DPRK Fighting for Russia in Ukraine, Reviewing U.S. Tariffs, and China's Nobel Conundrum
27:42 Share

Welcome to China Insider, a podcast from the Hudson Institute's China Center. I'm Myles Yu, Senior Fellow and Director of the China Center. Join me each week for our analysis of the major events concerning China, China threat, and their implications to the U.S. and beyond. It's Tuesday, October 22nd, and I'm Phil Hegseth alongside Hudson expert Myles Yu.

We start this week with credible evidence that North Korea has deployed upwards of 10,000 to 12,000 troops for training and ultimately combat alongside Russia in the war against Ukraine. Ukrainian reports are claiming North Korean forces have already been spotted in places like Mariupol. Miles analyzes the significance of this international escalation on the Russian side of the war and what this signals for the anti-Western axis of Russia, China, and North Korea.

Second, with the presidential election reaching its apex, the U.S. economy is in the political spotlight, and no policy more so than the Trump tariffs. Miles retraces what led to the tariffs on Chinese imports started during Trump's first term, and why they since have had such strong bipartisan support to stay in place. Lastly, every October new Nobel Prize winners are announced, and this year China came out empty-handed, while the U.S. and other Western countries dominated the winner's circle.

For a contest so tied to international recognition and prestige, Miles reveals why China has so few winners, and why the four winners they have had don't receive the hero's treatment you might expect.

Okay, Miles. Good to see you again. Good to see you, Phil. It's Tuesday. You're traveling. What else is new? But excited to have you. So we're going to jump right in. First is a topic that I saw kind of come across my headlines last week and seems to have been confirmed. We can dive into that a little bit. But the South Korean spy agency has confirmed that

with their intel, evidence, photos, videos, that North Korean troops are on their way, potentially already on the ground, and have been deployed to Russia to fight in Ukraine. So you predicted this, Miles, pre my hosting of the show. So why don't you take me and the listeners back? Why were you able to predict this?

and what kind of trends led to this involvement, which is big, by the way. North Korea has not militarily been engaged in any real conflict in almost 75 years. We predicted this over a year ago. Last September, Robert Putin and Kim Jong-un met in Russia, Siberia, in the satellite launching station. And they reached a kind of comprehensive deal. It's a quick pro quo about mutual support

So if you look at this, what is Russia needed from North Korea? North Korea had very little to offer, except a few things. One of the things that North Korea could really get from Russia is, of course, food supply, grain, energy, oil, and most importantly, its satellite launching technologies and also upgrading its submarine fleet. So those are things that the North Koreans wanted from Russia.

Which is very obvious. Now, what could North Korea provide Russia? Very little except one thing, that is commando special operation forces. North Korea has the world's largest commando special operation forces, numbering about 140,000.

That is staggering for a country like that. Yeah, so and they're all very well trained and Well fed despite the fact that the country was pretty much on the constantly on a verge of starvation So this is what the Vladimir Putin wanted now I predicted this in the aftermath of the Wagner Insurrection. Okay, because the Wagner was very Putin's primary instrument to conduct a wars overseas right when Wagner

stay away from Putin, he needed the forces to fight for him in a similar capacity. And there was only one country that could go to, and that is North Korea. And North Korea is willing, and North Korea is reciprocal to Putin's offering. That was the basis for my prediction.

which took place last September. So this is basically, you know, is very logical. It's very logical. Yeah, so it seems it's come true. It looks like it's about 10,000, reports are,

10,000 to 12,000. Ukrainian intelligence services are saying that they're already reporting forces on the ground in Mariupol, North Korean troops on the ground in Mariupol. Yeah, President Zelensky actually just came out to confirm that there are North Korean troops in combat in Ukraine. How does that change...

Ukraine's and the larger Western calculus in the conflict? I think it will change the nature of warfare in many ways. The rule of engagement, the warfare is already being rewritten right now as we speak because Ukrainian wars

Touched on many key elements of modern warfare. Number one, fighting forces. Ukraine had the perennial problem of combat personnel staffing. A lot of people who just fled Ukraine didn't want to fight. So Ukrainians have the problem and they find a solution that is drone warfare. The drone warfare can magnify the fighting capability of one person by

by dozens of times even. So one man who is very operationally capable of operating a whole set of drones can deter, say, the assault of a battalion, sometimes even a regiment. So if you do it right. So that's why drone warfare has a great future. Secondly, it's really about internationalization of the war. Because by including North Korean troops in this fight, you've got a lot of

a very interesting element from way far away. Now, of course, there are volunteers on both sides from different...and a lot of Chinese volunteers fighting for Russia in Ukraine. There are a lot of Taiwanese and Americans, and they all joined the Ukrainian forces. But those were sort of voluntary forces on the individual basis. Here, we're talking about a sovereign decision by a sovereign nation to send tens of thousands of troops into a combat zone. That could decide the outcome of the war. So that's why it's significant.

That was going to be my question. From the North Korean perspective, what drove this move? It's been this long that they've really militarily engaged in any conflict, as I mentioned, and there's been plenty of conflicts between the Korean War and now. What has driven them to jump into the Ukrainian War? Were they desperate for Russian resources? What is it? I think mostly, in a nutshell, it's ideologically driven.

Their ideology is anti-West. Right. And North Korea has been on the war against the US-led West for decades. And Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine was not just about grabbing territories from Ukraine, it's about making a statement against the West. He really looked up himself as a crusader against the Western-dominated world order. That's when Xi Jinping jumped in and said, "Oh, we're together, we're going to change the

the world order that the humankind has been saying for a hundred years. So this is basically the globalization of the war. But I will also say what really is telling about this move that North Koreans joined the fight in Ukraine is really about

the redefinition of global security issues. In other words, regional security is global security. In a real sense, there is no such a thing anymore as regional security because anything that happened in Taiwan, in Ukraine, or in Israel,

is a global affair. So everybody- It at least sets a global precedent of some kind. That's right. Well, this is for many reasons, right? One of the, basically, this is a, we're going to say the emergence of a line drawn in the sand between totalitarian-

regime and authoritarian regime and the free world. Number two, the two major participants in this struggle, Russia and the United States, they're global by nature. Geographically, Russia is a country with a huge territorial span. They have 11 time zones from Europe all the way to Asia. The United States, of course, is a global leader. It has a strong presence globally. But I also say that

In the 21st century, all modern warfares involve globally significant, globally connecting technologies, satellite, internet. They're all global. They're transcending national borders. So that's why this warfare is really broad in its scope. And that's why the war in Ukraine is probably the first really global war.

in a true sense. So with that being the case, China is a very large global player in what this podcast is about. What is China seeing with this new partnership and this new ratcheting up of international involvement, especially on the Russian side? Well, China has basically evolved very deeply. China is literally bankrolling Russia's war machine.

It's a war effort in Ukraine. I think I listened to Secretary Blinken's statement. He said something like over 70% of Russia's war operations were financed, assisted directly by Chinese made equipment or Chinese assistance. That was staggering. Basically, the war in Ukraine is basically China's war as much as Russia's war.

The only thing that probably is different, challenging involved in the interwar Ukraine's difference from Korea's is directed troops deployment. In the case of

North Korea, they send over 10,000 troops to Ukraine. So in my view, this war in Ukraine launched by Russia is truly a war of coalition among its buddies, China and North Korea. And their role in Ukraine is just, they share the same goal, is just to have the different division of labor. So if China's bankrolling all of this, is it safe to...

assume that the CCP gave an unofficial green light to allow the North Koreans to be involved on the ground, that they were aware of this happening and they're good with their money being used on North Korean commandos in Ukraine fighting for Russia.

Jeez, you ask is a very tough question because that talks back to the whole issue of China's participation in the Korean War some 75 years ago. Yeah. Yeah. Well, was Mao Zedong- That's the last time you've seen these same three countries- There you go. ... kind of be involved in one joint effort. Yeah. Was Mao Zedong given the opportunity to okay North Korean invasion?

to South Korea by Stalin or was China not involved by a standard? So there is a lot of historic documents right now coming out of the archives in the former Soviet Union that

definitely points to the reality that China was deeply involved in the decision to go to war against South Korea launched by Kim Il-sung. So there's no question about that. China, of course, was acquiescing. There is no way that strategic partners like Russia and China would not talk to each other about North Korea's massive involvement on the ground in Ukraine.

Yeah, yeah. Well, shifting gears a little bit to the upcoming election, there's not a lot of time left, just a couple weeks. A top topic always, but especially this year, is the economy. And in tie to that is tariffs. Trump pushed a number of tariffs on Chinese imports during his time. Those tariffs have stayed. And so there's an argument that they've had bipartisan backing and success. So just...

To set the scene here, Myles, why have tariffs been put into the economic spotlight during this campaign, and specifically the Chinese tariffs? It's very unfortunate that the tariff issue on Chinese imports have even become an issue because this has been purely a bipartisan issue. And I was listening to Vice President candidate Tim Walz say, "Ah, Trump launched the trade war on tariffs on China, the war he couldn't win."

This is just very disheartening because it was during the Obama administration that a very large 301 investigation was conducted. And Obama administration imposed debilitating tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum, which is basically the industry that had been destroyed by Chinese cheap import.

So, that's why Trump did not launch a trade war on China. China launched a trade war on the rest of the world, particularly the United States. China has been imposed very heavy tariffs on American goods exporting to China. So, this is just very reactive over there. Let me put this thing into a larger perspective. Tariff.

is antithetical to free trade, absolutely. Free trade is the system that will not allow tariffs because it shows trade barriers. However, that's the ideal world. We're living in the real world. The real world has one very inconvenient contradiction, that is the global free trading system based upon market has embraced a non-market communist economy.

whose policies, trade or economic ones, are purely predatory. So what do you do? I think tariffs is probably the only weapon left to stem the Chinese malign influence in economic and trade arena. Because tariffs basically serves three purposes. One is revenue. The federal government get money from tariffs.

Traditionally, United States, the main source of U.S. government revenue came from tariffs. Tariffs on imported goods. This is over 120-some years, it has always been the case, until 1913, when President Wilson started the whole personal income tax. So instead of taxing foreign imports,

The American government tax its own citizens. That's where we have the main revenue of the government has shifted from tariffs

foreigners to its domestic citizens, to Americans. That's why income tax is so high. Secondly, the tariff is important also in our real world, not ideal world, real world, to protect American industries. Because Chinese is a state subsidized economy. They use their state sponsored companies to kill American industries, American industrial base.

So, tariffs can serve to protect American industries, American economy. That's why these restrictions enacted by tariffs, I think, is necessary. Now, these are also reciprocal, because it's not like the United States just suddenly wake up and say, "We want a tariff for imports."

China is doing the same thing. So that's why it's a reciprocal We are trying to basically, you know to force China to stop this a predatory policy so that we can move away from the real world as existed now to the ideal world where Everybody will be involved in free trade and a free of government intervention So that's why tariff is necessary now. There's always an argument in this campaign that if we impose tariffs on

on China, the cost of the goods will be increased and will also be transferred to the customers. I don't really buy that argument because if you have tariffs, you would stop the Chinese imports significantly anyway. So those goods will less likely to show up in American market or shops. So that's why it's not going to be transferred on Americans.

And secondly, I think the whole purpose of this is to increase Americans competitiveness. So once Americans competitiveness is increased and productivity is increased, and it will be able to reduce cost on customers. So overall, it's a much larger case and also it's much better. So I don't buy this argument about

Mostly from Wall Street, from those guys who have vested interest in China, saying, ah, if you import, increase tariffs on China, customers will pay more. I don't think so. I think the other way probably is true. Yeah. Well, and see, you cited a couple of reasons why the tariffs are helpful and what is fueling them. But particularly the...

predatory practices that China is using in the market and in manufacturing and things like that. Quickly, what are a few of those that they're employing with the US and globally that the tariffs are protecting us from or we're penalizing them for? Well, one example I say is obviously the steel and aluminum, right? That basically is very important. That's one reason why you see the Democrats

and the Republic's oil company heavily in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio. Those were steel bases. American steel and aluminum industries were based there. That's one. Another one, obviously, is...

is the automobile. China subsidize its electric vehicles heavily that is not allowed and otherwise it's going to destroy the American electric vehicle industry in this country, period. Not just the United States, Europe and many other countries as well. So that's why it's protective. So I would say those are very prominent examples. Correct me if I'm wrong. Is it the idea that the CCP

provide subsidies to Chinese EV manufacturers so that they can make these cars super cheap, sell them super cheap, and drive out competition internationally and kill domestic companies? Oh, yeah, yeah. It's very clear. I mean, for example, the best selling EV out of China is BYD. Right. And BYD makes good cars, but it's heavily subsidized by the government. The Chinese give subsidy to every electric vehicle produced

Not sold, produced. Not only that, the government also subsidized every Chinese made electric vehicle exported. Again, not sold, exported overseas. That's why it's creating incentive for Chinese EV makers to make a lot of cars with subsidy in hand, they can produce more and more and more. So there's a surplus of EVs in China. You go to China today.

You have what we call EV graveyards. Millions of EV cars were lying there, they're rusting because they're overly produced by this non-market practice of state subsidy. So that's why this is such a pernicious practice. Virtually every modern industrial country is now banning Chinese cheap cars into their market without sort of some kind of a...

Or banning is not a word. I think heavy tariffs on them. Otherwise, their car industry would not survive. Depending on who wins, do you see these tariffs carrying forward or ramping up or cooling down, depending on whether there's a Harris or Trump administration? This all depends on China. The most important factor in determining the US-China relationship, economic, political, military, is solely on Chinese behavior.

And if they change their practice, the tariff situation will ease. Otherwise, it will continue.

All right, shifting to our final topic, Miles. October is the month when all of the Nobel Prizes are awarded. This year, China came up empty-handed. Not that China has come up empty-handed ever. They have won in the past, but they have an interesting history with the Nobel Awards. And so I want to use this time to kind of reflect on some of their past winners and what have happened, but also the general idea of

international recognition and the pull between China and the US on that global stage? Well, Nobel Prize is very much like college ranking. It doesn't tell 100% about one's procedure, but it's a pretty good indicator. So it's commonly used as a way of demonstrating one nation's

prestige in science, innovation, and creativity in writing, economics. So this year is no exception. China has always harbored a dream for Nobel Prizes. As a matter of fact, it has had four of them altogether. In 2000, there was a literature prize awarded to a Chinese-born writer. His name is Gao Xinjian.

Ten years later, this is probably the most famous Chinese Nobel Prize winner. This is a Peace Prize winner, which was awarded to the Chinese dissident, Liu Xiaobo, a college professor who was in jail in China at the time. And so after that, he died in jail. So this is the hero of the Chinese people.

And then two years later in 2012, the Nobel Prize for Literature was awarded to the Chinese writer by the name of Mo Yan, which is very interesting because he's a terrific novelist. But Mo Yan literally in Chinese means do not speak. So a lot of his creativity comes from

out of him being very artistic and creative in expressing his true feelings in a very oblique way. And then, of course, in 2015, China got the only science Nobel Prize winner in this old lady by the name of Tu Youyou.

who was credited for being responsible for creating this kind of drug, anti-malaria drug, which was ordered by Mao in the 1970s to invent some medicine to save the Vietnamese communists fighting in the jungle of Vietnam.

That's why she was famous for. Now, this isn't basically something that China should be proud of. Instead, those are very, very interesting kids because they're not really national heroes in China.

Literature, the first guy, Gao Xingjian, he was critical of China's Tiananmen Massacre. So China had made him a non-president. You couldn't even Google him in China. Of course, Google is banned in China. He's a writer and they banned all of his writings. Made him disappear. His name disappeared, I should say. His articles, writings were not there. And Liu Xiaobo, of course.

is the enemy, public enemy, number one in China. He died in agony in China. If you openly say, you know, I like Liu Xiaobo, you go to jail, literally, 100%. This was the activist winner, right? That's right, the activist, Peace Prize winner. And then Mo Yan, he was basically, you know, he was mostly sympathetic to the party, but he also, he championed

truth-telling, and that's why Mo Yan literally means his voice is unheard in China for the most part. I mean, he come out and say something once in a while, but mostly the government is not promoting him. And of course, Ms. Tu Youyou, the medicine prize winner, she was in her probably like early 90s now,

Nobody is now hearing about her because she refused to be recognized as an honor for the country.

She said, this is my accomplishment, which is basically a fight between individualism versus collectivism. Very anti-collectivist. Yeah. So the reason I'm saying all this is because China really wants to have a glory of Nobel Prize, but does not have this political atmosphere and the political courage to tolerate people of different accomplishments, particularly in political philosophy, social justice, and individualism.

Now, in contrast, United States has 420 Nobel Prize winners altogether. 420 versus four, that is a balance sheet of soft power. That's a balance sheet of innovation and creativity between United States and China. So what I'm saying here is that...

Even though this country is not perfect, but when it comes to social justice, creativity, and scientific advancement, we are the leader of the world, bar none. I like that, a balance sheet of soft power. Is there any way that the CCP, do you think, can change the tide of that balance sheet and catch up with the United States? Listen, that balance sheet can only be changed with freedom.

free speech, free flow of information. China does not have that under communist regime. I don't see any future at all in that regard. Well said. Great way to end, Miles. Thanks for your insight as always. And we'll have three more for you next week. Great to see you. Travel safe. All right. See you later. Thank you for listening to this episode of China Insider. I'd also like to thank our executive producer, Philip Hexeth.

who works tirelessly and professionally behind the scenes for every episode to make sure we deliver the best quality podcast to you, the listeners. If you enjoy the show, please spread the word. For Chinese listeners, please check our monthly review and analysis episode in Chinese. We'll see you next time.