|
|
|
|
|
GOLDSEA |
ASIAMS.NET |
ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES
Impact of Corean Unification
(Updated
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2025, 06:38:55 AM)
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.]
NYHomebuy,
LOL, where do I begin with you and your perpetual quest to defend the status quo?
Ideological centers? it's year 2002 buddy, american capitalism might be at war with communism -- a war started by america, i might add -- but where is it written that capitalism and communism cannot coexist? i see it as a petty issue, and not something that should get in the way of the formation of an east asian economic block similar to the EU. Americanism is for the good of america, at the expense of every else, a better term would be opportunism.
>>"Or was it b/c the NE had no natural resources that the Europeans could easily plunder and therefore was not worth the effort?"
History lesson: the coreans captured some of first europeans to land there, and sank the first american ship to intrude corea (the general sherman?). This isn't jiving with your claims, is it? And why where those brits so eager to sell opium to the chinese? for silk? for porcelain? carpets? medicine and spices? And the japanese thought there where plenty of natural resources in corea and manchuria.
Your other post is just wacky... are you addressing ACDropout or me? Rule of Law???? Are you suffering from selective amnesia or something? How many treatise did the "americans" honor with the "other" americans? the list goes on, and on, and on. Honestly, it TIRES me out just listing them. The only rule is... Americanism is opportunism, no rules necessary.
So tell me, how many communists were assassinated in the corean and vietnam wars? 300,000? 70,000? Save your shell game, buddy, just because the US have others do their dirty work for 'em. Democracy with a gun, "I'm right and your dead." Americans know about this all too well, don't they? Corea is, and forever will be, morally and ethically above the United States!
kimchi devil
Wednesday, November 13, 2002 at 10:57:28 (PST)
[152.163.188.228]
I am crazy
> (trust me many non Asian Americans themselves want that).
It's a nice dream. In order to pull and keep together any major alliance there has to be an ideological center. Or in the absence, a compelling economic reason (which is then suject to falling apart if the needs/balances chage).
But I see no moral or economic forces able to compete with the gravity of our present galaxy's sun other than Americanism, in Asia or in Europe.
It's only the big bellied and grandiose Americans that has the gumption to think they know what's the best for the rest of the world and actually tries to do somthing about it.
>Remember the N.E Asians are the only guys (except Iran, Ethiepia and Thailand) whom the Europeans did not have the guts to subjugate as they did to the other non-Europeans.
That may be one reason. Or was it b/c the NE had no natural resources that the Europeans could easily plunder and therefore was not worth the effort?
NYhomeby
Monday, November 11, 2002 at 06:36:00 (PST)
[24.90.59.127]
To those fence sitters.
Heh. KimchiD has fallen off on on his side and can't get up.
Allow me to repeat,
"only trust those aspiring to the WASP traditions, they have the maturity with technology and the moral repercussions."
Because, so far this is the only system of protocol among humans that has proven itself as a RULE of LAW.
>KimchiD
I never heard of a Chinese soldier raping young women in other countries. I wonder why"
B/c
1. We hold USA to higher standard.
2. B/c the Chinese hush it up, i.e. no freedom of press.
"I can name hundreds or instances where the masses are wrong."
Ÿup but in USA the masses are allowed to live anotehr day and learn from it. Unlike others, the masses are told what's good for them or else.
nyIMHOboy
Sunday, November 10, 2002 at 15:55:38 (PST)
[24.90.59.127]
huu76,
"Japan and South Corea don't need nukes because guess who has their back?"
Hmmm...you mean China. Their largest growing trading partner and largest target for foriegn investments. Or USA, whose military that are stationed abroad are accused of raping a young girl in the host country every year.
I never heard of a Chinese soldier raping young women in other countries. I wonder why
"West actually has to listen to their own people."
Oh you mean like stopping the Vietnam war in the late 60's. Or ending slavery in the 19th century. Or bashing and killing Japanese in 1980's.
I can name hundreds or instances where the masses are wrong. Why large countries choose to have some sort of safe guard against the ignorant masses. Called them electorial colleges, parliment, or even the CCP. The power resides in the hands of a few and they could care less about the masses than you believe. It's all about making the masses content and paying taxes.
USA is asking Japan to develop their own missile defense in light of N.K. nukes. Japan is balking because it would require them to rewrite their constitution, that USA wrote for them. Not to mention they fear upsetting relationships with China.
AC Dropout
Sunday, November 10, 2002 at 09:46:31 (PST)
[24.90.98.143]
Korea should unite. Is the economy more important than the people? Communism is a vermin, the worlds greatest lie which promises equality but creates new tyrants. The prez of N.Korea eats cake while his subjects cannot even afford rice. I say invade the North.
Besides Japan should bring back its great navy. But this time not to invade their Asian neighbours but to create a new alliance between China, Taiwan, Korea and if possible Vietnam and Mongolia. The American troops should be be asked to leave. (trust me many non Asian Americans themselves want that). North-East Asia must get the respect it deserves. Remember the N.E Asians are the only guys (except Iran, Ethiepia and Thailand) whom the Europeans did not have the guts to subjugate as they did to the other non-Europeans.
I am crazy.
Saturday, November 09, 2002 at 10:46:20 (PST)
[203.199.131.121]
Kimchi,
Huh? You want your own country to break up into civil war?
Japan and South Corea don't need nukes because guess who has their back?
It's only right that the countries with the most to lose retain the ability to wipeout those who threaten them. Unlike democracies such as China, South Corea and the Muslim world, the West actually has to listen to their own people. There are safeguards in place to make sure the end of the world isn't caused by the West.
Who's stopping Elvis in Pyongyang from dropping the bomb on Seoul? just because they've proven daddy's system doesn't work.
huu76
Monday, November 04, 2002 at 18:13:37 (PST)
[64.231.99.17]
nynukeboy,
and certainly not the jews who developed the damn things. actually, i trust china, corea, and japan with nukes more than i'll ever trust the United States with 'em, much less france and england. A nuclear germany is fine w/ me.
And who the hell said j, k, and c intend on using them against each other? that would be stupid, they should at least point them at other continents. nukes=world peace, don't you want world peace? at least according to america's cockeyed reasoning.
our reasons: as long as 'they' behave accordingly, they won't get nuked, considering that 'they' have waaaaaay more to lose than 'us'. who knows, maybe we can help with a carpet bombing here and a nuke there... if a civil war ever breaks out in the US. LOLOL.
kimchi d'evil
Friday, November 01, 2002 at 08:48:20 (PST)
[205.188.208.5]
Nukeboys
Ok, so no well dressed nation should be w/o a nuke?
It's like once your friend has a car, he no longer can bug you for rides. So, w/o nukes, K stays under the warm protection of US. 'Cause once the Ks are united, then the object of affection or disaffection becomes China, and nuke ain't gonna help then. If they nuke China all the radiation would fall over K anyway. I say no need for Koreas to have the nukes now or ever.
KD,
I'll do one better, I'll only trust those aspiring to the WASP traditions, they have the maturity with technology and the moral repercussions. I don't trust the French, the Germans, least of all the Russcians.
nynonukeboy
Thursday, October 31, 2002 at 19:27:19 (PST)
[24.90.59.127]
kimchae d'evil,
South Africa has nukes. That seems pretty weird. Where are they aiming at? the South Pole?
NK with nukes I'm not too worried about. PRC and Russia have more than enough resourse to keep NK in check right now.
Iraq with nukes. That would be bothersome. I wonder what the effect on oil prices would be if Iraq drop a nuke down an oil well in Saudi Arabia.
AC Dropout
Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 11:35:35 (PST)
[24.90.98.143]
NYhomeby,
Well currently NK stated that they are willing to negoiate their nukes for better treatment from the USA. Doesn't seem like much leverage if you ask me.
Like you mentioned they don't really have a feasilble target that would not destroy them in retaliation right now.
But NK seems to holding out the olive branch right now. With the Japanese abductees and nuclear program being admitted to the public.
I wouldn't be to sure about getting rid of it on their own volition. Even if unification occurs 1 nuke is better than no nuke when it comes to international negiotiations.
AC Dropout
Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 11:29:37 (PST)
[24.90.98.143]
NYhomby,
Corea has as much of a right and reason to arm themselves with nukes as france, england or anyone else for that matter. Maybe a better question is what exactly is the US, UK, and france pointing their nukes at? C, K, and J?
Need I remind you that the US is the ONLY country on the face of the planet that has actually used them so far, and on civilians. I guess according to you, Americans are only ones morally gifted enough to have them, eh?
what the hey, i'd love to see both japan and corea armed with nukes. bye bye redcoats, muh hahahahahaha.
kimchi d'evil
Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 10:15:52 (PST)
[64.12.96.47]
AC Dropout
The nukes in the hands of a dependent country like K is more of a liability and burden as it is asset. Who are the K to shoot at, the C, Russiks, the J? K has no strategic enemy other than themselves and absolutely need for nukes.
Once unification occurs, they wil get rid of it as fast as they can.
NYhomeby
Wednesday, October 30, 2002 at 07:02:33 (PST)
[24.90.59.127]
ACDropout,
You know, south africa had nukes too. it was only revealed after the change in gov't to nelson mandela's. and their current position appears to be against having nukes themselves and against nuclear weapons proliferation. whether they still have them or were pressured into getting rid of 'em, who knows.
If or when the corean unification occurs, i'm sure coreans would love to hold a few of 'em, just in case. But I'm also sure they'll also be pressured into getting rid of 'em and dismantling what's left of the program. By none other than the US, of course.
On a side note, I read somewhere that NK has uranium deposits with about 4 million tons in reserve. And considering Ur-235 comprises of about 0.7% of natural uranium, If this is true, that's quite enough to make thousands or even millions of nuclear warheads. iraq might have oil but... hehe.
kimchae d'evil
Tuesday, October 29, 2002 at 23:01:28 (PST)
[205.188.208.5]
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|