China and South Korea: Foreign Ministers talk while Kim Jong Un threatens war

Written by: Luke Wagner; Edited by: Diya Jain 

During a Wednesday phone call with South Korea’s top diplomat Cho Tae-yul, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi vowed to uphold “stability and continuity” in its national policy. Yi said that he hoped South Korea would pursue a “positive, objective and friendly” policy towards Beijing.  

Chinese-South Korean relations have deteriorated in recent years as Seoul has grown closer to the United States in an apparent effort to counter China and North Korea’s (NK) longstanding security alliances.  

Wednesday’s call was the first time that the countries’ two top diplomats have personally spoken to each other. Foreign Minister Cho took this opportunity to request that Beijing play a “constructive role” in curbing NK’s recent aggressive behavior.  

This request may be tested sooner than either minister would have expected. A day after the call, NK Supreme People’s Assembly voted to scrap all economic and cooperative agreements with South Korea. On Friday, NK Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un declared that its southern neighbor remains “enemy No. 1” and that he would not hesitate to use every power at his disposal to wipe out all enemies that threaten NK. 

These recent tensions reflect what regional expert Scott Snyder from the Council on Foreign Relations has called “an escalatory dynamic between the two Koreas following North Korea’s successful satellite launch last November.”  

If China heeds Cho’s request and works at de-escalation, it will likely be away from the public eye. However, South Korea and its partner Japan may have the chance to bring this issue up with China again soon; during the call, Beijing and Seoul agreed to accelerate preparations for a China-Japan-South Korea summit. Although China hopes South Korea would adopt a positive policy towards Beijing, that will remain complicated while NK’s Kim Jong Un is left unchecked. 

Pakistan: Relations with Iran improve amid promises of security cooperation

Written by: Diya Jain; Edited by: Luke Wagner

Less than two weeks after exchanging airstrikes that led to national outrage and an unraveling of diplomatic relations, Iran and Pakistan have agreed upon terms to pursue joint security cooperation and de-escalate tensions at their border.

Iran initiated attacks against Pakistani military bases which Tehran claimed were being used to harbor military combatants and violent separatist factions. Islamabad faced immediate pressure by its constituents to punish Iran’s actions, prompting retaliation within the next 48 hours. By January 25, both sides had launched their respective offensives, Pakistan had recalled its ambassador to Tehran, and all diplomatic and trade engagements were temporarily frozen. 

This recent escalation reignited fears amongst world leaders that the instability emanating from the conflict in Gaza may be destined to spread and engulf the Middle East. Over the weekend, the United States and European Union both issued statements to deescalate tensions between Iran and Pakistan.

On Monday, despite the confrontation and its resulting deaths – totaling eleven – top Iranian and Pakistani diplomats sat down to talk. Both Tehran and Islamabad re-emphasized a shared commitment to combating terror and preserving political stability in the region. They announced mechanisms for strengthening their relations, including returning ambassadors and diplomats to their posts, pushing for more frequent and transparent diplomatic meetings, and sharing security and counterterrorism technology for identification and targeting of insurgents. Iranian negotiator Hossein Amirabdollahian touted the establishment of new free-trade zones near border regions to facilitate higher volumes of bilateral trade. 

The prospect of nuclear-armed Pakistan providing more robust security technology to Iran poses deep concerns to the international community. While the resolution of tensions between Pakistan and Iran comes as an immediate relief to many across the region, closer alignment between the two could pose worrying trends for Iran’s nuclear ambitions.