Background
North Korea (officially, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, or DPRK) sits at the strategic intersection between the People’s Republic of China (PRC, or China), the U.S., and its East Asian allies, the Republic of Korea (ROK) and Japan. (Russia is also a player, but only plays a bit role in this analysis.) In 2017 and 2018, events on the Korean peninsula reached a fever pitch of both tension and détente. The U.S.-led maximum pressure campaign put the U.S. and its allies on a near-war footing, and then, in an unlikely turn, an incredible thaw began. A sitting U.S. president met for the first time with a North Korean supreme leader, and at least some halting efforts towards the removal of nuclear capability from the northern half of the peninsula appeared to have begun. Major annual military exercises by the U.S. and ROK were shelved. Meanwhile, the ROK president had several meetings with the North Korean leader.
Many Western public figures believe that China has the power to “fix” the North Korea issue whenever it wishes, including the U.S. president. Based on a superficial examination, relations between the PRC and the DPRK appear to have improved in 2018. For the first time since taking power, the North Korean leader traveled to another country for a visit (it happened to be China), and high-level Chinese envoys were also received in Pyongyang. But on a deeper level, what is the state of relations? How could we tell using open source materials?
Research Questions
As one part of a larger research project, this effort proposes to examine person-to-person ties between the PRC and DPRK as one means of characterizing the nature of state-to-state relations. Using social network analysis (SNA) tools is meant to reveal the more profound significance of particular ties.
- Which ties are the most valuable/important/influential? Are there certain positions which seem to be the most influential, regardless of who occupies them?
- What degree of resiliency exists in the relationship? (i.e., is there but a single main link, or are there multiple links of near-equal strength that could be used as a fall-back should something untoward happen to the primary interlocutors?) What would be the implications of the potential severing of critical links?
- Do the connections remain now? If not, has a different channel replaced them?
Hypothesis
My primary hypothesis is that overall, relations between the DPRK and PRC have worsened since 2011. In the larger picture, I believe such a worsening of relations between the countries contributed to the DPRK’s decision to focus on the rapid development of its nuclear weapons capability during this time period. I also believe that the research will show that individuals are more important than roles in the PRC-DPRK relationship (i.e., position matters less than does who is the specific person in the job).
Previous Works and Data Collection
At least two analysts have examined power structures and person-to-person relations in the Chinese Politburo and high leadership. Keller’s work, described in Niall Ferguson’s 2018 book, The Square and the Tower, examines network position as a factor in coalitions which allow certain people to ascend to top leadership positions. Gregory’s 2013 study tests several candidate theories which aim to explain loci of influence on the Chinese Politburo and finds that a combination of institutionalism and personal ideology displays the best fit. Each researcher used SNA as a key tool in their analysis and their work points the way toward additional resources which can help inform this study.
Several databases exist which already contain information about high-level exchanges between the two countries dating back at least to 2003. China Vitae of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace “tracks the appearances and travel of up to 200 leading Chinese officials” and provides date, location, and attendees participating in meetings, as well as the topics discussed. Pacific Forum’s High-Level Visits database provides similar information with slightly less detail, dating back to 1974. I will use these data sources as a starting point for creating a timeline of interactions between the two countries.
Supplementing these sources, I intend to search news media sources (newspapers, etc.) to gain additional data for the analysis. Western papers like the New York Times and Washington Post might contain useful information about these meetings. I will also examine Chinese and North Korean official state media published in English, though these sources shall be considered with a skeptical eye toward reportage of the content of such meetings, should any be included.
Network Measures
After collecting the data, I will create a two-mode dataset for all known PRC-DPRK meetings since Kim Jong-un came to power in late 2011. This will show who attended a meeting, where it was at, what was discussed, and so forth.
Network centrality measures and subgroup analysis should reveal key relationships and possibly notable factions.
It is my hope that analysis of these measures will reveal valuable results helping to specify which persons or positions on both sides have been the most important during the current regime.
Opportunities for Further Analysis
Future researchers could create network diagrams/data sets for top DPRK leadership such as the ones Keller has generated on China.
1 comment:
As we discussed, this is a fascinating challenge. Although I understand that the quality of the SNA you can do depends greatly on the data available, I would have liked to see more effort given to coming up with an overall, high-level research question that doing an SNA could answer. You have a number of what I would call sub-questions about ties and connections, but they need to be tied together into an overall question that addresses your main hypothesis about worsening relations since 2011.A bit more clarity on how SNA metrics are to be used would have been helpful, too. All this will need to be done, and I look forward to seeing it develop. We'll start in class on Friday.
Post a Comment