Asian Air 
Imagemap

GOLDSEA | ASIAMS.NET | ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES

Impact of Corean Unification
(Updated Wednesday, Jan 22, 2025, 04:38:55 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.

Asian American Videos


Films & Movies Channel


Humor Channel


Identity Channel


Vocals & Music Channel


Makeup & Hair Channel


Intercultural Channel

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.]
Kimchidevil,

From time to time, I hear the voice of "American puppeteering" is the sole reason that Korea is in trouble. They call me naive.

You seem to forget that it was Jimmy Carter's administration that wanted to remove all U.S. troops in Korea. Guess who didn't want them to leave? You are right that U.S. started to support Saddam Hussein when the Ayatollah overthrought the Shah. There are however two very big reasons why things are very different for Korea and Iran: 1: there is no oil in Korea. 2: Islamic fundamentalism does not exist in Korea. From a security point of view, Korea is a liability not an asset to the United States. The whitehouse and the pentagon are indeed arrogant in it's ability to unilaterally demand actions to be made by the South Korean government/military. These demands are assuaged by South Korean government for the simple reason 1 million North Korean soldiers are pointing artillery towards Seoul.

As you know, there are no significant mineral resources that Americans can "exploit" from South Korea. South Korea is however, an important economic partner--but the U.S. economy certainly wouldn't sink without trade with South Korea. Look at trade figures yourself--on the otherhand South Korea would certainly be in big trouble if she lost U.S. as a market.

But you want to talk about 2 girls who were unfortunately killed by a tank. You say they are guilty of murder. Really? Did two U.S. soliers wanted to drive over Korean civillian in a GTA2 style? Were they drunk? Were they not paying attention to the road? Was it an accident? What is at question here is SOFA, not the crime/innocense of the 2 U.S. soldiers, because you have already condemned them to be guilty--being distrustful of the U.S. military legal system(with good reason.) I mean do you know what the facts are? U.S. military along with South Korean military regularly conducts military exercizes--which incidentally frightens the bejezus out of North Korea. During this exercize 2 U.S. soldiers drove over 2 school girls. These are facts. What is questionable is your insistence that they are "guilty" and the U.S. military is covering up. Guilty? What proof do you have? You say U.S. government is covering up the fact that they are homicidal maniacs? That they were driving drunk? What is your basis that 2 men drove over 2 girls with the intent to kill, or with criminal negligence? I tell you, that you make your judgement due to your overtly strong nationalism, or your strong suspicions towards U.S. military. Had a drunk south korean taxi driver plowed into 2 girls, you wouldn't be burning any flags. Of course, they wouldn't fall under U.S. military jurisdiction.
But then again, how many U.S. soldiers do you really see around Seoul? There are only 38,000 in Korea--vast majority of who do not really go into the Korean general population.

Am I naive? What about you, who don't pay attention to details? Are you really being fair? What is questionable here is SOFA, an agreement where U.S. military men are under U.S. jurisdiction when they commit crimes in Korea.

You said, "Stalin ain't around to start another korean war, and the soviets stopped meddling with corean affairs a long time ago. Isn't it about time the US did the same? I believe the first step toward reunification is for the US to leave corea, once and for all. If anything, have the UN station troops there, as was originally intended." You are calling me naive? The "originally intended" UN trooops were almost unanimously U.S. soldiers. Stalin is dead, but Kim Jong Il is still alive. Certainly U.S. should leave the region, but tell me, how should they do this? Should they just say, "Hey Kim Dae Jung, we are leaving in February, good bye." and pack up and leave? Or do you want Pentagon to say, "We are gong to remove 10,000 troops each year starting from now, and 38,000 U.S. troops will be gone in 4 years." Don't make me laugh. 38,000 troops is a small token of threat to North Korea. You seriously think 38,000 U.S. military servicemen could even seize 600,000 South Korean servicemen to topple south korean government in a hostile territory?
You think that the PRC and the Russian fereration and the Japanese aren't "meddling" in Korean affairs? BS! Please read the news. Yang Bin was arrested in China and Russia just made a statement with the Japanese that they too are oppose to a nuclear North Korea. Those 3 countries simply lack the power to influence North Korea the way U.S. can.

You still think I'm naive? The experience of vietnam looms still fresh even today, and the U.S. failure to implement positive policies in Iran is reminder to us of what can happen when we do screw up--namely in the way of Osama Bin Laden.

Cold War may be over. Clinton administration offered 1994 agreements as several offeres to talk. South KOrean president gave several concession to the North Korean government. How has Kim Jong Il responded? Give me a break, will you say allowing 4-5 Japanese kidnap victims to return to Japan is proof that times are changing in Pyong Yang? This gordian knot will not be loosened until Kim Jong Il is cut.

The U.S. indeed has a lot of responsibility. But you are a fool if you are blindsighted by the real culprit of the Korean dilemma. Korea's survival depends on the pragmatic choice, not the choice of vindictive nationalist blind pride--thas is the path of north korea which you are heading.
ka
   Wednesday, November 27, 2002 at 10:31:48 (PST)    [168.103.180.35]
ka,

>>"If South Korea did not want U.S. to be there, you think U.S. will impose economic sanctions on South Korea?..."

How could you be so naive? What happened when the Iranians overthrew the shaw, a pro-US regime? the US then sided with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, along with all his heinous actions against Iran. Yup the very same americanos with their troops stationed in south corea. Do you honestly believe if south corea asked americans to leave that there wouldn't be consequences? Given their atrocious track record, they'd probably start backing north corea militarily. After all, prosperity without america would offend america's child-like, primodonna sense of self-importance in this world. You assume too much of the "good" that poisonous snakes "would" do.

Regarding US troops that have ever been brought to justice by the corean gov't, hell, I could have told you that this was very rare or nonexistent. But it turned out to be zero? Big deal, time well spent researching such a small, insignificant difference. Rest assured, if the south coreans aren't prosecuting these criminals, the US gov't sure as hell isn't, as demonstrated one more freaking time... When those responsible for the vehicular homicide of two girls were acquitted. Now, why doesn't it surprise me in the slightest? did it surprise you? So just who are the "left-wing, bleeding heart liberals" here? NOT ME. Don't you believe in punishing crime? What do you expect from the US military, who cover up, hide, and disregard crimes committed by their own against "foreigners." The exact same shpit that goes on here in the US of A.

IMHO, those who assist criminals (like the US military) ARE criminals, and crime should always be punished. If coreans in the US commit more crimes per capia than GIs stationed in corea, as you claim, than GOOD!!! There's nothing like payback. But I seriously doubt coreans have the propensity to commit crimes like their american counterparts.

and THIS particular KA believes that the United States and its meddling in the far east is largely responsible for the problems in the region. Besides, Stalin ain't around to start another korean war, and the soviets stopped meddling with corean affairs a long time ago. Isn't it about time the US did the same? I believe the first step toward reunification is for the US to leave corea, once and for all. If anything, have the UN station troops there, as was originally intended.
kimchi devil
   Saturday, November 23, 2002 at 19:47:00 (PST)    [205.188.208.5]
KommieD,

>>>>> Much of what makes north corea what it is today, is America.

You actually stumbled on the SECRET of NK's SUCCESS! GENIUS. Thank you.

That's PRECISELY what is wrong with NK and why they are not going anywhere. They live to get a reaction out of US of A. EVERYTHING they do, every BREATH they take is in expectation of a reaction from US of A.

If youre waiting for US of A to say Sorry, baby, you better have a plan B.

By the time a US admin comes along with more than enough attention span to think of more than two things (economy and middle east) at once, NK will be long gone, off the face of the earth. Or, you can wait until the KA community in US of A figures out the Jews' technique of how to win friends and influence people to start a proactive policy to NK...don't hold your breath...hehehe.
NYisawthelightboy
   Wednesday, November 20, 2002 at 17:27:34 (PST)    [24.90.59.127]
> The greed of America is that it assumes that AMERICANS want a chance at getting a two car garage...

You got that right. But further, its greed is that it thinks the rest of the world should become, in your parlance ... AMERICANS.

What is AMERICAN? a human who is expected to actully demand the right to own personal freedom and actully is born deserving to be happy...and further that it gives no despot any respect...it sees despots as nothing more than un-adjusted humans with unresolved personal issues... and that if only all these despots would go on Oprah! or at least Larry King to exlain themselves, that everything would be ok and there would be peace every where. Now, ain't that funny?!
NYpreacherboy
   Wednesday, November 20, 2002 at 17:15:36 (PST)    [24.90.59.127]
everyoneshouldhavenukes

First I make my apologies for making my self sound very extremist and also for the very BIG mistake on my part when I said that U.S. soliders have been tried under South Korean law. Under SOFA, U.S. *could* hand over their soldiers to South Korean government for prosecution, but this has never in fact, occurred during the ~50 years of the alliance. I'm sorry for this mistake everyone--but I''m rather disappointed that no one else pointed out my error--I hope all of you do your own homework instead of relying on propaganda.

I"m not denying that Bush has an overwhelming greed for oil. But what I do have a problem is when people make it seem like Americans are public menace numero uno. Let's stare truth straight at the face. The fact is that you have purposefully avoided discussing the atrocious human rights violations of Kim Jong Il's regime, and instead wish to dwell on Bush's current hawkish stance against Saddam Hussein. I'm not an advocate of war, because I believe that the people would rather live a peaceful life under oppression than die in a bloody revolution. That most people in the world do not believe the American Revolutionary creed, "Give me liberty or give me death." This however, does not change the fact that Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Il are truly and undeniably, heinous human beings. (may be human) The U.S. are in the middleeast for two main reasons, reason 1 being oil and reason 2 being Israel and U.S. domestic politics in regards to Israel. I'm boring, you as this is obvious to anyone who follows the politics here. But there are certain things that you don't talk about because you want to pin the blame on America for being the grand "puppet" master. U.S. of A. never partitioned the middleeast. That was the British and the French who did that. Zionism which created Israel was not the creation of U.S. of A. as it was mainly fostered by nazi germany and russian pogroms--U.S. defeated nazism and played power politics with the russians. In a region where every Arab fanatic want to declare himself the new caliph of Islam and unify the lands through the sword, can you really say U.S. is evil for balancing power and maintaining stability? I mean, do Arab people really want to see Saddam Hussein, Al Saud family, Ayatollah all duke it out to determine who will be the top honcho of the new pan-islamic state? I mean, if Iraq invades Kuwait and Kuwait asks for U.S. assistance, is it really wrong for U.S. to support Kuwait? Because it seems to me that you think it's wrong for U.S. to intervene. I disagree. Iraq has invaded Iran, invaded Kuwait, threatened Israel, and to the nightmare of Americans--may invade Saudi Arabia, America's most important oil producing ally. The truth of the matter is America needs Saudi Arabia. But is it America's fault that the Al Saud family can't run a good government? What should America do? What do you want her to do? I'm so curious. Should we finance grassroot democratic student movements in Saudi Arabia in a bid for revolution? Should we say, "screw this", and become isolationists and watch Saddam Hussein roll tanks onto Mecca? Have you ever thought about any of this? But personally my interest is not the middleeast, it's my birthland, Korea.

Yes, ka stands for Korean American, and i have purposefully a very generic handle so that anyone who reads what I write and anyone who reads something that another "ka" might write, would come to the realization that Korean Americans are a diverse mix like any other people. This particular "ka" believes that 38,000 U.S. GI presence in the Korean peninsula effectively dissuades Kim Jong Il from getting weird ideas--this is the same leader mind you, who was in charge of assassination attempt of past Korean presidents in a Burmese national shrine(destroying the national monument along with S. Korean cabinet members), destroyed a S. Korean passenger airline in a bid to ruin the 1988 olympics, kidnapped over 500 S. Korean civillians, and others of which you probably don't even know from looking at the brevity of Korea related facts you write about.
Did U.S. screw over Korea when Teddy Roosevelt traded Korea for Phillipines with the Japanese? Yes. Did the U.S. screw over Korea by announcing that Korea was not within U.S. stratigic interest right over WWII? Yes. But credit should be given where credit is due. It was America's two atom bombs that liberated Korea (and China, not the PRC military) from the Japanese, it was America's military aid that built up South Korean military. It is America's nuclear shield that effectively kept North Korea from relaunching their June, 25th surprise attack.
You are right. Everyone is biased. But the problem is, some people are more biased then others.

the "facts" I wrote about the U.S. before, was to put some perspective into S. Korean leftist students view of the U.S. This is simply fact to admit that many Koreans are racists and cannot stand the sight of say a black man dating a Korean prostitute--it's regarded as national humiliation. These same people won't have any problem seeing a Korean man having relations with a buxom blond haired blue eyed prostitute. Of course, the typical U.S. GI is not a very good representation of an "average" American in terms of education, temperament, etc etc. But xenophobia can lead to blindsighted accusations.

If South Korean people wanted U.S. to leave the Korean peninsula, I can assure you that there is NOTHING the U.S. can do to keep those soldiers there. Talk to a typical U.S. marine stationed in Korea, and they will tell you that they don't want to be there. They want to be stationed in Spain or Hawaii. If South Korea did not want U.S. to be there, you think U.S. will impose economic sanctions on South Korea? bullshit. Jimmy Carter wanted to remove all the troops there, and that was over 2 decades ago. The shadow of Vietnam war still looms large in the American conscousness which you probably never thought about.

you think you are being "fair" you are not. From what you write, it's only obvious that you don't 1: know a lot about Korea 2: or don't really care about Korea. 3: you hate america. The facts are trivial to you. You wrote, "are the people in South >Korea.)
where is your proof? if you haven't done the math, then you have none, don't you. which makes your fact 1 BS." We have figures from U.S. government about how americans die each year from drinking and driving. Korean/KAs probably kill people on a proportioanate basis as regular americans if not more, taking into consideration Korea's drinking culture. Do you know how many murders gets reported about GI murders? Even if I told you the miniscule numbers, it will be meaningless to you because it would be propaganda. Or you don't like to think or you are not very good in statistics.

I'm trying to convnince you to open your eyes and lose your own personal bias. Don't just shoot back and say, "ka, you should lose your own personal bias" unless you can give me factual and logical reasons as I have given you.

Does North Korea have a "right" to build nukes? Well let me ask you, does Kim Jong Il have a "right" to hold north korean people in north korea, even when they want to defect to South?
ka
   Wednesday, November 20, 2002 at 08:26:50 (PST)    [168.103.180.35]

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS