The US must present a united front with China

Threatening a trade war with Beijing is not helpful if diplomacy is to defuse the North Korean crisis

If Donald Trump is genuinely interested in solving the North Korean crisis, then needlessly antagonising the countries that are best placed to help alleviate tensions with Pyongyang is hardly the best way to proceed.

Of all the countries that have a vested interest in achieving a peaceful resolution of the stand-off, China is the most pivotal. Apart from being North Korea’s main trading partner – it accounts for about 85 per cent of all trade with Pyongyang – China is the only nation that has anything approaching a diplomatic relationship with dictator Kim Jong-un.

Beijing’s interest, moreover, in defusing the stand-off with the North Korean regime over its insistence on conducting bellicose missile tests has risen dramatically in the wake of last weekend’s detonation of a nuclear device – a test that was reported to have caused minor tremors on the Chinese border. If anything is going to concentrate the minds of Chinese officials in Beijing to bring Pyongyang to its senses, it will be the very legitimate concern that North Korea’s obsession with developing a viable nuclear weapons arsenal poses as much of a threat to the security of China as it does the rest of the world.

In many respects the Chinese have no one but themselves to blame for allowing their dysfunctional neighbour to evolve into an existential threat to their own well-being. For too long Beijing has humoured successive dictators of the Kim dynasty in the erroneous belief that it is better to have an unhinged communist tyrant in power in Pyongyang than have the country succumb to Western-style democracy.

Beijing’s institutional ambiguity towards its North Korean neighbour has certainly undermined previous diplomatic efforts to halt the regime’s quest for nuclear weapons, as China’s failure to bring any meaningful pressure to bear has encouraged the belief in Pyongyang that it can act with impunity.

And China’s non-committal approach no doubt lies behind the deep sense of frustration policymakers of all political persuasions in Washington and elsewhere feel about their inability to reach a solution during a negotiating process that has already lasted for a decade or more.

That said, China’s role in breaking the impasse has become even more important following the recent dramatic escalation in the crisis, which is why Mr Trump’s threat to stop trading with countries that continue to do business with Pyongyang could ultimately prove to be counterproductive.

Mr Trump is no stranger to issuing public criticisms of China’s trade policy. During last year’s presidential election campaign, he accused Beijing of “raping” the US economy through a policy of manipulating its currency to make its exports more competitive globally. After becoming president he ordered White House officials to find a solution to the US trade deficit with China – which stood at a staggering $347 billion (£267 billion) in 2016 – a subject that inevitably dominated his first summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

But if Washington has a legitimate grievance with Beijing over the size of the trade deficit, raising the prospect of a trade ban in the context of the North Korean crisis is unlikely to help matters.

If the world is to stand any chance of defusing the current dangerous stand-off with Pyongyang, then it is vital that the major powers present a united front in their efforts to persuade the regime to end its attempts to develop a nuclear arsenal.

It is also important that, no matter how provocative Pyongyang might be, America and its allies do not overreact. North Korea’s actions are undoubtedly reckless and intimidating. But, for all the bluster coming from Mr Kim and his cronies, the regime is still some way from developing a viable nuclear warhead that is compatible with its missile systems.

And until that point is reached there is still time for diplomacy to run its course, particularly if the Chinese can be persuaded to face up to their responsibilities and bring their recalcitrant neighbour and ally to heel.

However, any hopes that Washington and other Western powers might entertain of finding a way to the end the crisis are likely to be frustrated so long as Mr Trump continues to threaten a trade war with China over its business links with Pyongyang.

It is not as though the trade links with an economic minnow such as North Korea amount to very much in the first place. The country ranks a lowly 119th in the index of global trading nations, and its annual exports are a measly $3 billion a year – a sum over which it is hardly worth provoking a major trade war between Washington and Beijing.

So, rather than antagonising China with threatening tweets, Mr Trump would be better-advised to seek a more constructive engagement with Beijing. It is in the interests of both of these global powers to reach an accord on security concerns, such as North Korea, where they share a mutual interest, and against which they can make common cause.