We Are Brothers but Not Allies: The Sino-DPRK Alliance Revisited

IF 17.7 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.5509/2024971-art1
Daekwon Son, Yongjon Han
{"title":"We Are Brothers but Not Allies: The Sino-DPRK Alliance Revisited","authors":"Daekwon Son, Yongjon Han","doi":"10.5509/2024971-art1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n It is widely noted that China maintains a “special relationship” with North Korea, which is best epitomized by the Sino-DPRK Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance that the two countries signed in July 1961. However, in the post-Cold War era, the raison d’être of this alliance treaty has been challenged. Against this backdrop, this paper traces China’s evolving interpretations of the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty. By investigating the process behind the signing of the treaty, it argues that Beijing signed an “alliance treaty” with Pyongyang to win over the latter in the context of the Sino-Soviet split. However, as China sought to improve its relations with Western powers, the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty became increasingly burdensome to Beijing. Thus, Beijing began to dilute the alliance nature of the treaty by no longer publicly affirming its security obligation toward Pyongyang. After Deng Xiaoping came to power in China, the treaty was found to be incompatible with Beijing’s newly promulgated foreign policy principle of non-alignment. To address this problem, Beijing ultimately reformulated the nature of Sino-DPRK relations and reinterpreted the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty—that is, China is not an ally of North Korea, and the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty carries only symbolic meaning without casus foederis. Based on these analyses, this paper claims that the security obligation of the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty is no longer functional.\n","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":"24 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":17.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5509/2024971-art1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is widely noted that China maintains a “special relationship” with North Korea, which is best epitomized by the Sino-DPRK Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance that the two countries signed in July 1961. However, in the post-Cold War era, the raison d’être of this alliance treaty has been challenged. Against this backdrop, this paper traces China’s evolving interpretations of the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty. By investigating the process behind the signing of the treaty, it argues that Beijing signed an “alliance treaty” with Pyongyang to win over the latter in the context of the Sino-Soviet split. However, as China sought to improve its relations with Western powers, the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty became increasingly burdensome to Beijing. Thus, Beijing began to dilute the alliance nature of the treaty by no longer publicly affirming its security obligation toward Pyongyang. After Deng Xiaoping came to power in China, the treaty was found to be incompatible with Beijing’s newly promulgated foreign policy principle of non-alignment. To address this problem, Beijing ultimately reformulated the nature of Sino-DPRK relations and reinterpreted the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty—that is, China is not an ally of North Korea, and the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty carries only symbolic meaning without casus foederis. Based on these analyses, this paper claims that the security obligation of the Sino-DPRK friendship treaty is no longer functional.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们是兄弟,但不是盟友:再论中朝联盟
人们普遍注意到,中国与朝鲜保持着 "特殊关系",1961 年 7 月两国签署的《中朝友好合作互助条约》就是这种关系的最好缩影。然而,在后冷战时代,这一同盟条约存在的理由受到了挑战。在此背景下,本文追溯了中国对中朝友好条约不断演变的解释。通过调查条约签署的过程,本文认为中国政府与平壤签署 "同盟条约 "是为了在中苏分裂的背景下赢得平壤的支持。然而,随着中国寻求改善与西方大国的关系,中朝友好条约对北京来说变得越来越沉重。因此,中国政府开始淡化条约的同盟性质,不再公开申明对平壤的安全义务。邓小平执政后,该条约被认为不符合北京新颁布的不结盟外交政策原则。为了解决这个问题,中国政府最终重新制定了中朝关系的性质,并重新解释了中朝友好条约,即中国不是朝鲜的盟国,中朝友好条约只具有象征意义,而没有战争理由。基于这些分析,本文认为中朝友好条约的安全义务已不再起作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Tetrapyrrole Complexes with Unusual Geometries: a Main Group Element Perspective Bioinspired Nanofluidic Temperate Synthesis Diiron(I) Bis(cyclopentadienyl) Complexes with Bridging Iminium Ligands: From Foundational Organometallic Chemistry to Unique Reactivity and Biological Potential. Catalysis over Isolated and Nested Lewis Acid Centers and Noble Metal Centers Anchored by Nested Lewis Acid Centers in Zeolites Structure and Dynamics of Membrane Proteins in Native Cellular Membranes Revealed by In Situ Solid-State NMR.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1