Understanding the origins of war can pave a path to peace for North Korea

As North Korea maintains its belligerence, the world is caught in a dilemma. Ignoring it as just another round of empty threats would run the risk of North Korea test-firing missiles with longer range and greater precision. It would also strengthen the regime's rhetoric for testing more deadly nuclear devices. Having another round of six-party talks without a game-changing solution is unlikely to end this farcical merry-go-round.

There is very little American appetite for a military option. What is more, any direct military intervention poses the risk of uncontrollable escalation and collateral damage to the North's neighbours. Understandably, this option is strongly opposed by South Korea, as much as by Russia and China.

Meanwhile, all eyes continue to be on China as the regime's closest ally and provider of its life-support system. China, however, is getting more and more nonplussed by the increasingly recalcitrant regime.

Admittedly, both Russia and China don't want a nuclear North Korea as this would trigger the positioning of nuclear weapons by Western allies near their borders. What is more, this would spread nuclear armament in the region and beyond. For China, the added fear is a nuclear Japan.

However, if China turns off North Korea's life support and the regime collapses, there will be millions of hungry refugees invading China's borders, a humanitarian disaster.

For China, North Korea may act as a buffer and a useful bargaining chip against the West. But a North Korean regime collapse is not necessarily all bad for China. If it should come to pass, it is likely that China, rather than America, would become more influential in deciding whether a collapsed North Korea is going to be united with South Korea and, if so, on what terms. These could include a demand by China that the US should withdraw all its forces from the peninsula after unification.

All these explain China's ambivalence. Nevertheless, it begs the question whether a negotiated long-term settlement is possible. Could North Korea be persuaded to give up nuclear weapons once and for all in a credible, verifiable way, in return for an iron-clad, long-term guarantee for its sovereignty and security?