Chinese President Xi Jinping, on a state visit to North Korea in June, paid tribute at the Monument to Sino-Korean Friendship in Pyongyang alongside North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The visit, his first in seven years, drew global attention. Xinhua reported that the two leaders agreed to further burnish the spirit of the "War to Resist U.S. Aggression and Aid Korea" and to pass down the traditional friendship between China and North Korea from generation to generation. The monument, which honors the Chinese People's Volunteer Army that fought in the Korean War, stands as a symbol of the blood alliance between the two countries.
North Korea and China have maintained close relations for nearly 80 years since establishing diplomatic ties in 1949. Differences over policy direction and ideology have at times caused friction, but leaders on both sides have sought to keep the relationship from collapsing.
The author, a professor of history and international affairs at George Washington University in the United States, examines the relationship through the somewhat unusual lens of emotion and sentiment. His reasoning is that the ties were shaped not only by historical experience and political interests but also by emotional bonds built over many years. "The Chinese Communist Party and the Workers' Party of Korea cultivated mutual empathy among their peoples through various forms of emotional work, and through this formed a sense of common identity," the author writes.
The decisive moment in forming those emotional bonds was the Korean War, which broke out on June 25, 1950. The trauma and pride the two countries shared in fighting the United States became an important foundation of the alliance. Drawing on that common wartime experience, leaders in both countries built an emotional framework that stressed anti-imperialist sentiment and revolutionary fervor while demanding loyalty to the communist party.
Mao Zedong had the remains of his eldest son, Mao Anying, who was killed in the Korean War, buried on North Korean soil, making the grave a symbol of what he called the revolutionary spirit the two countries shared through common hardship and adversity. Senior officials from both countries still visit Mao Anying's grave at the Cemetery of Chinese People's Volunteer Army Martyrs in South Pyongan Province whenever relations need mending or a conciliatory diplomatic gesture is called for. The friendship monument Xi visited in June is likewise a required stop not only for senior Chinese officials but also for tour groups, symbolizing the mutual empathy and emotional solidarity between the two countries. "Visits to the Monument to Sino-Korean Friendship were a powerful salve for the many wounds Beijing and Pyongyang inflicted on each other in dealing with the South Korea question, nuclear weapons and other issues," the author explains.
After Mao's death, as Deng Xiaoping took power and emphasized reform, opening and pragmatism, the importance of Sino-North Korean friendship faded from what it had been. Yet both governments invoked it repeatedly at political turning points to rally public support and shore up the legitimacy of their systems. China's leadership was wary of North Korea moving closer to the Soviet Union, while North Korea needed Chinese backing as it installed Kim Jong-il as official successor.
Since U.S. President Donald Trump took office, deepening U.S.-China tensions have gradually strengthened solidarity between Beijing and Pyongyang. Xi's emulation of Mao in various respects has also worked to draw the two countries closer. In South Korean political circles, expectations are growing that China should play a constructive role in bringing North Korea to the table for dialogue and negotiation. But the author is categorical: those who expect an abrupt shift in China's North Korea policy, or who hope Beijing can pressure Pyongyang into cooperating with the United States, will be disappointed. The ideals and sentiments of Sino-North Korean friendship, he predicts, are etched deep into the genes of both countries and will continue to exert some influence, even if less conspicuously than in the past.
The author's argument that emotion has often been overlooked in explaining why alliances endure carries no small implication for the South Korea-U.S. alliance, which has been going through strains of its own. It is worth recalling that this alliance, too, developed on the basis of blood shed by both countries in the Korean War and shared values of liberal democracy and a market economy.
424 pages, 28,000 won.