Nepal hath need of Thee!’ The writer can be reached at: shashipbmalla@hotmail.com People's Review Print Edition