This is a guest post by regular commenter Lirelou. A multilingual former US military officer with experience across the globe, the Korea-based veteran wrote a fine piece of pessimistic realism about the threats to future peace in East Asia. Published with permission.
My personal assessment about the chances of long term peace in East Asia are pessimistic. The “pax Americana” is coming to an end, but I do not see an Asian “age of aquarius” on the horizon. Rather, we are seeing a nationalist resurgence in China, Korea, and Japan—the legacy of state indoctrination programs in the two former, and recidivist nationalism in the latter.
The reunification of Korea is inevitable, but it will be a far more painful process than many Koreans expect. Once that pain is felt, who will they blame? The extreme left, which may be discredited when Nork gulags are revealed, will point the finger at the U.S. Right-wing nationalists will look to Japan, as Korea would never have been divided and developed into a modern nation much like Singapore and Taiwan were it not for Japan’s colonialism. That argument is likely to find support among the Korean populace, and will likely whet their appetite for revenge. Add to this the very real possibility that China’s continued economic rise has by that time cut into the Korean GDP (adding to real price of reunification), and you may have a social discontent factor that is presently absent in South Korea.
The North Koreans and Iranians, neither one of which may currently possess the bomb, have in essence pulled out the cork on the nuclear issue. In the early post-reunification phase, U.S. pressure will keep the Koreans from going nuclear. Once U.S. forces leave the Peninsula, which I believe will be within two to three years following reunification, the gloves will be off. Depending upon Japanese assessment of the “Korean threat” at that time, Japan will have to decide on whether to remain under the U.S. “nuclear umbrulla”, which will imply both a continued U.S. troop presence in Japan, and perhaps an increase in U.S. air power capabilities, or whether to begin developing its own nuclear and force projection options to counter those of Korea.
An external factor that must be considered will be the U.S. political scene in the post-reunification period. If the Iraq and Afgan wars are perceived to have been failures, the American public will be less supportive of a continued U.S. troop presence in Asia, particularly if that presence could draw us into a Korean-Japanese conflict. My own suspicion is that the sizeable Korean-American community will prove as formidable at applying political pressure as the Irish-Americans in the Northeast, the Jewish communities of the major cities, and the Cuban-Americans in South Florida, all of which have had their say in American domestic and foreign policy. They have not always obtained what they wanted, but their power is recognized and respected. Korean-Americans have the further advantage of potential ties to the religious right. Thus Japan’s assessment of Korean-American political influence (vis-a-vis Japanese-American political influence) may be another factor that could possibly spur its own nuclear program.
All in all, not a rosy picture for peace in East Asia in the wake of Korean reunification. Of course, I’ve been wrong before. And I hope I’m wrong this time. Unfortunately, I have also been right at times when all the analysts were saying something else. That’s the part that bothers me.

Comments to this entry
Pavlov3
April 17, 2006
1:54 am
My reply would be yes...but....
I often ask South Koreans when unification will come, they reply almost 100% of the time "5-10 years", but of course that isn't going to happen if Kim Jong Il or one of his sons is still in charge. We need to face reality that unification (peacefully) is not in the interests of Kim Jong Il or his party elite. Currently they are the nobility of the Kingdom of North Korea complete with uneducated serf class, private army and no real assets. In a unified Korea they will lose not only their lands (possessions) but possibly their heads when the peasants find out what they have been up to. So yes, unification will come, but not for a long time, or not with a hard implosion or explosion which will be just plain messy.
A shorter term worry that fits in with lirelou's piece better is that the same conditions he describes are already in motion without unification! SK on its own is pushing the US out pandering to both NK (pointless), and China (suicidal..aka competitor) while stoking anti-Japanese and US sentiment.
A divided Korea can just as easily push NE asia clearly into a Chinese sphere of control and all of President Noh Mu Hyun's posturing aside, they really cannot balance anything. SK has a nice economy, but it is still a shrimp caught between two (maybe three) whales. This still puts Japan in the difficult position of either rearming or getting closer to the US. All indications are that they are considering both.
Other than that I agree, just that Unification or no Unification the NE Asian titanic is heading for the iceberg.
Of course the GNP could win the next election in SK (maybe) and bring SK back closer to the US, and Kim Jong Il could drop dead of a heart attack without naming one of his idiot suns King..er Dear Leader, and ..... A pragmatic Corp Commander could seize power and decide to peacefully unify with the South... and monkeys could fly out of my fourth point of contact. or it could all keep heading for the iceberg.
GI Korea
April 17, 2006
4:25 am
Another factor SK has to worry about is that if the country is about to implode KJI will invite the Chinese in for "peacekeeping" instead of letting the country implode which would mean his head. Giving the country to the Chinese would save his head and increase China's regional hegemony of North East Asia. China is already trying to claim ancient Korean Kugoryo history as their own through the UN. North Korea is where the Kugoryo kingdom was based from so if China successfully lays claim to that history that would mean they have a historical claim to the land. Plus by China moving in and securing the country this would prevent a humanitarian disaster from spreading across the North Korean border into China.
SK in this scenario could not wage a war against China to reclaim North Korea because SK just doesn't have the military might or national will to do so and the south has distanced itself so much from the US and Japan they would get no help from any allies in this scenario effectively leaving NK to the Chinese and SK firmly falling into the Chinese sphere of influence.
This is why I find the anti-Americanism in Korea so foolish. What alternatives are better for Korea other than the ROK-US alliance?
In the wake of Korean reunification at The Marmot’s Hole
April 17, 2006
4:40 am
sun bin
April 17, 2006
4:52 am
as to "China's continued economic rise has by that time cut into the Korean GDP", it is usually a non-zero sum game. if fact, it was japan's economic rise which lifted korea and taiwan/hk's. and that in turn raised China's. and china's will in turn boost that of its neighbors.
just look as what happened to EU and during the 1990s, after Portugal and Spain join. it gave everybody a lift.
similarly, reunification, or a enlightened commander in NK who would choose the China/Vietnam path, will only boost SK's economy, by supplying a lower cost base that China. this could mean competition to China but it is not neccessarily a bad thing to China, if one does not view it as zero-sum. a richer neighbor will always buy more from you.
sun bin
April 17, 2006
4:57 am
this i must disagree. without this revenue KJI clan will have to squeeze the people tighter. With this they learned to appreciate an easier way to get what they need.
Sunshine Policy paves way for reform in NK. It may take long, but it should not be scapegoated for the problems that others created.
Yago
April 17, 2006
5:23 am
And again, as someone said earlier, yes, SK is nationalist until the point of sheer madness, but I don't seem then starting a war. It may hate Japan as much, or more than China, but China is still a closed-minded country with a tightly controlled people, easy to drive to a war. South Koreans today are cool, slow-life westernized consumers. They won't go to a war to Japan just because their college teachers tell them to.
Wars today are 3rd world things, with the West getting in lightly when its interests absolutely demand it.
kushibo
April 17, 2006
5:27 am
My personal assessment about the chances of long term peace in East Asia are pessimistic. The "pax Americana"Â? is coming to an end, but I do not see an Asian "age of aquarius"Â? on the horizon.
Who says the Pax Americana is coming to an end? Keeping the peace here is highly beneficial to American ideals and American commerce/business. The US acts as a geopolitical ground-plug to keep things from getting out of hand, and the leaders of Korea and Japan (and grudgingly, China) acknowledge that (and tacitly or openly encourage it).
Yeah, fifty/sixty years is a long time to be in some place, but the US has had a presence on Cuba for a hundred years, and look how hostile they've been to the US for the last four decades. Yeah, despite leftist groups in Korea and in Japan, the US presence will remain (and should remain).
I would also like to point out that Taiwan is also a lingering, unresolved problem, adding one more major reason for the US to maintain a strong presence in the region.
Rather, we are seeing a nationalist resurgence in China, Korea, and Japan"”?the legacy of state indoctrination programs in the two former, and recidivist nationalism in the latter.
A nationalist resurgence in Korea? No, it's the same old crap humming along, generated by the same groups as before. Park Chunghee was quite the nationalist, as was Rhee. Things weren't all that different under Chun.
The reunification of Korea is inevitable, but it will be a far more painful process than many Koreans expect.
Reunification is inevitable? I think it's likely, but nowhere near the inevitable stage.
that pain is felt, who will they blame?
Once that pain is felt, political opportunists will be pointing fingers in order to augment their supporters. BUT, most people will be too heavily involved with fixing that pain to point fingers, which will quickly be seen as a waste of time.
Remember, the chinbo ("progressive") agitators don't run the show here, which is why they make such a stink about everything.
Shelton Bumgarner
April 17, 2006
7:02 am
The North Koreans and Iranians, neither one of which may currently possess the bomb, have in essence pulled out the cork on the nuclear issue.
Everything I've read leads me to believe there is a 90 percent chance the DPRK has The Bomb.
Once U.S. forces leave the Peninsula, which I believe will be within two to three years following reunification, the gloves will be off.
I simply disagree. Unless some outside factor forces them out (China) , even after unification American troops will be in Korea.
A lot depends on why the two countries are united. Each of the different possible reasons will bring with them problems and benefits. Given how communism is now essentially the state religion of the DPRK, it seems the most likely reason the two nations will be united is the violent overthrow of the government of the DPRK.
I don't know what will cause it, but it will be nasty and potentially totally destroy large parts of the two Koreas and some of Japan for good measure. If that happens, then nationalism will be huge in the two Koreas as the two nations recover from the war together. I'd give that possibility about 60 percent.
Next up is violent collapse of the the DPRK government. Something simply amazing is going to have to happen for that to happen anytime soon. The government would have to be much weaker than we think. If it does collapse, then there might be a mad rush between the RoK, US and China to see who could "help the brothers of the north" shrug off their communist poverty. I say this is about 30 percent in possibility.
Lastly would be a peaceful unification after Kim Jong Ill dies or something. I'd say that's probably about 10 percent possible.
Yago
April 17, 2006
9:48 am
Sperwer
April 17, 2006
10:50 am
Richardson
April 17, 2006
12:16 pm
I sincerely doubt that. Preventing arms races with the mere presence of U.S. troops in a country/region is time-tested and very apparent.
As GI Korea points out above in regard to reunification, Koreans talk the talk but are unwilling to walk the walk. A very vocal minority calls for the immediate withdraw of U.S. troops, while a sizable portion of the country leans towards that but is unsure. However, candid comments from many show a recognition, begrudging or not, that U.S. forces will need to remain in Korea after reunification.
Though most won't admit it, their collective reaction to Japan doing anything near Dokdo (a.k.a. Takeshima) show it; Koreans are scared silly of Japan. Last year Chinese scholars gave Koreans a wake-up call akin to a kick in the balls with the not so nuanced claim that Koguryo (an ancient Korean kingdom that extended past present-day North Korea well into what is now China) was actually Chinese, making Koreans who were paying attention more alert to the possibility (probability?) of China asserting (i.e., taking over territory, or "Ëœhelping' NK) itself if/when North Korea collapse.
When South Koreans, particularly policy-makers, take a cold, hard, realistic look at the situation, the U.S. is the only ally that does not have potential territorial claims and allows the most flexibility. Simply put, Korea needs the U.S. if they want to remain relatively free of unwanted influence from China or Japan.
On the flipside, the U.S. wants continued regional stability, which is why those who become angry over anti-Americanism in Korea and want to pull troops out are cutting off their nose despite their face. A continued U.S. troop presence in both Japan and Korea help (but do not guarantee) regional peace/stability, and as expensive as it is, it's far cheaper in both lives and dollars to continue "“ even if some Koreans hate us "“ than to gamble the other way.
http://www.korealiberator.org/2005/09/06/us-troops-will-be-in-korea-japan-long-term/
http://www.korealiberator.org/2006/01/31/korean-reunification-%e2%80%93-who-wants-it/
On North Korea and nukes; they have the materials, have apparently mastered how to explode a plutonium device (much more complicated than a uranium one), and claim to have them. They may or may not have them, to but suggest they probably don't in the face of all that is known does not seem to be the best analysis, unless you know something everyone else does not.
Note to Sun-bin: China-Vietnam path and the Sunshine Policy are impossible in the first case and a failure in the second case due to the Kim family cult; there is no way that North Korea can engage fully w/o exposing the cult, along with the entire, absurd, alternate history. Scapegoating problems on others? The only economic engagement North Korea allows is that which it can easily reverse, and which keeps its population insulated. Allowing South Korea to basically pay tribute is not engagement.
Note to Yago: Who is going to stop China from taking North Korea amid the chaos that a North Korea collapse scenario would entail? The UNSC!? If China made the claim, what military is going to invade to kick them out? Or if their troops moved in to "Ëœhelp stabilize' the country, and "Ëœsecure' WMD/military facilities, who is going to stop them? The South Koreans certainly would not be a potent enough element to keep Chinese out, although U.S. troops in Korea would be.
sun bin
April 17, 2006
12:28 pm
on top of it, the statement that 'china/korea/japan' become more nationalistic recently probably also needs some qualification.
my hypothesis:
the extremists have always been there, in the past their voices were only heard in MSM or some niche channels (e.g. far right publications in japan. somewhat controlled media in korea, in china there was only one voice, the CCP voice which sways according to the mood of its leader)
today, we have internet, blogs, international media, and more media professional. so we hear about them a lot more.
(and the loudest person is heard most, who also happens to be the most extreme).
yes, a couple events triggered some brawl recently. but we have to view this in connection with other events (eg more aggressive new generation leaders in japan who do not want to bear the WWII burden any more, a china which no longer has to kowtow because of the loan and aid in yen, a freer korea, etc)
but other than that, i would say that the number of extremists perhaps in smaller than that in the 1980s. because --
more people are busy surviving, making money or consuming. less people care about politics in all 3 countries.
e.g. in the 1980s there were still hundreds of millions of workers in state owned units in china. their major activity during work is reading newspaper, and you guess what? commenting on the news with their colleagues.
today these commentators are mainly young "anry netizens". there may be millions of them. but definitely not hundreds of millions.
sun bin
April 17, 2006
12:36 pm
a little clarification:
the china/vietnam path mostly likely would happen after Kim dynasty ends. the successor might not be a deng. but deng has also shown the way, and vietnam did not have its own deng.
the sunshine effect could nurture the exposure of this successor.
without such exposure, the c/v path becomes less likely, but still, not impossible.
to me this is the more plausible (and optimistic) solution. what i do not know is how long it would take. even if it is 10-15 years, it could still be better than a sudden collapse of NK. i mean, better for the NK people. if we believe in non-zero sum game, this would also be better for china, SK, japan and US.
Richardson
April 17, 2006
12:55 pm
sun bin
April 17, 2006
12:57 pm
Curzon
April 17, 2006
2:05 pm
sun bin
April 17, 2006
2:36 pm
China was close to economic bankrupcy.
almost everything is reminiscent to NK today.
well, you may say NK situation is worse today than china 1976.
but this just provides some perpsective for us to imagine the unimaginable.
sun bin
April 17, 2006
2:39 pm
mao died on Sep. in Oct extremely leftist (gang of 4) purged.
in a few more months deng is back on stage.
we then hear talks about incentive and market, and than there is lesson to learn even from the wicked capitalists as well.
Sonagi
April 17, 2006
3:10 pm
Richardson
April 17, 2006
3:33 pm
sun bin
April 17, 2006
4:36 pm
If you have seen cities other than BJ/SH, or the rural China in 1970s, you would not say what you just said.
it was not too different from a famine.
the first job deng took up was to reform the rural, and buy some corn from canada (fodder grade corn)
there are differences so i am pretending they are exactly the same. eg
1. different international environment
2. a richer SK who is willing to help on humanitarian basis
3. a China who lends a life-line
4. last but not least, much more advanced information flow today
there is virtually no difference in terms of "isolated, controlled, and indoctrinated". if you are saying that there is so reformist inside NK, well it is a black box, has any of the western observers noticed deng before 1980?
p.s. for many Zhou was an evil accomplice of Mao. IMO zhou does not have any of my respect. Deng has.
sun bin
April 17, 2006
4:39 pm
and btw, Zhou died on Jan 1976, before Mao.
Richardson
April 17, 2006
5:33 pm
I don't believe anyone could credibly maintain the position that China was as isolated/indoctrinated as North Korea. In terms of hours spent in education, during and after work and school, I do not think NKorea is close to being rivaled by any other society, ever.
Sonagi
April 17, 2006
5:33 pm
sun bin
April 17, 2006
7:32 pm
NK's education is as good as most Eastern European country, miles above China in 1970s. please google to verify.
cult: how many senior cadet in China defected from 1966-1976 (the disastrous cultural revolution)? how many NK defected in the last 10 years?
i do not think i need you to factor in per capita # to compare.
isolationism: how many % of NK families exchange letters with (and recieve remittance from) their foreign relatives? how many % in China did in 1970s? let's include SK, HK, Taiwan, Macau
sun bin
April 17, 2006
7:40 pm
if zhou survived Mao, i am not quite sure what China would look like today. perhaps like NK? more likely vietnam or a bulgaria.
but talking about monopoly of power, you need to view some of the documentary films in the 1970s.
a single word against mao leads you to prison.
mistakenly stepped on mao's poster which fell on ground, prison.
an essay question mao, death. (Zhang Zixin, Yu Luogang)
senior party leaders that mao felt he was threatened, death (Peng Dehuai (commander in chief in Korean War), Lin Biao(general would bascially defeated KMT, appointed successor), Liu Shaoqi(chairman of the state who rescued china from great leap forward))
can you quote any such example in NK?
if not, could it be worse?
Richardson
April 17, 2006
10:28 pm
That's absurd. I don't need to Google this "“ North Korea is my area. I'll refer you to Helen-Louise Hunter's "Kim Il-song's North Korea"Â? (1999). More hours spent in a classroom does not equate to a better education if between 30-70 percent (depending on the year of the student) is spent on indoctrination unrelated to an actual education. Being able to read and write in hangul is one thing; being able to think and be productive is another.
Most defector children cannot function in South Korean schools; being able to quote from the works of Kim Il Sung won't get you far there. This is a noted social problem in the South, and something that reunification planners have worried about years "“ this is not new information.
For further information on North Korean education (among other things), I suggest:
Kang, Chol-Hwan. (2001). Aquariums of Pyongyang: Ten Years in the North Korean Gulag. New York: Basic Books.
And the "ËœHuman Rights & Defectors' section of this page;
http://www.dprkstudies.org/dprk.html
I don't have your numbers on Chinese defectors from the 60s/70s "“ if you have a point to make with that, produce some numbers and I will look at them.
Jing
April 17, 2006
11:35 pm
Curzon
April 18, 2006
1:05 am
Jing: Too true. Although I haven't addressed this specific claim, I've been talking about the general nuttery of the ROK administration since this blog began. There are some in the Uri party who say Korea has a claim to chunks of northeastern China and eastern Russia. That's another real concern when reunification happens.
lirelou
April 18, 2006
1:13 am
For all, regarding North Korea's collapse. Not even the USFK predicts collapse. Publicly, they merely note that collapse is more likely than war, and they have to be prepared for both. Below is a selective list of statements heard in my time from policy experts and analysts:
1962 "“ Cuba under Castro won't last another five years.
1967 "“ Vietnam - We can see the light at the end of the tunnel.
1968 "“ Vietnam "“ Post-Tet: We slaughtered them. The enemy will never recover.
1972 "“ Cuba "“ Castro can't hold out much longer. He's got to liberalize or go down.
1975 "“ Iran "“ Forget the mullah's, the Shah will be there forever.
1977 "“ Nicaragua "“ The Sandinistas are no real threat to Somoza. (This from two military analysts described as the "CINCs experts on Nicaragua"Â?.)
1978 "“ Nicaragua "“ There is no way that Somoza is going to lose, unless he goes down fighting in his bunker. (This from same two "experts"Â?)
1983 - Grenada "“ It would be folly to invade a Black Caribbean island. The people there would never forgive us. (They went wild with joy.)
1986 "“ Paraguay "“ Stroessner will be in charge until he dies. He keeps the military totally under control and there is no one to challenge him.
1988-89 "“ Panama "“ Once the caps start popping, this will be a "walk-thru"Â?. (OK, it was. But these were the same guys that said: Panama didn't need a military.)
Same period "“ Soviet Union "“ The USSR will be around for a long time to come.
1997-99 "“ Panama "“ President Balladares is a shoo-in for re-election. (His referendum to amend the constitution to that effect failed.) The Panamanians don't really want us to leave, it would devastate their economy. (They did, and it didn't.) OK, the Panamanian government is being forced to make us leave, but they are going to allow us a counter-narcotics base. (They didn't) And my all-time Panamanian favourite: There is no way that Mireya Moscoso can be elected President. (She was.)
So, pardon my skepticism regarding Korea, an area I am not expert in. It just seems to me that predicting reunification for Korea is a no-brainer. Now, when that will happen, that is the test. It is akin to predicting earthquakes, or volcanic eruptions. Certain factors are tangible, and can be measured, but the time line for geological events is very difficult to render in human terms of time. In this regard, Pyongyang-ology is like vulcanology, We (mostly) agree that it's going to blow. But will that be within the next week, next decade, or next century? My gut instinct tells me that it is going to blow sooner than we expect it to, and that the analysts and experts will once again be caught by surprise.
sun bin
April 18, 2006
1:16 am
You are saying Bulgarian school children in 1980s or 1970s are critically eduacated? or an East German boy found no problem mingling into West Gemrany system? what are we comparing?
Even in the west there are many uncritical school children. More in Asia (Japan, Taiwan, HK). I never said oxbridge or harvard.
yes, literacy, basic math is what i was speaking about.
we are comparing China 1976. NK's rural literacy is probably as good as China rural today! (this is my gut feeling, no hard data)
and you thought i didn't know NK brainwashing? this is a topic you are most interested in: history education.
In their version, SK invaded NK in 1950, NK won the single-handedly. In none of their public document was PLA (CPVA to be precise) mentioned, not even on their side of Panmunjun.
There was one memorial tomb in pyongyang, it was smashed but rebuilt only after it badly needed aid from China.
but all this, does not change the fact that, there is a likelihood, not large but not too small either, that NK could move the vietnam path, not as successful as Deng's, but reasonably well.
Shelton Bumgarner
April 18, 2006
1:28 am
Unless a crisis develops that forces the issue (i.e, a mushroom cloud over the Big Apple with a DPRK receipt attached) things are probably going to stay the same.
But we know so little about what is really going on in the DPRK that they could be on the verge of collapsing violently ( or peacefully) and we wouldn't know about it until it actually started to happen.
Richardson
April 18, 2006
1:39 am
Please show me anywhere in my text that I said/implied anything at all that could be construed as what you say above (if that comment is directed to me).
"and you thought i didn't know NK brainwashing?"Â?
Please point to any text where I state/imply that (if that comment is directed to me).
"this is a topic you are most interested in: history education."Â?
No, actually. It goes far beyond history "“ it is in literally every facet of their lives. Or was "“ there has not been much published recently on this (i.e., last 5 years). Anyway, much deeper;
In reading, students read about Kim's
guerrilla exploits; in math, the learn
to count by counting the number of American
soldiers killed or the number of tanks
destroyed in the Korea War; in history,
they study the Communist revolution in
Korea; in music, they sing Kim's marching
songs; and in drama, the reenact his life
story. The emphasis on the political never
diminishes. (Hunter, 1999: 214)
I just don't think anything China did compares.
As far as the Vietnam route "“ you state that it is a "fact"Â? there is a "likelihood"Â? they will go that route; that is utterly false. How you can you state that it is a "fact"Â? that they will probably go that route? Do you mean a "chance"Â?? I'm not splitting hairs here, "likelihood"Â? means greater than 50 percent chance. Is that what you actually mean to say?
No matter which way you mean, I again say it's highly *unlikely*, but re-explaining will just be going in circles.
Curzon
April 18, 2006
1:44 am
sun bin
April 18, 2006
1:59 am
Richardson: i have been very careful in choosing words, like Lirelou did. (I do not has much disagreement with lirelou.) All I said was there is such likelihood, whether it be 20%, 5% or 2%. You will certainly lose if you are making an absolute claim of 0%.
But I am not here to try to win an argument. We are here to discuss and explore the possibilities.
Now got back the NK/1976 China analogy. I can actually find you example one by one
In reading, students read about Mao' Route is Alway Great/Bright/Correct and Mao's Strategic/Warfare vision (Mao is a great military strategist though, KIS isn't)
in math, yes, need to calculate the number of KMT/Japanese puppet soldier captured and kjilled, also how many American imperialists are killed by dear friends Vietcon.
in history, they study the Communist revolution in
Korea; in music, East is Red, Sailing on Sea We Rely on Our Helmsman
drama, what drame? there are 8 drama/movies in the country. same 8 every year. everybody watched them at least dozen times
this is china in 1970s. are you happy?
sun bin
April 18, 2006
2:01 am
Now I understand why no one appreciate what Deng and his successors did for China (despite all their faults). You guys thought China was paradise (or East Germany) in 1970s.
sun bin
April 18, 2006
2:21 am
i asked these questions because i was trying to point out certain similarities between NK and China1976. and you seemed to think that China1976 had an enlightened group of school children.
i laid out a scenario of vietnam, you wanted the berlin wall to fall down.
we were talking about apples and oranges. let's stop this)
snow
April 18, 2006
2:25 am
Richardson
April 18, 2006
2:42 am
You cannot find anything in any of my comments that would point to that. Also, you have not pointed to my text where you assert I said/implied other things that also were not said/implied by me. There is a pattern in that.
Curzon
April 18, 2006
2:53 am
sun bin
April 18, 2006
3:48 am
as for china
re: richardson, i compared NK with China1976. please see my reply to snow above.
you disagreed my comparison with china1976. but you know not much about china in 1976. so we ended up arguing on a lot of irrelevant stuff. i tried to tell you what china1976 is like by pulling in bulgaria (which i do not know much to be honest). you talked about critical education in NK. i said that is exactly what china1976 had.
are we really talking about the same stuff? if not, let's stop and not wasting our time, the space, and times of other readers here. take it offline if you want. but i guess i have said too much already.
---
you said
bq. The major difference between the 1970s China of your example and North Korea now is the cult dynamic, and the amount of isolation/indoctrination of the population (alternative history included in this)...I don't believe anyone could credibly maintain the position that China was as isolated/indoctrinated as North Korea.....Being able to read and write in hangul is one thing; being able to think and be productive is another....
Most defector children cannot function in South Korean schools; being able to quote from the works of Kim Il Sung won't get you far there.
sun bin
April 18, 2006
3:51 am
as to china, it was 6bn people then. but they were not controlled. they were brainwashed. control has a scale problem, brainwashing does not, it is like the internet.
1) after the great leap forward, all they believed was soviet withdrawn aid, ask us to repay the debt, so we are hungry!
2) every young person was willing to die for Mao
sun bin
April 18, 2006
3:52 am
Sonagi
April 18, 2006
12:20 pm
Re: comparison between Mao's power and Kims' power: Can you name off-hand even ONE powerful North Korean government official besides Dear Leader? I can't, and I read Korea-related news every day.
"NK's rural literacy is probably as good as China rural today! (this is my gut feeling, no hard data)"
You admit that you are only guessing about educational conditions in North Korea. You probably haven't met enough North Koreans to make judgements about their educational system. Neither have I or almost anyone else commenting in this forum. However, the media in South Korea have told stories about defectors' adjustments to life in the South, and defectors like Kang Chul-hwan have written books about their experiences, so we can get second-hand information from written sources.
Your comparisons between 1970s China and North Korea today are valid, but I ask you: Where is North Korea's Deng? After falling out of favor, Deng hid out in Guangzhou. Where could North Korea's Deng possibly hide to avoid being sent to a concentration camp?
Admiral
April 18, 2006
2:06 pm
sun bin
April 18, 2006
3:18 pm
1) no. you cannot name a single person other than Mao either. Deng was purged twice and Zhou (basically a yes-man) died.
2) education. you are right. it is a black box. but the literacy numbers are usually pretty accurate. it does not take sophisticated equipment or money or a lot of food to teach literacy.
my point is actually. literacy is not a crucial factor for reform.
in china1979 a few people at the politburo made the decisions.
Today Chinese people still haev to adjust when moved to HK or Taiwan, let alome 30 years ago.
3) It doesn't need a Deng. There is no Deng in NK. It is unlikely to have a Deng in a hundred year anywhere. But there will be many people who heard of the Deng story and have seen/heard how China and the rest of the world changed.
If this is common sense to us. It is to the new leader.
However, the new leader could equally likely be another KJI. I said I refuse to bet on it, unless you reward me with 1:50 or above :)
He might have hidden as one of the visitors in KJI's recent Guangzhou trip. He knows many people in Pyongyeong escaped due to poverty, a few he knows in person.
Sunguh
April 18, 2006
6:37 pm
I think there are some valid comparisons with NK, from what little I know of them, but even if the patterns are similar, nothing is inevitable. I wouldn't want to bet on it.
Ron Patterson
April 21, 2006
3:50 pm
The infamous Kyanju massacre in the 80's was as much about troops from Daegu a region which loathes the people in Kwangju being allowed at their 'enemies' as it was about Chun crushing dissent.
The Kims in a strange way widely admired in South Korea. KJI is seen as a strong man who rules in a"Korean" fashion. This is hard to explain to Westerners. Their rule is safe unless their is outside intervention.
So I do not see reunification because of some desire by the North Korean populace for economic reform, nor because the South gets so sickened by his excesses that it takes the action need to hasten his fall. Also the Southerners love his anti Japanese rants.
Yes Japan does care what is happening in Korea , it cares deeply. They have invaded time and again because of the fears of China using the penninsula as a launching base for invasion. REunification would mean a serious security problem for japan.
Kozuimi is a fervant nationalist, who has toned his rhetoric down in recent years but his early speeches and writings are full of anti-U.S. rants,and appeals toJapanese millitarism.
Mao ruled by developing partnerships within the CCP discarding partners occasionally to keep his opponents off balance. He kept Zhou his yesman but he shrewdly developed coalitons to keep power and control his opposition. Kim in North Korea has no opposition. There were several attempts to strip Mao of some or all of his power. Lin Bao was working to undermine Mao, before his "accident"
China also had a window to the west, Hong Kong. North Korea has no such window.
I do not belive that America is leaving Asia . Forget rhetoric I do not think anyone in the region except perhaps Kim really wants the withdrawal of American forces. The "pax AMericana"has worked well and there is no reason to believe that it will not continue to work.
The Korean war was an abberation caused by Kim Sung Il's idiocy Stalins miscalculation on Americas resolve and Mao's trusting Stalin to back him up. EVErybody lost on that one so know one wants a repeat.
Ecthelion
April 30, 2006
7:03 am
It is true, however, that Korea's history has been a fractious one, of peasant uprisings, of court intrigues, and negotiations with foreign powers to usurp power from the throne (this happened even in the Three Kingdoms period in the Korean kingdoms of Goguryo, Baekche, and Shilla), and the like. It is not true that Koreans have never been unified except under the Japanese. In the sense that Ron Patterson is referring to, this national (Korean-wide) fervor and unity has also happened during the Mongol occupation and before then under assault from the Chinese. But in times of peace, Koreans generally left each other alone. Koreans as a people are not truly a very militarily aggressive people (except perhaps against each other), and unless they perceive that their territory is invaded, very few will actually act out against foreign powers. Koreans are also united in national competition (thank God for sports, I guess).
And I can't remember who said this, but to answer the claim that Koreans are scared silly of the Japanese, they mistake indignation and anger (that are also historically justified) for fear. While the reactions thereof might be similar, the emotional origins are far from it. Koreans have been harassed by incursions from the land now known as Japan since its early recorded history. These incursions occurred after the Korean kingdom of Baekche colonized the Japanese islands (setting up the Yamato-Wa state) and subsequently was destroyed a few hundred years later. In fact, organized Japanese incursions, while frequent, were not a huge problem until the Japanese state overcame its own isolationism and civil wars - the most significant Japanese incursions, therefore, came after the Yi (Choson) dynasty took the throne in 1392.
The point is, Koreans are not afraid of the Japanese (especially now, since both of their militaries - and I'm referring to South Korean only here - are technologically equivalent and the South Koreans have a more powerful military in terms of numbers and equipment), but are angered and indignant of what they see as an insolent, irritating, and ultimately unrepentant Japanese government. It is common knowledge that the current Japanese military (its "Defense Force") lacks the strength (if not only in numbers) to capture and hold territory outside of Japan, but that the South Korean military, thanks to the ever-hostile DPRK, is more than capable of capturing and holding territory effectively in the absence of a more potent threat (i.e. North Korea). Koreans have nothing to fear militarily from Japan - it is the economic power wielded by Japan that should cause worry for Koreans, now and in the future. But Koreans are (and somehow have always been) self-confident (as a unified people in public, anyway), and they do not fear the Japanese but resent them, are indignant of their government's actions now and in the past, and are irritated by their continued attempts to infringe on Korean territory, physical or otherwise.
Zorobabel
May 5, 2006
7:24 pm
Oh My News’ Own Reunification Theory «
October 23, 2006
9:08 pm
Scenarios of Reunification «
October 23, 2006
9:20 pm