|
|
|
|
|
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)
Naki,
Sucess is a subjective word. You can also state they had dissappointment or were even unsucessful in the World Cup. Neither statement can be refuted in terms of semantics.
That is why those adjective are usually not used in sporting events to describe coming in 4th or not medaling. They are used in absolute terms. In sporting events success = victory; dissappointment = loss.
Please open up a sport section of any crediable English newspaper and you will understand the better use of shading in your prose.
I wish you well in the Verbal section of any standardize test in the USA.
AC Dropout
Tuesday, July 23, 2002 at 05:17:19 (PDT)
Naki,
How does the one child policy promote inbreeding and birth defects?
I believe the one child policy is supposed to bring about control population reduction in an over populated nation.
Please share your enlightened insight with this humble yet somewhat slow dropout.
Have you even been to asia? Please astound us with the high IQ that you are proposed to have.
AC Dropout
Monday, July 22, 2002 at 11:20:41 (PDT)
A Divided Korea is in America's Best Interest--
From time to time, I read posts like yours and it really tires me out. Because I can only assume that you don't really follow American foreign policy debates. America almost went to war with North Korea, because U.S. government cannot absolutely tolerate North Korea with nuclear and missile technology. If America goes to war with North Korea, don't you think it's obvious that they would need South's support on the ground of national unification? The U.S. of A. can negotiate to retain it's military bases in Korea even AFTER unifcation of Korean peninsula. You are very blind. Korea still has stiff trade protection from American rice farmers, who incidentally grow short-grain korean rice nowadays. Moreover there are conservatives in the U.S. who are against selling F-15 to South Korea on the grounds that they don't want to transfer american military technology to foreign nations. There are also politicians who want to pull out of the Korean peninsula all togethter, so as not to get involved in a war in asia.
You are angry that U.S. pushed for the sale of F-15. So are you saying that the French Rafale is a superior aircraft? I don't know honestly, I'm no military expert. But it seems obvious to me that South Korean airforce will prefer to use military equipment they are already familiar with. Moreover, they probably want to use military equipment from an ally that gives it a nuclear umbrella rather than a nation who likes to conduct nuclear weapons experiments in the Asia Pacific, rather than it's own backyard.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that George W. wants a regime change in North Korea--meaning that from America's perspective, it's better that Korea be united on friendly Seoul government, who does not conduct and sell nuclear technology to Pakistan, Iran, and Libya. But you don't think this far ahead, because you swallowed whole Kim Jong Il's propaganda.
ka
Monday, July 22, 2002 at 10:36:16 (PDT)
ka,
Forget about my glib comment to Naki about soccer. I was very happy for an asian nation to do that well in the World Cup. They exceeded many people's expectations during the competition. But their "Speed Skating Victory Dance" was weird.
Back to the discussion at hand. I totally agree that the Sunshine policy stance was an extremely favorable for the N. Koreans to begin negotiation with S. Koreans.
But in reality the incursion at sea will only further polarize the S. Koreans during election time next year. They will take the belief that they were too soft to the polls.
Not to mention the fact N. Koreans died from the battle. How they will react will also not help matters.
This will not help the unification process.
AC Dropout
Monday, July 22, 2002 at 10:27:48 (PDT)
AC Dropout
To bad you think it's misspent, you'd made a great Jimmy Swaggart with your verbosity.
NYhomboy
Sunday, July 21, 2002 at 19:58:26 (PDT)
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|