South Korea and China have a complex relationship characterized by economic interdependence, strategic competition, and regional security concerns. Navigating this delicate balance has been a defining challenge for every South Korean president. Newly elected President Lee Jae Myung has assumed power at a time of increasing US-China strategic competition as well as uncertain global supply chains and growing threat from North Korea. Could this new administration mark a shift in Seoul’s approach to Beijing? Or will President Lee maintain strategies similar to that of President Yoon?

To discuss ROK-China relations, and President Lee’s approach to this intricate issue, we are joined on the podcast today by Dr. Ramon Pacheco-Pardo. He is a professor of international relations at King’s College London and the KF-VUB Korea Chair at the Center for Security, Diplomacy and Strategy in the Brussels School of Governance. He is also an adjunct fellow with the Korea Chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the author of several books on the domestic affairs and foreign policy of South and North Korea. 

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:44] “[P]ragmatic diplomacy centered on national interests”

[05:06] State of Play for Sino-South Korean Relations

[09:56] Balancing Between the United States and China

[14:47] China Taking Advantage of US-ROK Frictions 

[19:03] Economic Interdependence as a Leverage

[25:39] Xi Jinping Attending APEC South Korea 2025

[31:11] American Pressure on Allies to Protect Taiwan

On June 13th, Israel launched attacks on several military and nuclear facilities in Iran, marking the beginning of a 12-day war between the two countries. The United States followed with targeted strikes on Iranian nuclear sites to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power and posing a threat to regional and global stability. China’s involvement in the conflict was limited to condemning the Israeli and US use of military force and calling for de-escalation. Beijing offered only rhetorical support for Tehran. 

To discuss what the Israel-Iran war reveals about China’s relationship with Iran, its evolving strategy in the Middle East, and the broader implications for US-China competition, we are joined by Yun Sun on the podcast today. Yun is a Senior Fellow, co-Director of the East Asia Program and Director of the China Program at the Stimson Center. Her recent piece in The Wire China entitled “How China Sees Iran’s Future” offers provides a nuanced take on Beijing’s calculus during and after the war.

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:34] China’s Diplomatic Strategy Toward the Middle East

[05:00] A Limited Chinese Response and China’s Regional Role

[08:19] Chinese Perceptions of Iran’s External Strategic Blunders

[15:00] Trickling Chinese Investment into Iran

[20:10] Chinese Concerns About a Nuclearized Iran

[25:09] Implications of the Israel-Iran War for China’s Energy Security

[32:04] Trump’s Response Shaping Chinese Views of the United States 

In February 2022, Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. China has never condemned the invasion, and its government and media have carefully avoided using term “Ukraine War,” opting instead to refer to the war as the “Ukraine crisis,” the “Russia-Ukraine conflict,” or the “special military operation,” a term that echoes Moscow’s language. 

Beijing’s approach to the Ukraine War has included support for Russia, a commitment China’s own principles, including respecting Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and a professed desire for peace.

This episode’s discussion will focus on China’s evolving posture toward the war and China’s relationship with Ukraine. Joining the podcast this episode is Dr. Vita Golod, who is a Junior Research Fellow at the A. Yu Krymskyi Institute of Oriental Studies, National Academy Sciences of Ukraine, and a Visiting Adjunct Instructor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.She is also the co-founder of the Ukrainian Platform for Contemporary China and a board member of the Ukrainian Association of Sinologists. 

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:35] China’s Relationship with Ukraine Prior to Russia’s Invasion

[05:06] President Zelenskyy’s Accusations Against China 

[08:20] Contemporary Ukrainian Perceptions of Relations with China 

[12:14] Ukrainian Perceptions of Sino-Russian Relations

[16:25] China as a Mediator and Peacemaker

[19:06] China’s Interests in the Outcome of the Russo-Ukrainian War

[21:21] What concrete steps could China take to facilitate peace? 

[23:14] China’s Role in the Post-War Reconstruction of Ukraine

[28:08] The Future of Sino-Ukrainian Relations

On April 22, 2025, gunmen in the town of Pahalgam, located in the disputed region of Kashmir, killed 26 people—mostly Indian tourists. A four-day military clash between India and Pakistan ensued, bringing both countries to the brink of a full-blown war, before a ceasefire was reached on May 10, 2025. 

During the India-Pakistan clashes, Beijing urged both sides to deescalate and called for a “political settlement through peaceful means.” But China did not play a neutral role in the conflict. Consistent with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s purported statement to his Pakistani counterpart that “China fully understands Pakistan’s legitimate security concerns and supports Pakistan in safeguarding its sovereignty and security interests,” China reportedly provided intelligence, satellite equipment, and other forms of support to Pakistan before and during the clashes.

To analyze China’s role in the conflict, host Bonnie Glaser is joined by Andrew Small. Andrew is a senior transatlantic fellow with GMF’s Indo-Pacific program, and author of two books on China, including “The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia’s New Geopolitics,” which is now ten years old, but remains an insightful and relevant study.

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:46] China’s Diplomatic Response to the India-Pakistan Clashes

[05:58] Beijing’s Offer of Playing a “Constructive Role”

[10:56] A Testing Ground for Chinese Weaponry and Equipment

[14:03] China’s Cautious Approach to Sino-Indian Relations

[18:10] Military Support and the Sino-Pakistan Relationship

[23:44] Implications for Chinese Arms Exports

[26:27] Indian and Pakistani Assessments of Chinese Involvement

[30:06] Influence of US-China Rivalry on India-Pakistan Relations

The United States and China reached a 90-day truce in the trade war when their representatives met in Geneva in early May. Both sides agreed to temporarily roll back tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers. President Trump announced that a “total reset” in US-China relations had been achieved. Beyond the hyperbole, the two sides agreed to establish a mechanism on economics and trade and launch negotiations to address trade imbalances and other problems. Whether a deal is reached, what it might look like, and what it might include, remains to be seen. The future trajectory of US-China relations, overall, is still unclear.

This episode highlights a Chinese perspective on the US-China bilateral relationship, including on the recent trade talks and the factors that will influence US-China relations going forward. Sun Chenghao, a fellow and head of the U.S.-Europe program at Tsinghua University’s Center for International Security and Strategy (CISS), and council member of the Chinese Association of American Studies joins host Bonnie Glaser for this episode. 

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:39] What does Trump want from China? 

[04:29] What view does Dr. Sun hold?

[05:00] Assessing the US-China Geneva Talks

[09:21] Feasibility of a Broad US-China Trade Deal

[13:23] Implications of Trump’s “Unification” Comment

[16:46] Importance of the Strategic Channel

[20:47] Declining America, Rising China

[23:27] Shift in US Policy Toward Alliances

[27:49] The Future of US-China Relations

Critical minerals are required for the manufacturing of electronics, aerospace equipment, medical devices, and renewable energy technologies, making them essential for a country’s economic and national security. These materials have been at the center of China’s domestic and foreign policy for many decades, and China’s ability to integrate internal industrial policies with foreign trade and investment policies has allowed them to gain dominance in the market. Meanwhile, the US has lagged behind China in terms of both access to and processing technology of critical minerals. The country has been heavily dependent on China for its critical minerals and struggles to find an alternative supplier.

China’s announcement to impose export restrictions on seven rare earth elements on April 4th has opened many conversations surrounding critical minerals, especially regarding the US and its supply chain vulnerabilities. What has China done to achieve their global dominance in the critical minerals sector, and what can the US do to address the overdependence issue they are facing today? To answer these questions and more, host Bonnie Glaser is joined by Gracelin Baskaran, the director of the Critical Minerals Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. She is a mining economist whose area of expertise is critical minerals and trade.

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[02:13] US Dependencies on Rare Earths and Critical Minerals

[03:51] Sourcing from Latin America, Africa, and Asia

[06:28] Environmental Harm from Mining and Processing

[08:11] Deliberate Suppression of the Price of Rare Earths in the Market

[11:06] Chinese Exports Restrictions on Seven Rare Earth Elements

[14:08] US Administrations’ Approaches to Critical Minerals Vulnerability

[20:02] 2010 Fishing Boat Accident and Japan’s Response 

[24:00] What might China do moving forward? 

[27:42] Timeframe for the US to Catch Up to China

This episode of the China Global podcast discusses evolving disputes between China and South Korea, specifically regarding their unresolved maritime boundary in the Yellow Sea. There is a long history of fishing disputes between the two countries in the Provisional Measures Zone (or PMZ) of the Yellow Sea, which is where their exclusive economic zones overlap. Although China and South Korea have engaged in negotiations over the years, they have yet to come to an agreement on their boundaries in the Yellow Sea.

Taking advantage of the persisting disagreement on delimitation of maritime borders, China has employed gray zone tactics in the Yellow Sea to expand its territorial presence in the region. In the most recent dispute, China installed a new steel structure in the PMZ, causing a maritime standoff between Chinese and Korean coast guards.

To discuss recent developments in the Yellow Sea and China’s broader gray zone tactics in the maritime realm, host Bonnie Glaser is joined by Ray Powell, the Director of SeaLight, a maritime transparency project at Stanford University’s Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation. Ray is also the co-host of the Why Should We Care About the Indo-Pacific podcast, and a 35-year veteran of the US Air Force.

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:43] Strategic Significance of the Yellow Sea

[03:12] Expanding Chinese Control in the Region

[04:08] Chinese Maritime Installations 

[05:20] Are these installations found in other regions?

[06:00] Gray Zone Tactics in the South China Sea 

[08:20] Maritime Militia Activity in the Yellow Sea

[09:02] 2001 Korea-China Fisheries Agreement

[10:34] Testing the Waters with South Korea

[12:09] Navigating South Korean Policy Dilemmas

[13:48] Rehabilitating China’s Imagine in Korea

[15:14] Environmental Issues in Disputed Waters

[17:18] Countering Chinese Activities in the Yellow Sea

[19:40] SeaLight Tracking and Deciphering Chinese Actions

As China’s military capabilities expand, US-China frictions intensify, and regional tensions increase, concern is on the rise that a potential crisis, either accidental or deliberate, could take place that could spiral out of control. 

If a crisis arises with China, leaders may want to de-escalate and prevent a wider conflict. To do so, they will need to understand how China thinks about crisis management and escalation.

The guest for this episode has dug into the writings of PLA strategists and authoritative PRC sources as well as Western scholarship to assess how China views military escalation and how the US and other countries can accurately predict and interpret PRC signal in crisis scenarios.

Lyle Morris is a Senior Fellow on Foreign Policy and National Security at the Center for China Analysis at the Asia Society Policy Institute. His recently published paper is titled “China’s Views on Escalation and Crisis Management and Implications for the United States.”

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:37] Methodology and Authoritative Chinese Sources

[04:17] PLA Theories and Concepts of Managing Escalation

[06:00] Controlling All Facets of Military Escalation

[10:28] Doctrine of Seizing the Initiative

[15:21] First Use of Force and a Reluctance to Use Force

[19:37] American and Chinese Considerations of Misperception

[25:46] Utility of US-China Tabletop Exercises

[28:33] Predicting a Taiwan Contingency

The year 2025 marks the 10th anniversary of China’s Digital Silk Road, which has become an increasingly crucial component of Xi Jinping’s flagship foreign policy project: the Belt and Road Initiative. Over the past decade, China has massively expanded its digital infrastructure investment across the globe. Accompanying the investment has been the diffusion of China’s digital governance norms and standards in recipient states. Countries in the Indo-Pacific have been at the forefront of this stretching Chinese digital influence landscape. The conflation between digital development cooperation and digital governance norms adoption has far-reaching implications that need to be better understood and addressed. 

To discuss the issue, Michael Caster joins host Bonnie Glaser. Caster is the Head of Global China Programmeat ARTICLE 19, an NGO that advances freedom of opinion and expression. His organization has published two reports examining China's Digital Silk Road. 

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:30] Understanding China’s Digital Silk Road 

[05:57] China’s Digital Governance Norms

[10:16] China’s Digital Footprints Abroad

[16:07] Attractiveness of Chinese Digital Solutions

[18:56] Role of High-Tech Companies in Digital Governance

[21:44] Assessing the Effectiveness of China’s Digital Governance

[23:14] State-Driven Surveillance and Censorship

[27:39] China’s BeiDou Navigation System 

[31:09] How should governments respond to these normative shifts? 

Nuclear weapons have changed the nature of modern warfare and exerted a profound impact on international politics. The Cold War logic of nuclear deterrence maintains that nuclear-armed states will not attack one another because of fear of massive retaliation, or mutually assured destruction. By this logic, nuclear weapons promote stability and can prevent war.

At the same time, however, nuclear weapons created a new dilemma. That is: “How can a state achieve its political objectives through military force without triggering a catastrophic nuclear exchange?”

This is a dilemma faced by all countries, especially nuclear powers. States have responded differently to this dilemma. What is China’s answer to this strategic dilemma? What has Beijing been doing to gain strategic leverage? How should we evaluate the success of China’s approach so far?

These issues are the subject of a new book titled Under the Nuclear Shadow: China’s Information Age Weapons in International Security. The author, Fiona Cunningham, joins host Bonnie Glaser for this episode. Fiona is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania. She is also a Faculty Fellow at Perry World House and affiliated with the Center for the Study of Contemporary China and the Christopher H. Browne Center for International Politics at the University of Pennsylvania.

Timestamps

[00:00] Start

[01:59] How do countries cope with the limited war dilemma?

[04:00] China’s Approach of Strategic Substitution

[07:24] Adoption of this Third Approach

[11:23] Utilizing Information-Age Weapons

[15:49] From Brinksmanship to Calibrated Escalation

[21:21] Understanding China’s No First Use Posture

[26:27] Following China’s Model 

[30:42] An American Response