|
|
|
|
|
GOLDSEA |
ASIAMS.NET |
ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES
Impact of Corean Unification
t's been over a decade since the Iron Curtain came crashing down in Europe. The Bamboo Curtain is little more than a quaint phrase. Yet the Cold War remains very much alive on the Corean peninsula.
Across a 186-mile DMZ glare opposing armies collectively totaling 1.7 million. By all reckoning the Pyongyang regime should have become ideological roadkill following the collapse of communism. Instead, it remains an impregnable roadblock to the economic integration of East Asia, the world's fastest-growing region.
How can an economic nonentity be such a roadblock?
Consider its location at what should have been the crossroads of East Asia. With 56% of the peninsula's land mass, North Corea separates on one side the world's greatest market and labor pool (China) and the biggest reserve of natural resources (Sibera) from, on the other, two of the world's leading technological and manufacturing nations (Japan and South Corea).
But for Pyongyang's intransigence Seoul would already be linked by railroads and superhighways to Beijing, Moscow, Berlin, Paris and London. All those cities would also be linked to Tokyo via a bridge across the 126-mile strait dividing Shimonoseki from Pusan. The savings in shipping cost and time alone could amount to tens of billions of dollars a year. Such a trans-Eurasian land link would accelerate the cultural and economic integration of not only East Asia, but the world. In the process, the Corean peninsula would shed the burden of financing the world's most heavily fortified frontier and become the center of the global economy.
That's the vision dancing before the eyes of farsighted statesmen and business leaders pushing for the political leaps of faith needed to keep Pyongyang taking its unsteady baby steps toward opening North Corea.
But skeptics and pessimists abound. Even a loose confederation with the North would only burden and destabilize South Corea's economy and political system, they argue. For decades to come the impact on the global economy would be entirely negative as investors and customers begin shunning the uncertainties, denying capital and trading partners to hundreds of world-class Corean manufacturers. The ultimate result, argue the naysayers, would be to throw a monkey wrench into an alignment that has allowed three decades of strong growth for East Asia.
What is the likely impact of Corean unification?
This interactive article is closed to new input.
Discussions posted during the past year remain available for browsing.
CONTACT US
|
ADVERTISING INFO
© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.
|
|
|
|
WHAT YOU SAY
[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]
(Updated
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2025, 06:38:55 AM)
AC, you are damn right that I'm suspicious of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. I'm 200% suspicious of him, because whereas his rhetoric is good, he has failed to match his words with his actions. For example, going by his words, Kim Jong Il should have visited Seoul months ago. He has also held up building railroad to rejoin our people.
Like I said before AC, I don't like Bush saying crap that is clearly unconstructive. But his actions towards the north, his ACTIONS, have been a copycat policy of Clinton's policies. He continues KEDO, food aid, and an open invitation to a dialogue without strings as you may have read in CNN. These are practically the same thing Bill Clinton offered, and moreover, Bill Clinton admited that U.S. and North Korea almost engaged in open warfare during his administration.
So WTO "begged" China to join? Uhm... So that's why China was so quiet during the process for membership during those times? Clearly it is in the world's best interest for China to join an international framework for commerce as China can contribute greatly to the global economy. But the opposite is also true, as the world has a lot of offer China. WTO didnt' bendover backwards for China. Certainly WTO didn't bendover backwards for North Korea either. There simply isn't a parallelism here. Your assertion that WTO "begged" China is patently false. As I remember my reading CNN some time ago, I remember reading that right winged U.S. congressmen tried to use China's application into WTO as a leverage to improve Chinese human rights. How could this be used as a leverage if the Chinese had no desire to join WTO? The truth is there are many like minded U.S. and Chinese politicians.
You are absolutely 300% correct when you say that small businesses led by Koreans with North Korean ties should spearhead developing North Korea. But you are so aware of Chinese history but lack information about North Korea, you make the mistake of assuming that North Korea is simply at where China stood decades ago. The simple fact is that Kim Dae Jung and even before him, South Korea tried very hard to do exactly what you are suggesting. The north has turned down all requests, as the North fears that South Korean family members may "corrupt" North Koreans with their stories about the successful southern economy. You are right that there are indeed few very wealthy North Koreans--they are the cadre of Kim Jong Il. They don't make wealth from business like you do--you are seriously misunderstanding the North korean situation here. The few who are wealthy are generating the wealth in the same old tradion of Chosun Korea--through bribes and other corrupt methods of a feudal economy. Like I said before, small businessmen from Japan, Russia, China, and elsewhere have all failed in North Korea. When North Korea bans all south Korean products, where is the basis, where is the first stepping stone South koreans can use to implement your enlightened, but uninformed policy of engaging the North through small businesses?
Because of your chinese experience, you make the false assumption the same is true for North Korea. It is not. I'm still watching for the North Korean reforms that has not yet come.
We cannot put parallism of a small child to North Korea. But if you insist, sometimes it takes a good spanking and good old fashioned discipline which rears children away from growing up to be gangsters. But the true dilemma is, what if your child is already a gangster? Simply throwing money does not always work, money must be coupled with some genuine creativity.
Lastly I wanted to point out that you claim you did successful business in China. I imagine you are talking about Post-Deng China. Kim Jong Il is nothing like Deng Xiao Ping, and his regime still adheres to command economy--which is essentially what I have been against since the beginning of this dialgue. North Korea is more similiar to China of Mao Ze Dong. But for one moment think what China might have been like if Mao lived 2 decades more with 20 more years of the cultural revolution and the so-called "great leap" forward. Think what might China have been like if Deng Xiao Ping was executed for political crimes. That's what North Korea is like right now.
ka
Friday, June 14, 2002 at 11:41:20 (PDT)
AC
The only card that NK has is the "crazy man". Once they throw out that they aren't crazy, they have no more bargaining stance with US.
That's the ball game that NK wants to play, only way for it to feel secure to starting dating/negotiating. Any other stance is to be totally at mercy of the US...untenable for them.
How do you see this?
NYhomeboy
Friday, June 14, 2002 at 11:36:38 (PDT)
NYhomeboy,
If NK is a girl...We have just basically told the neighborhood that she is an ugly skanky 'ho with AIDS.
Now who is going to want to date NK, if we, the top dogs in the 'hood, keep talking smack like that.
You think SK is ready to diss us and try to touch the skanky 'ho, NK, in the house we built?
You think SK can step up and represent, after what we said. I think not.
AC Dropout
Thursday, June 13, 2002 at 12:23:19 (PDT)
ka,
Your basic stance is that you are suspicious of everything out of N. Korea.
"Bush is not so fundamentally different from Clintonian policies."
What are you talking about. Clinton never called them evil. That's a fundimental difference right there.
WTO...China vs N. Korea. First off it was the WTO telling China it should join. China was fighting not to join for 5 or more years as it decided on policies to protect China internal economy. N. Korea on the other hand is basically ignored by the WTO. The results might look the same, but there is a difference.
That is why I said small business must lay the cultural changes in N. Korea. S. Korean businesses must ultilized family ties in the N. Korea to lay to foundation of change.
I'm sure there are a few wealthy individuals in N. Korea not related to Kim Jong Il. It is human nature for some to desire wealth.
For a nation to behave normally you must treat them as a normal nation. It is like children who become gangpiet. If you continue to treat them like gangsters, they will act as gangsters. I'm not saying there is no risk in this endeavor. But if you do not take those risk the situation will forever remain the same. Not to mention, we are wealthy enough to afford these risk.
AC Dropout
Thursday, June 13, 2002 at 10:29:31 (PDT)
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|