POTUS UN Speech

[Dill]

(09-23-2017, 04:07 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: China can't afford to losing the US as a trading partner. While China has a semi ideological bound with North Korea, a lot of the reason they still support them is they share a 800 mile border and can't risk a refugee crisis if the Kim regime fell. I'm not sure that outweighs trading with the US

I'm not sure that it does either.

However, my point is that when two erratic, authoritarian leaders put nukes on the table and start calling each other names, we can no longer be sure how China, or the rest of the world, will react. They would not view a US nuclear strike on NK the same way they would view a drone strike in Yemen or a round of cruise missiles dropped on Syria. 

If NK somehow managed to nuke Guam or other US territory first, China might respect a US retaliation in kind. But if Trump makes China and Russia believe that he is likely to use nukes preemptively, then I think that might trump trade with the US--which the US needs as well. 

China claims its financial institutions are disengaging with Korea. Trump has instructed the Treasury Dept. to identify further industries to sanction (e.g. fishing).  If, through diplomacy, Trump can get enough nations on board with UN sanctions, that should incapacitate NK far more quickly and effectively than name calling and risky military threats.

But it's not clear that diplomacy and sanctions are priority for Trump. He might think they are great one day, after speaking to Mattis or McMaster, but not great the next, after a phone call from Bannon. He might goad NK into doing something BEFORE the sanctions take effect, and then decide NK has left him no choice but some kind of military action. 

How would China and Russia and others respond to the US calling for sanctions and then derailing them before they can work?  How might populations of other allies react?  People/nations would not have to be "allies" of NK or side with them to oppose US actions then.