The Korean War began 70 years ago, on June 25, 1950. This was not just a standoff between neighboring states. The Korean War, in fact, began as a civil war between the two Korean camps (the North, that sought to build the future of Korea according to the Soviet model, and the South, committed to American attitudes). In the context of the Cold War, it immediately developed into a large-scale military conflict. Great powers were directly or indirectly involved. This includes the USA, Great Britain, USSR, PRC, as well as the UN, which sent an international military contingent to Korea under its own flag to help the South.
Military Confrontation on the 38th Parallel
The inter-Korean confrontation continues to this day. Today, on both sides of the 38th parallel — the latitude line that roughly demarcates the two Korean states — military fortification is piled up, and thousands of troops with modern weapons and military equipment target each other. Moreover, in accordance with the Mutual Defence Treaty between the U.S. and South Korea, the latter is hosting a group of U.S. troops of 28.5 thousand people, subordinate to the ROK/U.S. Combined Forces Command (CFC).
And if Seoul does need the U.S. military presence in Korea in order to protect South Korean economic prosperity from the hypothetical encroachment of Pyongyang, then for Washington, it is only an element of the global system for ensuring “American leadership.” The Korean Peninsula is the only continental element of the U.S. military presence in East Asia. In addition, South Korea, as an ally of the United States, significantly strengthens American military power in the Pacific, doing so to a much greater extent than Japan, still fettered by Article 9 of its Constitution.
In the 1990s, the tangle of security problems on the Korean peninsula was supplemented by the North Korea nuclear crisis. North Korea, in violation of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, announced the development of a nuclear missile program. Pyongyang remembered the calls of the American General Douglas MacArthur, who led the United Nations Command in the Korean War, to use the atomic bomb, and believed that the DPRK’s own nuclear weapons could prevent a potential strike from the United States in the event of a new inter-Korean war.
The United States confronted the North Korean nuclear missile program with a sanctions war and aggressive military rhetoric. This included direct threats of President Trump in 2017 to physically destroy the DPRK should it decide not to give up nuclear missile development. However, common sense prevailed. Mutual accusations gave way to dialog. Three inter-Korean and two North Korea-the U.S. summits took place in 2018–2019.
Inter-Korean dialog was facilitated by two circumstances. On the one hand, having created long-range nuclear missile weapons, the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un decided that the main strategic goal to ensure the security of the DPRK from the United States had been achieved, and that the nuclear-missile race could be suspended by putting more funds into economic needs. On the other, it was the behavior of South Korea that promoted a thaw in the relations. And this is not only due to the fact that from the very beginning, the current President of the Republic of Korea, Moon Jae-in, went to the polls under the slogans of restoring dialog with Pyongyang. The aggressive rhetoric of Donald Trump in 2017 regarding the DPRK also played its role. For the first time in several decades, the world was faced with the real threat of a new war on the Korean Peninsula at the initiative of the United States. South Korea would be the main victim of it, suffering a powerful blow from the North. Therefore, if Washington’s victory in the war would be the liquidation of the North Korean state in its current form, then for Seoul, the only option for victory would be to prevent the war.
There were a lot of expectations from inter-Korean summits. But these expectations were only met, perhaps, by the fact that there will be no nuclear or other war in Korea in the near future. The declarations adopted in Panmunjom and Pyongyang by Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in set a number of tasks to promote cooperation between the two Korean states. However, for the most part, these documents looked more like statements of intent. Many political and legal obstacles stood in the way of fulfilling these intentions.
Therefore, the inter-Korean dialog that pompously started in 2018 began to stall by the end of 2019. At the beginning of June of the current year, it even reached a dead end. Under the pretext that the South Korean authorities did not prevent various public organizations from sending balloons with leaflets wording the attacks on the North Korean regime, Pyongyang blocked all communication channels with Seoul. In addition to this, Kim Jong-un’s sister, Kim Yo-jong, who now oversees relations with the South and, in general, has practically become the second most influential figure in the DPRK power structure, promised Seoul to destroy the inter-Korean liaison office in Kaesong in the near future (which was done — Ed. note.), the next step to be made by the military of the North.
The point was not, of course, in sending the balloons with leaflets to North Korea, especially since many of them had not reached the DPRK. The reasons go deeper. On overcoming the coronavirus pandemic, the DPRK economy is in dire need of economic support, and Pyongyang makes it clear that they are dissatisfied with Seoul’s lack of any steps aimed at restoring inter-Korean economic cooperation. This was stipulated by the agreements reached at the summits of Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in. This is primarily about the Kaesong Industrial Complex (KIC) and the Kumgangsan tourist region. The KIC, located in the DPRK near the border with the Republic of Korea, was the largest and most successful inter-Korean project. It housed the production of more than a hundred South Korean small and medium-sized enterprises, which employed about 50 thousand North Korean workers. By 2015, through the work of the Kaesong complex, inter-Korean trade turnover reached USD 3 billion, which made South Korea the second most important trading partner of the DPRK after China. The Kumgangsan tourist region was open to South Korean citizens for ten years, from 1998 to 2008. During this time, almost 2 million South Koreans could visit it, giving the DPRK government an additional source of income.
Pyongyang seems to be counting on the large victory of the ruling Democratic Party in the parliamentary elections in South Korea in April this year, which might create new prerequisites for restarting the inter-Korean peace process. This is all the more since immediately after the elections, the Office of President Moon Jae-in stated that normalization of relations with Pyongyang remained a priority for the country’s leadership and the resumption of negotiations between the North and the South might occur in May-June.
However, the initiator of rapprochement with the North, President Moon Jae-in, found himself in a critical situation. The most important asset of his party in the elections was not an inter-Korean settlement program, but the successful actions of the South Korean authorities in the fight against the pandemic. Now that the unrest around the pandemic has more or less subsided, the economic problems in the country, aggravated by the pandemic and corruption scandals involving people close to Moon, are again coming to the fore in the public consciousness of the South Koreans. So today, the President of the Republic of Korea is clearly not up to talking with Pyongyang.
The pressure of the big ally certainly plays its role. Before the results of the U.S. presidential election, Washington will not only be unable to take any action on the Korean vector, but will also disallow Seoul to take the initiative.
Do all of Korea’s Neighbors Want the Reunification?
In the current alignment of forces near the Far Eastern borders of Russia, the establishment of Korea as a single independent neutral and nuclear-free state would be in its interest. The question, however, is that at this stage, neither North nor South Korea is ready for reunification. The partners of the two Korean states are not ready for this either.
Seoul is concerned that reunification will come at a very high cost, pulling it out of competition at the regional and global levels for a long time. Pyongyang, in turn, does not intend to surrender to the South. They examined the experience of Germany, where the capitalist West brought the socialist East to heel, making former GDR citizens “second-class” and subjecting members of the former East German power elite to all kinds of persecution, including imprisonment. The new young generation of the North Korean elite is actively blending in with the emerging North Korean business under Kim Jong-un. We have already seen something similar in Russia. Both of these classes — the current military party elite and the North Korean nouveau riche — have a vital common interest in preserving a separate North Korean statehood. The unification of Korea under the leadership of Seoul is equally dangerous for both, because in this case, the elite will lose power, and local business will simply be crushed by the South Korean chaebol monopolies.
As for the United States, it is not really in its interest to have Korea reunited rather than having status quo on the Korean peninsula, maintaining tensions there. This is the most convenient way to keep and, if necessary, strengthen the U.S. military-political presence in Northeast Asia.
China is considering the alignment of forces on the Korean Peninsula primarily through the prism of its confrontation with the United States. Beijing will support the reunification of Korea only if it is sure that a united Korea will be pro-Chinese. There is no certainty about this: Korea, united under Seoul conditions, will, at best for China, become a powerful independent state with strong ties to the United States, and at worst, like Japan, the outpost of Washington’s deterrence of China in the region.
The Japanese, in turn, say that the main question for them is who will get the North Korean nuclear weapons. Tokyo will support the reunification of Korea, only being sure that these weapons are destroyed or withdrawn. In fact, the Japanese are simply afraid of the emergence of a united Korea as a powerful competitor in the regional and world arena, similar to the way England and France tried to delay the unification of Germany in the late 1980s.
Therefore, speaking about the reunification of Korea in the current conditions is at least premature. It should be a matter of inter-Korean reconciliation, building bridges between the two Korean states.
Trump and Pyongyang
In 2018 Donald Trump’s transition from the threat of a military attack on Pyongyang to a dialog with Kim Jong-un was largely forced. Both the insistence of South Korean President Moon Jae-in on the issue of inter-Korean detente and the general international attitude against the risk of a nuclear war against North Korea played a role. Special attention should be given to, firstly, the “road map” for settling the nuclear issue on the Korean peninsula put forward on July 4, 2017, by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Russia and China. And, secondly, to the unwillingness of the U.S. allies to engage in new American adventures in Korea, which was clearly shown in January 2018 at Vancouver meeting of the foreign ministers of those states whose troops fought in the Korean War of 1950-1953 on the side of the South as part of the so-called UN forces in Korea.
In dialog with Donald Trump, Kim Jong-un voiced the new relations between the DPRK and the U.S. as the main condition for the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. These relations should be based on mutual trust and free from mutual demonization. It is clear that this is not an easy task for Pyongyang and Washington. But there are examples of how similar challenges were solved in due time in China-the U.S. and Vietnam-the U.S. relations. The future relations of the DPRK and the U.S. could reach the level of today’s communication between Vietnam and the U.S., when they still remember the war, but the memory of the past does not prevent them from working together in the present.
Pyongyang could stop the development of ICBMs, freeze the production of nuclear materials, and open its nuclear facilities for international inspections. And Washington, in return, would officially recognize the DPRK, establish diplomatic relations with it, exchange diplomatic missions, limit military activities at its borders, reduce and ultimately lift sanctions, and provide economic and energy assistance to the North.
The problem, however, is that at least for the coming year, any progress in the U.S.-North Korea dialog is ruled out. Trump is concerned about preparations for the presidential election, the extremely unfavorable situation in the country due to racial unrest, and not about Korea. Both now and in case of winning the elected position, there will be more important issues — China, Europe, Russia, the Middle East. Korea will not be among the U.S. foreign policy priorities even if Biden wins the election (all for the same reasons).
Inter-Korean Reconciliation Matter is in the Hands of Koreans Themselves
The main result of the inter-Korean summits was Seoul being reconciled with the existence of the DPRK and adopting the policy of peaceful coexistence with respect to it. The urgent need for the Republic of Korea today is to recognize the status of the DPRK as a sovereign state, the rule of law and constitutionality of its leadership, and shift the relations between the two Koreas into a bilateral format.
The UN is called upon to play its role in this situation. It has been dealing with the “Korean issue” from the moment it arose in the late 1940s. Yet after the approval of two resolutions on this issue at once during the 30th session of the General Assembly in November 1975 (one initiated by the USA and the other by the USSR (both remained unfulfilled)), it basically removed the issue of a political settlement in Korea from the agenda.
First of all, it is worth changing a completely unnatural situation when, formally it is not the Republic of Korea, that is in the military confrontation with the DPRK, but the UN. To assist South Korea during the Korean War, in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution No. 84 of July 7, 1950, the United Nations Forces in Korea were created — the multinational armed forces of 16 states led by the United States. Since these forces participated in the Korean War under the UN flag, and the 1953 Korean Armistice Agreement was signed on the behalf of these forces opposing the Korean People’s Army and Chinese People’s Volunteers (and in fact on behalf of the UN), the latter is still formally at war with the DPRK, that since 1991 is a full member of the UN.
It is time to adopt the UN Security Council declaration and to declare that the Korean War was a page of the past, that the UN Security Council turns this page and, accordingly, there is no need for the UN Command in Korea.
As for the American troops in South Korea, their presence should be regulated exclusively by interstate agreements between the Republic of Korea and the United States. In this case, it would be worthwhile to decide on the issue of Operational Command (OPCON) by the ROK/US Combined Forces Command. Now, under bilateral agreements, in peacetime on the peninsula, South Korea commands both its own troops and the U.S. military contingent. However, with the outbreak of war, the command automatically transfers to the United States, which means, in fact, that the President of the Republic of Korea, as the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the country’s armed forces, becomes subordinate to the Lieutenant General of the U.S. Armed Forces.
The question about the need to replace the 1953 Armistice Agreement in Korea with a peace treaty repeatedly arose in connection with the inter-Korean summits. At the same time, there is a wide range of opinions expressed as to which states should be parties to this treaty.
The Armistice Agreement of 1953 was not an interstate document. It was an agreement between the commanders-in-chief of the warring parties on the suspension of hostilities, the withdrawal of troops and establishing a demilitarized border between them. Neither the Republic of Korea, nor the United States, nor China in state capacity were involved in the armistice agreement. Moreover, the United States and China did not participate in the Korean War as states.
The peace treaty on the Korean Peninsula should be the treaty of two sovereign independent states — the DPRK and the Republic of Korea. There are certain preconditions for this. A joint communique of the Republic of Korea and North Korea was issued on July 4, 1972, calling for an independent and peaceful reunification of the divided country, without depending on foreign powers and without foreign interference, on the basis of “great national unity.” In December 1991, the heads of government of the North and South for the first time formally recognized the equal existence of two Korean states by signing the Agreement on Reconciliation, Non-aggression and Exchanges and Cooperation. Five inter-Korean summits took place from 2000 to 2018, joint declarations being adopted at each of them — a program for the development of bilateral relations aimed at a gradual shift from confrontation to reconciliation and phased rapprochement. None of these documents provided for the participation of any third states in inter-Korean communication. It was and should be about the interaction of the two Koreas exclusively in a bilateral format.
It is noteworthy that during the 2018 Pyongyang Summit the Agreement on the Implementation of the Panmunjom Declaration in the Military Domain was signed by the Ministers of Defense of the DPRK and the Republic of Korea. This is a fundamentally new and, most importantly, a practical step towards reducing military tension. Confidence-building measures between the military are being strengthened, communication channels are opening up, the parties are going to take all measures to prevent any clashes and conflicts with the use of military force in any territory. This is all the more important, firstly, since the ROK in its own capacity did not sign the Armistice Agreement in Korea in 1953. Secondly, the leaders of the two states announced that they would pursue a joint bid to host the 2032 Olympic Games. That is, the ROK recognized that it did not expect, as in the previous years, the regime to fall in the DPRK and that the North and South would exist separately even in 15 years.
The Korean War that started 70 years ago, has not ended yet. The Korean crisis today is one of the main threats to international security. This crisis has two components: the division of the Korean nation over decades into two separate states and the DPRK nuclear missile program.
These two components of the Korean crisis are interconnected, but their impact on each other is unequal. Pyongyang’s refusal from nuclear development alone will not end the confrontation between North and South. At the same time, normalization of inter-Korean relations is a prerequisite for ending the Korean War matters and solving the denuclearization issue of the Korean Peninsula.
From our partner RIAC
The role of CPC in supporting leadership schools in democratic countries
The Department of International Communication is officially under the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China “CPC”, known by its former name (International Department “ID” or External Department).
It has played a major role in introducing the policies of China and its ruling Communist Party, since the establishment of the External Department of Political Liaison of the Party in 1951, especially those its contacts and communications with (communist and leftist orientations, as well as all other intellectual and ideological currents, in addition to its keenness to communicate with international think tanks and research, and the most prominent academics around the world).
Through my academic experience, academic and research closeness by virtue of my specialization and my in-depth study in the politics of the Communist Party of China, I have been able to analytically approach all departments and committees of the ruling Communist Party and its local grassroots branches in all regions, provinces and autonomous regions of mainly ethnic nationalities in China, in addition to my PhD thesis has focused on tracking and analyzing all policies related to the Communist Party of China, especially the internal ones, which gave me the opportunity to get acquainted with the most prominent comrades in the ruling Communist Party in China and all the visions of the members of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and its political office, and my attempt to extensively and permanently review a number of (Documents issued by the archives of the Communist Party Library and its main sessions. Perhaps I had the luck to see old and rare archival documents dating back to the 1950s, and I was fortunate to be close to all international intellectual and research projects aimed at studying the history of the Communist Party of China, its main stations, and the main difficulties and challenges. and patterns of relationship with the powers of the West).
– Based on my academic and analytical understanding of the most prominent roles of the “External Department of Political Communication of the Communist Party of China”, as an academic and expert specialized in Chinese political affairs, I was able to track and monitor the most prominent main roles of the “International Political Liaison Committee of the Communist Party of China”, and its relations and contacts in the past and present, given the importance of the work of tthis international committee in conducting the basic planning and policies of the Communist Party, as the following:
My research and academic exposure, as an expert in Chinese political affairs, came to the most prominent policies of the ruling Communist Party in China and its internal and then external relations through the Foreign Department of the Central Committee, with referring to many (recordings and jottings archives for all of the memories and documents during the Cold War era), and the most prominent rare communist documents that I dealt with, which enabled me academically to study, research, and become familiar with that era that is absent from the minds of new generations, especially my fellow young researchers and academics to study the role of the Communist Party of China and its relevant committee. Through external contacts with the world, in support of the (national liberation movements in Africa and the world during the fifties and sixties), and even an extensive personal and academic acquaintance with the most prominent aspects of the old relations between (the Nasserist era in the history of Egypt for the late Egyptian leader “Gamal Abdel Nasser” and the late Chinese leader, comrade “Zhou Anlai”).
My academic focus on the content of the work of the “External Department of Political Communication of the ruling Communist Party in China” was a pivotal factor in understanding China’s extended relations during ancient periods, and perhaps my study of that ancient era in which the complex conditions of my study led me to reach some new academic and analytica results, and the most important for me personally, was my ability to (rewrite and review the era of the late Egyptian President “Nasser” and the Free Officers in the history of Egypt and the main contacts of the leader “Gamal Abdel Nasser” with China).
As a researcher and academic concerned with Chinese affairs and the policies of the ruling Communist Party, I was able to understand some ancient eras, due to tracking the work and monitoring of the roles of the “International Liaison Committee of the Communist Party”, especially after looking at an old archive of the “Cold War Project”, which I got close to historically and archivally. As an integrated international academic work, I approached its researchers, to understand how the old leaders of the Communist Party of China think during the (period of international liberation movements from Western colonialism) and compare them with the current communist leaders, and try to understand all Western theories that provided different and varied interpretations to understand the mechanism of thinking and formation of the Communist Party of China.
Perhaps the new and very rare matter in research and analysis, which occupied my mind and analysis for a long time, because there were no serious studies about it in the first place, is (an academic research and analysis on the extent of the aspects of the relationship between the external department of the international communication of the Communist Party of China and the Department of Tourism of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, during the era of the fifties in introducing China’s policies globally), especially in front of foreigners and visitors, given that the establishment of an independent department for tourism in China within the Chinese Foreign Ministry in the fifties, which made me pause for a long time to understand: the extent of the relationship between the (Department of Tourism and the International Liaison Committees) of the Communist Party of China, given that they basically mean to improve China’s image internationally and to understand, explain and interpret its policies around the world?
In my personal and academic analytical opinion, it’s not possible to understand all those historical epochs and stages of the Communist Party of China, without a (precise analytical understanding of the working mechanism of the Committee for Communication and External Action of the Communist Party of China), which is entrusted with communicating primarily with the outside world and other parties in the world since the history of its establishment and establishment in the early fifties of the last century.
In general, the “International Liaison Committee of the CPC Central Committee” aims to explain and clarify the policies of the Communist Party of China in the first place, define its achievements and clarify its most important roles internally and externally, and most importantly to respond to those American and Western accusations, and the “CPC” leaders always emphasize that “China is not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries to spread a certain style or ideology or to export the Chinese model of the Communist Party globally”. The Committee for “Liaison and Communication with the Outside World” of the Communist Party of China has also succeeded in (supporting many leadership schools in a number of African democratic countries, and providing educational programs created by the Communist Party of China).
The International Liaison Committee of the Central Committee of the ruling Communist Party of China was able to highlight many of China’s global development efforts for leaders of foreign political parties and to remove confusion and ambiguity about policies related to China and its ruling Communist Party with the constant emphasis of the Chinese leadership on the keenness of the Chinese leadership of the Secretary-General of the Communist Party of China, Comrade “Xi Jinping”, to adopt many of the most profitable and beneficial development initiatives for the world, especially for the marginalized, the poor and developing countries, such as: (Belt and Road Initiative, Dialogue among Civilizations, Exchange and Civilized Cooperation among all, the common destiny of humanity, win-win principle, mutual benefits, pursuit of development and cooperation, South-South cooperation, dialogue and narrowing the gap between North and South), and the other Chinese global development initiatives.
It is noted here that (the international or external section of the Communist Party of China), has no reservations about any trend, type, or intellectual or ideological current adopted by any of those foreign political parties that deal with it around the world, given that the leaders of the Communist Party of China can deal with all of the (right-wing parties, left-wing parties, and with all other parties of different orientations and intellectual and ideological currents).
Many of the tasks of the “CPC Foreign Department” have been carried out online during the period of the Coronavirus pandemic or “Covid-19”, with the aim of introducing the world to China’s achievements in eliminating the pandemic, and how to overcome challenges and learn from the Chinese experience, according to the principle of “common destiny for humanity”.
Here, I can present statistics to understand the most important actual activities of the CPC Foreign Committee. We can identify here that (the CPC Foreign Department or Foreign Liaison Department) has succeeded in (communicating with more than 600 political organizations in more than 160 countries in the world), and these external contacts have increased during the same year of appointing the Comrade “Xi Jinping” in reign. The number and percentage of high-level party meetings between (the external department of the Communist Party with all foreign political parties increased by more than 50% between 2012 and 2017, until the total of those meetings reached more than 230 annual meetings).
Some academics in the West have described the activities of the CPC’s Foreign Department as being similar to the “New Comintern”, that is meaning, the formation of an institutionalized communist regime led by China, which is (similar to the old international communist movement), led by the former Soviet Union before its disintegration.
From my analytical and academic point of view, it is noted that (there is a fundamental difference between the communist system of China compared to other political systems such as Western democracy), China does not preach or advocate the adoption of communism, and its only goal is to prove that countries can become richer without being Democracy in the literal sense that some are trying to export to us, and this message is receptive to politicians who see that the checks and balances of democracy in the same Western liberal concept are disturbing, with their call to change regimes according to the dictates and conditions of the West.
The Chinese President, Comrade “Xi Jinping”, played a major role through his presence and activities within the CPC’s external communication and work committees with the world before he took power in the first place, and head of the “Central Institute for the Qualification of Communist Party of China Leaders”, from which he was rehabilitated and nominated to become the country’s president in 2013.
After Comrade “Xi Jinping” assumed power in China in 2013, he was more confident in the ideas of the Communist Party and the consolidation of its ideology among everyone, especially among the youth and training young people on party principles for the advancement of the Chinese nation. Hence, the Communist Party only started working on increasing its influence on private sector companies in a more specific and accurate way in a strategy known as: (the party building strategy that baptizes everyone), meaning: forming party committees in all Chinese companies, including those belonging to the private sector or to individuals, so that it can be considered whether the company’s decisions are in line with the policies of the government and the “CPC” or not?
The late founder of modern Singapore “Lee Kuan Yew”, described, in an interview with American foreign policy experts “Graham Allison & Robert Blackwill”, in 2012, before Comrade “Xi Jinping” took office, saying that:
“Xi Jinping has iron in his soul more than former President “Hu Jintao”, who came to power without going through the trials and tribulations of “Xi Jinping”. In the sense of referring to the long experience of Comrade “Xi”, given his presence and passing through all party positions in the “CPC” and his deep belief in his ideas and spreading the spirit and ideas of the importance of ideological education sound of Chinese youth and children, with the aim of consolidating the ideological ideas of the CPC within them through schools and various Chinese and local media)
The role and spread of many (Party committees within all sectors of Chinese society during the era of Comrade “Xi”, with the aim of collectively uniting with the policies and leaders of the Communist Party of China), and we can understand the request of the Chinese President, Comrade “Xi Jinping” from the private sector to (Unite around the Communist Party, its policies and leaders to jointly advance the Chinese state), and accordingly, “Yi Qing”, as the responsible for China Federation of Industry and Commerce has ordered to open (party committees supervised by the Communist Party to apply the state policies and laws and their interconnection together to defend the interests of the Chinese nation, especially abroad).
Based on the immediately preceding point, we can notify that “Yi Qing”, as a senior official of the China Federation of Industry and Commerce, called on all companies and private sectors to establish (human resources departments led by the Communist Party of China and its internal committees, with the formation of monitoring units that allow the Communist Party committees to scrutinize company managers) and knowing the depth of their (commitment to the collective policies of the party and the state before the world). I can note and analyze that all of these measures have extended and included mainly all large Chinese companies and groups in particular, given the diminished role of smaller companies in positively influencing the dissemination of the policies and ideas of the Communist Party abroad decisively compared to those of their counterpart companies with space, business volume and investments larger than them in general China.
I can observe and analyze one of the main activities of the “CPC” Foreign Department during the era of Comrade “Xi Jinping” in organizing training courses for foreign political parties, especially those in developing countries, with the purpose of (understanding and highlighting mainly the policies of the strong central leadership of the Communist ruler Party in China).
Here we can analyze the statement of the Head of the Foreign Department of the Communist Party of China, whose name is “Song Tao”, in an online briefing to party leaders from 36 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, with the assertion of “Song Tao”, that:
“The achievements of the Communist Party of China in pushing the wheel of comprehensive development has proven the wisdom of the five-year plans adopted and defended by the Communist Party of China to advance the sectors of Chinese society in all fields”
In his capacity as responsible for all the activities of the Party’s foreign committees and effectively communicating with the outside world, we can find out that “Song Tao” has emphasized that:
“The Chinese regime and its Communist Party can be an important reference for its listeners to learn and benefit from its achievements and successes, how to overcome its failures and any negatives or challenges it faces. Because it turns out that collectively believing in the goal in China by sticking to the leadership of the Communist Party and rallying around it, and will put all those plans and measures on the right track”
On this occasion, a general conference was held in Beijing at the end of 2017, which was joined by (leaders and members of political parties from 120 countries around the world, members of the Democratic and Republican parties at the USA has been attended, despite their public criticism of the policies of the Communist Party of China). Chinese President Comrade “Xi Jinping” also delivered the keynote speech, and many participants signed the statement (Beijing Initiative), praising all the policies of the Communist Party of China and Comrade President “Xi Jinping” in the world.
One of the most prominent roles and works of the (Committee for the Outer World of the Communist Party of China) was to explain, publish and review the book of Chinese President Comrade “Xi Jinping”, known internationally as “The Complete Works of President “Xi Jinping”: On Governance and Administration”, which is consists of three parts to explain the view of Chinese President Comrade “Xi” on the methods and arts of government in China and his view of the world through it.
The foreign committee committees of the Communist Party has organized (several training courses and international classes to explain the ideas of the Chinese President Comrade “Xi Jinping’s book” on the methods and systems of Chinese rule). The most remarkable thing to me is the keenness of a number of African leaders and officials from the ruling parties in countries, such as: (Angola, Congo Brazzaville, Ghana, Mozambique, Panama, and Venezuela) to attend classes and training courses organized by the “Foreign Work Committee” of the Communist Party of China to introduce and explain the ideas of Comrade “Xi Jinping” on the (philosophy of governance and administration in China), with the aim of benefiting from the Chinese experience and the experience of Chinese President Comrade “Xi Jinping” in managing the Chinese state’s policies internally and externally around the world, and understanding and explaining the reason for the success of the Chinese experience and its global development initiatives, such as the “Chinese Belt and Road Initiative”, and others.
There are many official websites in China that promote and explain all (the ideas and policies of the Communist Party of China, and how to strengthen these efforts by communicating with the international community and all political parties around the world, including those parties and countries with a different democratic and liberal ideological vision), and that is a clear sign – according to my own analysis and understanding as an Egyptian researcher in Chinese Politics – to open up the Communist Party of China, and its great willingness to cooperate with everyone and all partners and other parties around the world, including those who differ with it ideologically and ideologically.
Here, we can identify that the (External Department of the Foreign Political Communication of the ruling Communist Party of China with the world) also laid the foundation stone for building ideological schools for the ideas and policies of the Communist Party of China, most notably the opening of (The Ideological School of the Communist Party of China in Tanzania in 2018), and this Tanzanian school is funded Completely from China and the CPC Foreign Liaison Committee, the opening ceremony of the Ideological School in Tanzania was attended by “Mr.Song Tao”, in his capacity as an official and main representative of the Communist Party of the Chinese state, and as the official head and representative of the CPC External Liaison Committee, as well as the presence and participation of many Among the African officials in the opening of the communist ideological school in Tanzania, as representatives of a number of African parties ruling several African countries friendly to China, such as: (South Africa, Angola, Mozambique, Namibia, and Zimbabwe).
The new thing that stopped me in studying and analyzing here, is that a number of African countries that are internationally classified as democratic countries, such as: (Ghana, Kkenya and South Africa), the Foreign Department of the Communist Party of China sponsored several visits by delegations from those democratic parties. To China, in the presence of the leaders of African democratic ruling parties, with the aim of (studying the form and construction of parties, governance and all policies related to China and its Communist Party).
Most notably, the “New National Party of Ghana”, which is currently the ruling party in Ghana, asked for many trainings from the Communist Party of China and its Committee and External Communication Department, in order to (enhance skills Ideology of Ghanaian New National Party Members).
We can notify that the (formerly ruling Democratic National Congress of Ghana) sent dozens of its employees to China to receive and learn such training, and the (Ghana Democratic National Congress) also opened a leadership school in the Ghanaian capital that provides educational programs and materials created by the Chinese Communist Party. It aims to spread its ideas and adopt its policies among the members, despite the different and different ideological views of the Ghanaian party.
We conclude through our analysis of the most prominent roles of the International Liaison Committee of the Central Committee of the ruling Communist Party in China, that it is (the eye through which the world and its political parties see China and its ruling Communist Party). Here, the importance of the document issued by the “Propaganda Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China” on August 16, 2021, entitled: “The Chinese Communist Party: Its Mission and Contributions”, comes in emphasizing the importance of the “Chinese people” themselves at the heart of the “people’s government and the people’s army”. In order to achieve the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, which is already confirmed by all the documents of the International Liaison Committee of the ruling Communist Party, on the role of the ruling Communist Party and its main committees in discussing all issues of concern to the Chinese people, such as: (five-year plan, drafting reports submitted by the Secretary-General of the Communist Party of China to the National Congress of the Communist Party of China, and the plenary sessions of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China), all of which aim to affirm the advancement of the Chinese nation and the Chinese people before the world, and the role of the ruling Communist Party in achieving this.
The global role of CPC and Xi Jinping in promoting a dialogue among civilizations
The ruling Communist Party of China has hosted a “Dialogue on Exchange and Common Learning among Civilizations” on January 10, 2022, which was held in its second session, was attended by Vice Chairman of the Chinese Parliament “Ji Bingchuan”, Foreign Minister of the Communist Party of China “Song Tao”, and a number of among the senior leaders and officials of the Chinese state, with the participation of many political elites from former heads of government and officials of international and national organizations and bodies concerned with dialogue among civilizations and spreading the culture of coexistence, including the former Director-General of “UNESCO”. The ruling Communist Party of China and Chinese President “Xi Jinping” play a prominent role in promoting dialogue among civilizations in the world with an open Chinese vision to all, in accordance with the principle of “the common future of mankind”.
So, according to my area of expertise and especialising in Chinese political affairs, and my PhD thesis dissertation has already been focused several years ago on all policies related to the comrades of the Communist Party of China and its political elites, the Egyptian researcher will analyze the Chinese vision to the dialogue among the, as follows:
The Communist Party of China “CPC” and President “Xi Jinping’s rapprochement” with all friends around the world: The CPC seeks to open up to more friends around the world. Therefore, the “CPC” maintains regular communications with more than (400 parties and political organizations in more than 160 countries in the world), and its circle of friends is constantly expanding. Looking to the future, the “CPC” is keenly to strengthen communications with all of the parties of the world, share Party-building and state-rule experiences, conduct exchange and dialogue among civilizations, enhance strategic mutual trust, and work with the peoples of the world to advance the “building of a community with a shared future for mankind and the building of a better world hand in hand”.
The Communist Party of China and President “Xi Jinping” set a unique principle for the global vision of learning and benefiting from the civilizational achievements: This vision is based on respecting of peoples and nations, and giving the rights of differences among all, according to the actual conditions of every country and its internal circumstances.
The theory of the Chinese Communist Party known as “civilizational innovations” to open up to the peoples and civilizations of the world and support the policy of difference: The theory of “civilizational innovations” is based on respect for peoples and their differences with openness to all the features of progress achieved by the peoples of the countries of the world, through keenness on dialogue, exchange and cooperation with peoples and parties from all over the world, with the Communist Party of China “CPC”, declaring its full support for those peoples in promoting cultural exchange and people-to-people friendship between them and China.
Develop a plan for the Communist Party of China “CPC” to share its experiences globally with countries and political parties around the world: The leaders and officials of the Communist Party in China affirmed their keenness to support global dialogue between China and all countries and peoples during the next five years, with the Communist Party of China “CPC” pledging to provide an opportunity for 15,000 people from the political parties that are representing all of the different countries of the world to conduct the exchange in China. The most prominent here, is the call of Chinese President “Xi Jinping” for the establishment of a (clear institutional mechanism) aimed at the regular holding of the “High-level Dialogue Conference between the Communist Party of China and World Parties”, so that it becomes a high-level political platform with wide representation and global influence.
All the speeches of the Chinese President, Comrade “Xi Jinping”, affirmed China’s theory of “common global development contributions”: This theory becomes clear after the Corona pandemic, by providing medical and health assistance to all countries and peoples to get rid of the negative effects of the global epidemic, and here China also provided a huge amount of (free aid, preferential loans, technical, human and intellectual support to all developing countries), with the focus of Chinese state leaders and officials within the framework of the “Chinese Belt and Road Initiative” on building a large number of projects in order to advance its economic and social development and improve the livelihood of its people.
The role of Chinese workers and citizens around the world in enhancing China’s image in the civilized dialogue between China and the world, especially in developing and African countries: Perhaps what surprised me personally as a specialist in Chinese affairs specifically is the presence of thousands of Chinese scientists, engineers, businessmen, technicians, doctors, teachers, workers and volunteers who work. Now virtually in a large number of developing countries, working with local people to change their destiny hand in hand and side by side, according to Comrade “Xi Jinping’s clear principle of China’s support for the common destiny of mankind”.
The declaration of the Nineteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China to implement the “Plan for a Prosperous Society of the Chinese People and All Peoples of the World” by the year 2050: According to the planning issued by the (Nineteenth National Congress of the Communist Party of China), it was affirmed that by 2020, China will achieve building a moderately prosperous society in all respects, by 2035 it will basically achieve socialist modernization, and by 2050, China will achieve the construction of a strong, prosperous, democratic, civilized and harmonious modern socialist country for the well-being of the Chinese people and the rest of the world alike. This was confirmed by the leaders of the Communist Party of China in calling on the parties in the world to participate in China in creating more opportunities for cooperation and working to advance a (joint development and prosperity) among the various countries of the world.
China’s role in maintaining global peace: The Chinese state participates in all international forums to promote global stability and peace, and at the present time, China contributes externally to the (payment of more than 36,000 Chinese peacekeeping forces internationally), China has also become a major contributor of forces and funds in the UN peacekeeping operations globally. We find that China has a major role in “maintaining international peace and security and managing conflicts globally”, through the presence of more than (2,500 Chinese officers and soldiers to maintain peace and security in 8 regions for peacekeeping missions), despite the difficulties and dangers they face.
Chinese President “Xi Jinping’s call” to reform and build the global governance system: Comrade Xi Jinping’s call to advance the development of the international political and economic system in a more justice and rational direction, President “Xi Jinping” emphasized in all his political speeches on “China never seeks hegemony, and does not harm others or expand abroad”, and focusing all China’s efforts on achieving development at the international level among all partners and friends.
The Communist Party of China’s call for all political parties around the world to develop “a new theory and foundations for building world peace and joint contribution to global development and protection of the international order: In confirmation of that call from the comrades in the ruling Communist Party in China, their call came to work with all countries of the world, most notably I have the serious emphasis on “China not importing the foreign style from abroad, and not exporting the Chinese style also abroad”, and thus China’s clarity in not forcing all other countries to copy and imitate the way China works.
Chinese President Comrade “Xi Jinping” and the leaders of the Communist Party of China (CPC) called to “narrow the gap between the North and the South”: The Chinese view is to achieve economic globalization based on (openness, inclusiveness, public benefit, balance and mutual gain), and to create conducive conditions to the common development of all mankind and work together to advance development and prosperity for the countries of the world, and to eradicate poverty and underdevelopment, from which many peoples around the world still suffer.
The speeches of the Chinese President, Comrade “Xi Jinping”, affirmed the application of the principle of “building a community with a shared future for mankind” by introducing the “Chinese Belt and Road” initiative: that is why the Chinese keenness on modernization and construction globally and helping everyone without exception achieve (the Joint Construction of the Belt and the Road), as a global platform for activating cooperation between the countries concerned to achieve common development.
China’s global affirmation to respect the right of countries and peoples to choose and differ and build a common community for humanity: This principle is rooted in all principles and documents advocated by the Communist Party of China and its companions, with their affirmation of respecting differences between different countries of the world, and avoiding any differences, contradictions or frictions. It impedes the civilized dialogue between everyone, and raised the Chinese civilizational principle that “all people are belonging to one family”, as they live under “one sky and one planet on Earth”. Therefore, all the peoples of the world should adhere to the idea of “all under heaven from one family”, and search for common ground while leaving aside differences and making joint efforts for (building a community with a shared future for humanity).
In conclusion, the essence of the idea of Chinese dialogue, which is meaningful to all countries, peoples and civilizations around the world, is the belief of the Chinese communist leaders and Chinese comrade “Xi Jinping”, and the affirmation of the belief of the Chinese nation in the principle of “all under heaven from one family”, by reference to the Chinese civilizational heritage, which calls for “loving of all people and creatures, make all nations live together in peace and a world of greater harmony”. This was translated by the political discourses of the Communist Party of China and its General Secretary, President “Xi Jinping”, and their affirmation of the Chinese nation’s aspiration to live in a better world, and everyone’s pursuit of justice for the public interest.
Japan’s Rohingya Policy: Deviation From Long-held Distinction
The story of Japan long pervasive in Bangladesh even across the world consists of two distinct aspects. One is the horrific nuclear bomb attack on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 and other is the Japanese people’s modesty, magnanimity and their national standing for the cause of humanity. Disproportionate response to Japan’s pre-war action with nuclear weapons and subsequent death of millions mostly civilian are still recalled with awful astonishment. Even as a testimony of suffering by the millions of ‘Hibakusha’, the post-war irradiated victims, the heart wrenching story of Sadako Sasaki and her arduous efforts to survive still haunts the people across the world. Similarly victimized for varied reasons, Bangali and Bangladeshi people always stood in solidarity with Japan. The legendary Bangali Jurist Radhabinod Pal and his prudential standing in ‘Tokyo Trial’ to defend Japan from wholesale allegation of committing war crime symbolize that solidarity. And Bangladesh is among the forefront countries to set up peace stone in Okinawa Peace Memorial Park.
The story of Japanese people’s modesty, charity and national standing for the just cause of humanity especially at the time of our independence struggle and post-war reconstruction effort is quite prevalent in Bangladesh. Japan was the first country to send delegation to newly independent Bangladesh in a bid to aid economic and infrastructural reconstruction. The name like ‘Shapla Neer’, a well renowned Japanese NGO, or JICA, Japan International Cooperation Agency, resonates Japanese largesse and support to Bangladesh. Half of a century old Bilateral relation between Bangladesh and Japan is characterized with reciprocity and the reverence of Bangladeshi people to Japan. And this relational reverence to Japan is more to do with Japan’s long-standing stance for just and humanitarian cause than its formidable economic position.
But given the Japan’s inertia, in some cases defiance, in response to the one of the greatest injustices in 21st century- Rohingya refugee crisis, it seems that Japan has substantially drifted away over the time from its position of long-held soft power strength- reputation of being benign to humanitarian cause. In the name of policy of non-interference, Japan has constantly defied the brutality unleashed by Myanmar military junta. Even as a blow to the very cause of humanity, in many cases they had cozied up to perpetrators. Let alone rendering any support to global initiatives to the cause, Japan stood in defiance to the collective steps of targeted sanctions or bringing perpetrators to the justice for parochial geopolitical and economical interests. Japan’s parochialism in Myanmar policy regarding Rohingya crisis has brought her to the same footing of It’s geopolitical rival, China. Both countries have been upholding their geostrategic interests above the greater humanitarian conviction even the crisis took the genocidal turn in August, 2017. Constantly blurring policy line between China and Japan questions the very strength of distinct Japanese way to the world.
Japan’s policy of non-interference regarding Rohingya crisis stands on the naive notion that over the time, through the economic development, Myanmar would go through the continuous democratic evolution and eventually embrace the inclusive governance values. But blow to this very notion, the recent coup at nascent stage of democracy has made it clear that the Myanmar military machine is impossible to be extricated from state mechanism. And state-sponsored apartheid policies against the Rohingya minority will surely follow the past precedents if not halted with harsh responses.
Again Japan’s Rohingya policy doesn’t reflect very standing of its own people. Officially Japan never recognise Rohingya people as separate ethnic minority native for long in Myanmar. They use ‘Muslim’, ‘Rakhine Muslim’ even ‘Bangali’, a derogatory term used in Myanmar to indicate Rohingya as illegal Bangladeshi immigrants, in their Official statements. But clear contrast to the official line, Japanese media and civil societies use the term ‘Rohingya’ to denote the ethnic entity. This contrasting line, given the high degree of reflection and integration between Japanese media and people, demonstrates the dearth of democratic principle in Japan’s foreign policy position.
Another deviation in Japan’s foreign policy orientation toward Rohingya crisis is its conspicuous apathy to mobilise its position of strength, economic one in Myanmar and political in global platforms like United Nations, to contribute to the resolution of crisis. Historically Japan has considerable economic footings in Myanmar, given its position of being 6th largest foreign direct investor, 3rd largest importer and 7th largest exporter to Myanmar. But rather than mechanizing the economic might to tame Myanmar’s policy line toward the resolution of crisis, it has been showing clear apathy to that end and has continuously been toeing the line demarcated with geopolitical and geo-economical colour.
Over 1 million Rohingya in Bangladesh along with hundreds of thousands across the world have been lingering to return to their birth land and loitering for Justice to the brutality unleashed to them. Bangladesh with limited resources stood by the them and has been voicing for their justice in international platforms. But if that voice from tiny country like Bangladesh for broader cause of humanity is not heard and responded by powerful ones like Japan, Justice will continue to cry in seclusion. As famous maxim tells us,” Justice delayed is Justice denied”, how much delay does it necessitate to awaken the world to stand for Rohingya cause?
Labour market recovery still ‘slow and uncertain’
As the COVID-19 pandemic grinds on and global labour markets continue to struggle, the latest International Labour Organization (ILO) report,...
India’s open invitation to a nuclear Armageddon
Army chief General Manoj Mukund Naravane said that “India was not averse to the possible demilitarisation of the Siachen glacier...
The role of CPC in supporting leadership schools in democratic countries
The Department of International Communication is officially under the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China “CPC”, known by...
Guterres Calls on Private Sector to Help Developing Countries with Post-Pandemic Recovery
In a special address at the virtual World Economic Forum Davos Agenda 2022 on Monday, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres...
Modi Urges All Countries to Embrace Sustainable Lifestyles
Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India used his address to the Davos Agenda 2022 to call on all countries to...
China: $1.9 Trillion Boost and 88M Jobs by 2030 Possible with Nature-Positive Solutions
Nearly $9 trillion, two-thirds of China’s total Gross Domestic Product (GDP), is at risk of disruption from nature loss. Making...
UN-backed COVAX mechanism delivers its 1 billionth COVID-19 vaccine dose
With a 1.1 million jab delivery in Rwanda this weekend, the World Health Organization’s multilateral initiative to provide equal access...
Defense3 days ago
Why shouldn’t Israel Undermine Iran’s Conventional Deterrence
New Social Compact3 days ago
Age No Bar: A Paradigm Shift in the Girl Child’s Marriageable Age in India
Americas4 days ago
The Forgotten Analogy: World War II
Crypto Insights4 days ago
Unifying Cryptocurrency ESG Efforts Key to Boost Global Adoption
Crypto Insights3 days ago
The Bitcoin ETFs: An Instrument to be Reckoned With
Middle East3 days ago
Egypt vis-à-vis the UAE: Who is Driving Whom?
Science & Technology4 days ago
Ethical aspects relating to cyberspace: Self-regulation and codes of conduct
Economy3 days ago
Rebalancing Act: China’s 2022 Outlook