|
|
|
|
|
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)
ka,
1 billion dollar is a significant amount to the Japanese. That war was really our war, no matter what the political rhetoric said. Now we have Part II of that same war from the son of the father who fought the original war.
That nice piss on the native americans again. Isn't it nice to know the USA has never consistently honored any agreements with the native Americans. That is the signal largest injustice of all injustices that this country was built on. In the far future I would not be surprise if foriegn covert operations ultilize the native American population as a rebel force. But speculations like that are best left for trade paper backs.
East Timor...which aspect of the country are you referring to? The conflict between them and Indonesia. The status as least develop nation. Sure we should assist them or try to give them a leg up. But currently I don't think that country is our nation radar blip yet.
I think your suspicions are too uncalled for at this point. NK is trying desperate to get normalized relationship now. I think we can give them a benefit of a doubt for the time being.
AC Dropout
Friday, August 02, 2002 at 06:13:01 (PDT)
AC, I agree that China definitely has the right to approve or disprove companies from other nations from operating within it's political domain. I'm just saying that US of A has just as much rights and privileges as China on that regards, and hence forth has the right to sanction foreign businesses who harm U.S. from doing businesses in the U.S. (i.e. 6 companies from China) I welcome China to do the same exact thing. If China doesn't like GE for making U.S. military jet engines, go right ahead and sanction them. I don't mind at all. and i think it's definitely within China's rights to do so.
I don't remember how much japan paid for desert storm, but I think it was actually more than 1 billion. I could be wrong, you might be right. But if it was ONLY 1 billion, it really is a paltry price. One U.S. stealth bomber cost 1 billion dollars. I mean one billion is a lot of moolah, but Pentagon tosses around several billion dollars each year like pocket change, considering how big the U.S. defense budget is. I think several thousand m1-a1 tanks were deployed during desert storm, and if you think about it's extreme weight and cost of fueling, and the cost of flying each individual tanks on cargo plane which sucks up more fuel, and the cost of each individual american missile and smart bombs, all these costs would run multi billion dollars. I mean 1 billion dollars is pocket change compare to what the U.S. probably wound up paying for this war--but to put more things into perspective, Japan is by far more dependent on mid-east oil then the U.S. as U.S. actually have other sources of oil available to it. Worst comes to worst, U.S. will probably kick off the native americans in Alaska and start drilling like Dick Cheney wants to do according to his Energy Policy report. My point is that the world is full of free-riders, as free-riding is in the best interest of many of these other nations. You make the mistake of assuming that these other nation care less about these problems in the world, because they tend to free-ride upon America's initiatives.
And also call me a bleeding heart liberal, but I think it's in the best interest of people to care about his/her neighbor even if they are very far away from us, i.e. East Timor. I'm not really sure what you mean when you talk about political isolationism and economic engagement.
but going back to the topic of this discussion thread, people are speculating that North Korean government is undergoin economic reformation. But I feel like north korea has called "wolf" too many times, and I'm rather skeptical about it's motives. I hope that the Great Leader proves me wrong.
ka
Thursday, August 01, 2002 at 10:35:52 (PDT)
ka,
That could be because they didn't have many ABM at that time.
But not to fear. N and S Korea on the road to discussing unification agian.
AC Dropout
Tuesday, July 30, 2002 at 14:21:02 (PDT)
AC--Fact correction--
I have to apologize for an erroneous posting I made. I said that in regard to ABM treaty that Putin and Bush signed a treaty to negate the ABM treaty--this is false. I apologize for the error for all those people who got the wrong fact due to my error--considering I was using this bit to accuse AC of fact-creation. I screwed up. Bush did in fact unilaterally withdraw, but China and the rest of the world was never a signatory of the ABM treaty.
ka
Monday, July 29, 2002 at 11:37:47 (PDT)
ka,
Not knowing every detail of every company in China. But I think every multination needs China's approval on some level before conducting business in their country. It's quite a daunting beauracracy even the cultural revolution did not change. So it is equal applied from my limited knowledge.
Other nations donate money to the USA for military action when it is in their interest. Japan foot $1 billion dollars for desert storm. Japan is probably not going to donate any money for the overthrowing of Sadam in Iraq.
East Timor is really a debate on "self-interest principles" vs. "principles." I think my stance is on that issue would be quite apparent.
AC Dropout
Monday, July 29, 2002 at 08:57:40 (PDT)
J Lee,
So there will be a bunch of hapa kids in the near future. The world will survive.
AC Dropout
Monday, July 29, 2002 at 08:50:52 (PDT)
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|