Kim Jong-un aligns with China’s multipolar vision: systemic realignment in Northeast Asia amid US hegemony decline

Indigenous Korean perspectives on reunification and peace are systematically excluded from geopolitical analyses, despite their emphasis on intergenerational trauma and the cultural significance of the Korean Peninsula as a single entity. The division of Korea is often framed as a Cold War artifact, but indigenous cosmologies (e.g., *han*, the concept of collective grief) highlight the psychological and spiritual toll of partition. These voices are marginalized in favor of state-centric narratives that prioritize military security over human security. Traditional Korean medicine and agricultural practices, which have sustained communities despite sanctions, are also overlooked in favor of technocratic solutions.

The current alignment between North Korea and China must be situated within a century of imperial encroachment, colonial occupation, and Cold War divisions. Japan’s colonial rule (1910–1945) and the subsequent US-Soviet occupation created the conditions for the Korean War (1950–1953), which solidified the peninsula’s division. China’s support for North Korea during the Korean War was not purely ideological but a strategic move to prevent US encroachment on its borders. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 left North Korea isolated, forcing it to adapt by leveraging China’s economic lifeline while maintaining a nuclear deterrent.

In Confucian political thought, the ideal of a 'multipolar world' aligns with the concept of *wangdao* (王道), or 'kingly way,' where power is exercised through moral leadership rather than coercion. However, this framing ignores how both North Korea and China instrumentalize anti-hegemonic rhetoric to justify authoritarian practices, mirroring historical patterns of imperial China’s tributary system. Indigenous Ainu and Ryukyuan perspectives in Japan, as well as Taiwanese and Mongolian voices, offer critiques of both US hegemony and East Asian authoritarianism, but these are rarely centered in geopolitical discourse. The concept of 'multipolarity' also resonates in African and Latin American contexts, where post-colonial states seek alternatives to Western dominance, though these parallels are seldom explored.

Systemic analyses of Northeast Asian geopolitics reveal that the 'multipolar world' narrative is a strategic construct rather than an empirical reality. Quantitative studies on sanctions regimes (e.g., UN Security Council resolutions on North Korea) show that economic coercion often strengthens authoritarian resilience while devastating civilian populations. Network theory models of alliance formation indicate that North Korea’s alignment with China is driven by survival imperatives rather than ideological affinity. Meanwhile, climate science highlights how sanctions-induced fuel shortages exacerbate environmental degradation in North Korea, further destabilizing the region.

Artistic and spiritual expressions in Korea and China often critique the militarization of the peninsula while envisioning alternative futures. North Korean *pansori* (traditional opera) and South Korean *minyo* (folk songs) lament the division of families, framing reunification as a spiritual necessity. Chinese *wuxia* (martial arts) literature and films frequently explore themes of balance and harmony, which contrast with the zero-sum logic of geopolitics. Meanwhile, Buddhist and Daoist traditions in both countries emphasize non-violence and interdependence, offering a counter-narrative to the securitization of the region. These cultural productions are often dismissed as propaganda or entertainment rather than as valid critiques of state power.

Scenario modeling suggests that continued US-China rivalry could push North Korea toward deeper dependence on China, risking a de facto annexation scenario where Pyongyang loses autonomy. Alternatively, a negotiated denuclearization process—if paired with sanctions relief and infrastructure investment—could reduce regional tensions but requires unprecedented trust-building. Climate change exacerbates these dynamics: droughts in North Korea and flooding in China’s northeast could trigger mass migration, further destabilizing the region. Future models must incorporate indigenous knowledge systems, such as traditional Korean rainwater harvesting, to build climate-resilient communities.

Marginalized voices in this narrative include North Korean defectors who critique both their government and Western sanctions, South Korean labor activists opposing US military bases, and ethnic minorities in China (e.g., Uyghurs, Tibetans) who face state repression alongside North Korea’s elite. Indigenous Korean communities in Japan and Russia, as well as the *dongbei* (northeast) Chinese populations historically tied to Korea, are also excluded from mainstream analyses. These groups often advocate for peaceful reunification and economic cooperation, but their perspectives are drowned out by state-centric and militarized discourse. The voices of women in North Korea—who bear the brunt of sanctions through food insecurity and healthcare shortages—are particularly absent from geopolitical debates.