A game of maps: How China prepared to steal Korean history to prevent reunification

EXPLORING KOREA: Stories from Milwaukee to the DMZ and across a divided Peninsula. This special series explores historical sites and cultural traditions from across the Korean Peninsula, building a bridge back to the search for identity in Milwaukee. From the occupation of Korea at the end of World War II, to Korean War veterans in Milwaukee, veterans from Milwaukee who served in later years at the DMZ, adopted South Korean children who grew up in Milwaukee, different waves of the South Korean diaspora who moved to Milwaukee to raise their families, and even a defector from North Korea, their stories share generations of Korean and American experiences. https://mkeind.com/koreanstories

Along with its economic rise in the early 2000s, China’s geopolitical ambitions took a particularly aggressive turn concerning its northeastern neighbor, North Korea.

Amid rising concerns about the collapse of Kim Jong-il’s oppressive regime (1994-2011), China quietly laid the groundwork to assert historical claims over North Korean territory. The maneuver, ostensibly aimed at bringing stability to a volatile region in the event of a power vacuum, concealed the true goal.

China was prepared to seize territory and prevent Korean reunification under a Western-influenced democracy.

Central to China’s strategy was the Northeast Project, launched in 2002. The research initiative, formally known as the “Studies of History and Geography of Northeast Borderland and a Series of Phenomena,” was orchestrated by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. It aimed to reclassify the histories of ancient Korean kingdoms, such as Goguryeo (Koguryo) and Balhae, as part of China’s historical narrative.

It was the Korean kingdoms of Goguryeo and Balhae that ruled parts of what is now China’s northeastern provinces from 37 BC to 926 AD. But the project was not merely an academic review of historical documents, it was a strategic move to steal Goguryeo history in preparation for future scenarios at its border.

Just like how it promoted a “Nine-Dash Line” map to assert unjustified claims over the South China Sea, China manufactured alternative history claims to justify a potential land grab in North Korea.

The implications of the Northeast Project became clear when China emphasized its focus on the ancient kingdom of Goguryeo, which spanned parts of modern-day North Korea and China. By asserting that Goguryeo was inherently Chinese, China sought to establish a historical precedent that could justify intervention in North Korea.

The revisionism supported China’s claim that any territory once under Goguryeo’s control, including significant parts of North Korea, rightfully belonged to China.

A unified Korea, particularly one aligned with the West, posed a significant threat to China’s strategic interests. North Korea, despite its economic struggles and international isolation, served as a crucial buffer state between China and South Korea, a key ally of the United States.

The collapse of the North Korean regime and subsequent reunification under a democratic government would bring a Western-influenced Korea directly to China’s border, a scenario Beijing was determined to avoid.

China’s strategy revolved around maintaining North Korea as a buffer state to prevent the spread of Western influence. The fear of a democratic, unified Korea on its doorstep has driven China’s efforts to ensure the survival of the North Korean regime. However, Beijing was also prepared for the eventuality of North Korea’s collapse. In such a scenario, China wanted to be ready to move in under the guise of stabilizing the region, leveraging its historical claims to justify its presence.

The potential collapse of North Korea presented significant geopolitical challenges. Should the Kim regime fall, China was likely to position itself as the primary actor responsible for restoring order. The pretext of bringing stability would serve as a cover for China’s territorial ambitions, similar to the Soviet Union’s post-World War II occupation of Eastern Europe.

China’s intervention could lead to a de facto annexation of parts of North Korea, consolidating its influence in the region. The strategy involved several key components. In the early 2000s, China maintained a significant military presence near its border with North Korea, ready to act swiftly should the need arise. The military buildup, ostensibly for defensive purposes, positioned China to intervene quickly in the event of regime collapse.

China was North Korea’s primary trading partner and economic lifeline. By controlling the flow of goods and resources, China exerted substantial influence over North Korea. The economic leverage would be crucial in stabilizing and controlling the region in a post-collapse scenario.

Using diplomatic efforts, China sought to ensure it remained the key player in any negotiations concerning North Korea’s future. By positioning itself as a stabilizing force, China sought to legitimize any future interventions in the eyes of the international community.

The prospect of a Western-aligned Korea was a significant concern for China. A reunified Korea, backed by the United States and other Western allies, would shift the regional balance of power. The scenario would not only bring Western military forces closer to China’s borders but also serve as a beacon of democratic values in a region where China sought to maintain its authoritarian model.

To counter the possibility, China promoted its historical claims and emphasized the cultural and historical ties between North Korea and China. The narrative aimed to undermine the legitimacy of a unified Korea under South Korean leadership. By framing its actions as historical reclamation rather than territorial aggression, China hoped to gain broader acceptance for its intervention.

The international community, particularly South Korea, Japan, and the United States, view China’s ambitions with growing concern. The potential for Chinese intervention in North Korea could destabilize the region, leading to another major conflict that would draw in multiple nations.

As a countermeasure, several research initiatives were launched with the aim to highlight the factual inaccuracies in China’s historical assertions, and promote a more balanced and accurate understanding of Northeast Asian history. By exposing the flaws in China’s historical counter-narrative, the aim was to undermine China’s justification for territorial claims and intervention in North Korea.

Nearly two decades later, in the wake of the Ukraine invasion, North Korea began providing Russia with artillery ammunition and short-range rockets in support of its full-scale invasion. Russia offered economic aid, critical for North Korea’s struggling economy, and military assistance to enhance Pyongyang’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs.

The enhanced Russia-North Korea relationship introduced new variables into China’s plans. With North Korea receiving substantial support from Russia, Beijing faces the challenge of balancing its influence over Pyongyang with the growing Russian presence.

The power dynamic potentially undermines China’s ability to unilaterally manage North Korea as a buffer state. China’s ability to seize territory could also be limited by Russia’s military presence and commitments to North Korea. Another distraction for China is Taiwan, and its goal to reunite with the breakaway republic.