Ever since Stalinist North Korea admitted—or to be more accurate, boasted—that it was developing nuclear weapons almost two and a half years ago, Washington, and much of America, has been grappling with a question of fundamental importance: what do we do about the Kim Jong-il regime now? Sadly, many have concluded that a negotiated settlement can work, due to an unrealistic assessment of how much Communist China is willing to push its Stalinist neighbor and ally toward a deal in America’s interest. This has led to dangerous false hopes about the success for talks on North Korea’s nukes, and a near-complete misunderstanding of Communist China’s real motives in the crisis.

This misunderstanding comes in two forms. The first is the myth that Communist China wants North Korea to be nuclear-free, but that Kim Jong-il is “beyond Beijing’s control.” In reality, Communist China could not care less whether or not Kim has nuclear weapons. Moreover, far from “beyond Beijing’s control,” Stalinist North Korea depends on Communist China for its very survival. Without energy aid, food aid, and economic aid from the Communists, North Korea would collapse like a house of cards. The regime continues to inflict unconscionable pain on over 25 million Koreans for one reason only: Communist China wants it to do so.

With this in mind, the notion that Kim Jong-il would do anything with his “nuclear deterrent” that would bother Communist China is absurd. Why would Communist China be angry at North Korea selling nuclear fuel to terrorist states such as Libya, when the Communists did the same thing for Iran in 1991 (two tons of uranium)? Why would Communist China be upset about North Korea’s ties to the A.Q. Khan “nuclear network” when Khan’s home country and employer—Pakistan, a Communist Chinese ally since the 1950s—developed its nuclear arsenal specifically due to help from Zhongnanhai? Moreover, if Communist China were determined to stop North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, why did it sell Kim Jong-il tributyl phosphate – a critical element in weaponizing uranium? The answer to all these questions is the same, and it is this: Communist China has no objection to a nuclear-armed, terrorist-aiding North Korea, and in fact has decided it could be useful (more on that later).

The other form of the misunderstanding is more complicated. It accepts all of the above, but still believes Communist China can be convinced to force North Korea to dismantle its “nuclear deterrent,” simply because it’s what the U.S. wants. This is a common flaw of those who support “engagement” with Communist China—a belief that Communist China and the U.S., deep down, want the same thing. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The United States wants a world safe for its people; Communist China wants a world safe for the Chinese Communist Party, at the expense of its people. Thus, the Communists seek the advancement of their geopolitical power at the expense of America’s friends and allies, Japan and India’s interests, and Taiwan’s very existence. Communist China chafes in a world governed (mostly) by American power and American ideals, and seeks instead a world it can control on the “principle” of “non-interference” in international relations, i.e., let the citizen beware. This is why they sell arms to Iran, Syria, the murderous Sudanese regime, and (while he was in power) Saddam Hussein: to build and develop anti-American alliances for current and later use.

The supporters of “engagement” do not see these facts, and for that reason, they don’t understand how Communist China really sees North Korea: as another useful tool against the United States. Rather than use these talks to convince North Korea to behave, Communist China has consistently used them to push the U.S. to make more and more concessions to the Stalinists. In this, the Communists have already succeeded. Before the talks began, the Bush Administration demanded Stalinist North Korea destroy its entire nuclear weapons program before it could even talk to the U.S. about economic aid and security guarantees. Now, the Administration is promising some economic aid and a conditional guarantee before the North even has to start dismantling the program. Clearly, North Korea—and Communist China—won the early rounds.

Despite all of this, some still say it is in America’s best interests to make a deal—any deal—with Stalinist North Korea, and as such, Communist China can be helpful. Unfortunately, we have been down this road before. The Clinton Administration already had an agreement with the Stalinist North in 1994. Under this deal, called the Agreed Framework, America agreed to build two nuclear power plants in North Korea, and give the regime hundreds of millions of dollars worth of fuel oil in the interim, while the Stalinists pledged to freeze their nuclear weapons program. Communist China blessed the deal (no real surprise), while the Stalinists took a brief respite, until the international spotlight shifted, and then went right back to developing nuclear weapons in secret for four years before the Bush Administration called them on it in 2002. It should also be noted that the 1994 agreement was North Korea’s way of restoring a broken promise from 1987, which in itself was a restoration of a broken promise from 1985. Why should anyone believe what would be the Stalinists’ fourth promise in only twenty years? Why should we expect any help from the Communists who did nothing during the last two decades to make their ally adhere to any of its last three promises?

The truth about Communist China is this: it is a rising, angry, and fearful regime hostile to American interests because it is terrified of its people becoming too exposed to American liberty. As such, the Chinese Communist Party has a natural affinity with dishonest dictators around the world: Zimbabwe, Syria, Sudan, Iran, Burma, Communist Cuba, etc. Stalinist North Korea, with its litany of broken pledges, fits right in.

To assume Communist China is willing to help stop North Korea’s misbehavior is dangerously naïve. If anything, the more the Stalinists misbehave; the more use they are to their Communist allies. For this reason, any talks with the Stalinist regime are certain to fail. If the United States wants North Korea disarmed, it has to look at other options – either a “surgical strike” military action or liberation. These options will be explored in the remaining columns in this series.

D.J. McGuire is President and Co-Founder of the China e-Lobby, and the author of Dragon in the Dark: How and Why Communist China Helps Our Enemies in the War on Terror