Dantac wrote:
tangomike wrote:
I dont know too much about politics so my bad if this is a stupid question. From what I know he is a crazed powertripping manic but his heir isnt quite as nuts...or maybe thats one of his sons idk. Hes GOT to realize how f*cked up his country is and that people are starving in the millions, or at least malnourished. Whats the point in arming a 1970 era army, its never going to win against a modern military like Americas, Japans, or any European nation- all of which would be against NK together.
DO you think his heir will be more reasonable and more willing to talk to the UN and play nicely, or at least nicer? ...because shelling a South Korean island is just ridiculous, I cant beleive that even happened.I mean if mexico shelled San Diego.... oh son your done, fried beans.
Simpler outcome: It becomes the next Tibet of China.
Once Loony Kim dies the power elites left in place will have no choice but to 'invite' China to take control. They simply do not have the resources to fight each other in a sort of civil war nor the border security to do so...in their eyes S. Korea and the US will invade them the moment they show weakness. Plus China will be very eager to offer these elites power and privileges beyond what they currently have in exchange.
It'd be like the Louisiana purchase for China.
..and S. Korea nor the US can do nothing about it.
A. Unlikely.
B. If it did happen it would probably be the best thing that could happen to North Korea, and would make life a lot easier for both Washington, and for Seoul.
North Korea is a basket case. China is already afraid of their starving refugees coming over the Yalu river into China. And they sure as heck dont want exclusive responsability of the country itsself when it collapses. They would be more than happy to pass off the problem to Seoul and to Washington.
It was never politically expedient for China to outright annex North Korea like it did Tibet (or the US taking over Texas).
China conquered Tibet in the 1200's when China itsself was ruled by the Mongols, and both the Nationalist regime in Taiwan and the Manland Communists regard Tibet as part of China. Niether China ever claimed Korea. There are other differences between Tibet and Korea.
Decades ago they might have sought "suzierty through Satrapy" over North Korea. Doing a watered down version of what you're talking about. Ruling North Korea as puppet state through native rulers like Vichy France, or like East Germany was to Soviet Russia.
With North Korea's problems they would be reluctant to do that today.
But even if they did -so what? That just means North Korea will join the rest of the Communist world. Communism is already long dead in the communist world.
A North Korea ruled by China would likely become atleast as captialistic as china itsself is now. And it would recieve captal investment from outside countries- including extra heavy investment from South Korea - and would become open to South Korea politially and culturally more than it is now. South Korean companies would rapidley end up running the North Korean economy despite the chinese overlords. Indeed the Chinese overlords would likely invite all the outside help they could get.
In short- a Chinese ruled North Korea would end up like the Soviet ruled East Germany ended up. It would end up free of China as part of a democratic captitalistic united Korea. And it would happen alot quicker than it took for the two Germanies to reunite because the united communist bloc is long gone.
So if china does the heavy lifting of carrying the catatonic North Korea to its ultimate destination of reuniting with South Korea- it could save us alot of head aches.
18 Nov 2011, 8:37 pm
