Chinese Invasion of N. Korea

[Falstaff]

Even with the rather good circumstances there were several people in the west who opposed such a fast and mutual reunification.

And weren't in a state of war for 50 years after a bloody civil war with armed clashes occuring right into these days.

Sure it is about emotions as much as about everything else.

But I don't think it's a safe bet that the south really wants to reunify with the north from one day to another without proper planning and a well timed phase of transition.

The question is, and was at that time, if we didn't take the chance to reunify at that time, would we have another? And I can remember that argument very well. But in the end, our leaders thought that this was a historic chance that had to be taken.
I am asking myself, as it must be painful (as it was for us Germans) to have brothers and sisters of the same people on the other side of the fence, at whom you might even be forced to shoot at, wouldn't the Koreans take any chance as well?
When the first East Germans crossed the borders (and I'm happy I stayed at Berlin on that very day) they too looked very arkwardly styled and talked in a funny accent How different are you inside? That's the question.
However, it is true that both western and eastern Germans never were that much apart from each other as the Koreans are today (from what I read).

Nevertheless, despite the costs and efforts that would be endless, I don't believe S. Korea would under any circumstances accept a chinese invasion of North Korea. Neither do I believe China would do something like that. Why would they?

 

[kato]

they too looked very arkwardly styled and talked in a funny accent

They still do now 20 years later, on both accounts

 

[Waylander]

They still do now 20 years later, on both accounts

Now both of you can guess where I come from...

I am totally d'accord with the idea if it being a historical chance which our leaders rightfully decided to take.
I am just questioning the comparability of the two situations and that a reunification is a given thing as soon as the possibility of it emerges.

 

[kato]

As reunifications go... perhaps Vietnam could give some better pointers, from the opposite perspective.

 

[DarthAmerica]

North Korea is tiny, and economically a basket case. The cost of integrating them into China would be immense. Why bother? The Chinese have enough of their own backward regions to develop, and they hardly need more people at this point. Not to mention they risk a nuclear attack if not on Chinese cities, definetly on Chinese troops.

Hmmm...I'm not so sure about this. The technological jump from crude, not to mentioned failed, detonation of fissile material in a test environment to weaponized warhead compatible with a reliable delivery system is quite large. I think the risk of a direct nuclear attack from N Korea is quite low under any circumstances. Even so, it would represent little more than a harsh pin prick if used in a tactical manner. Going after cities would be a better option for the North Koreans as it would force the Chinese to consider counter value scenarios. But for this to be a real deterrent it would have to involve a fairly significant number of weapons and be reliable. Then the North would have to consider the Chinese response...


-DA

 

[swerve]

When the first East Germans crossed the borders (and I'm happy I stayed at Berlin on that very day) they too looked very arkwardly styled and talked in a funny accent How different are you inside? That's the question.

Yeah, but when I saw E. Germans on holiday in Russia (coach tour, in Leningrad) in 1980, they looked more like "westerners" than they did like Soviet citizens. Those Koreans were conspicuously different. There were maybe a dozen, all fairly young, & they were all short. Short compared to Japanese or S. Koreans.

This accords with the reality of N. Korea. As S. Koreans get taller, N. Koreans are shrinking. For people born before partition, there was a small height disparity the other way round, with northerners being slightly (1 to 1.5cm) taller than southerners. This is similar to the disparity between W. & E. Germans at the time of reunification, which was ca. 1 cm - i.e. not enough to be conspicuous. The gap between N. & S. Korea is now huge. 7 year olds measured in 2002 were 12 cm shorter in the N. than the S, according to this study. Young adults who've left N. Korea are about 6 cm shorter than southerners of the same age.

N. Koreans have also been far more physically & culturally isolated than E. Germans ever were. Foreign visitors have been very few, & closely watched, & N. Koreans are unable to travel. Even within the country travel is restricted.. N. Korean TVs & radios are not able to pick up foreign stations (pre-set tuning to N. Korean stations), & phones (including mobiles) are controlled, with private phones being restricted to a small elite. The system is breaking down now, with TVs, radios & mobile phones (pre-pay connected to Chinese networks) from China being available on the black market, but even so, compared to E. Germans, who could meet foreigners, travel easily within their country, visit other E. European countries with relatively few problems (& travel to the West once retired, or if trusted), listen to foreign radio & even watch W. German (or Polish or Czech or Danish, depending on where they lived) TV, their isolation is striking.

That could mean they are very different "inside".

 

[luccloud]

Traditionally we think of North Korea and China as allies; however, history is replete with instances of international treachery. What do you think the strategic implications would be of a Chinese invasion of North Korea? I was thinking about it tonight and here's what I came up with.

What does China stand to gain?

North Korea: Her land, her people, her infrastructure and her resources.
-------------------------
Seriously, it's the other way around.

N Korea is a country that can't even feed its population. Its infrastucture is crumbling and its resource is minimial. Its like US annxing Haiti.

China have very little to gain and a lot to lose. Even a trade disruption of a few week would cost more than whatever China can gain from such a invasion.

 

[Feanor]

Hmmm...I'm not so sure about this. The technological jump from crude, not to mentioned failed, detonation of fissile material in a test environment to weaponized warhead compatible with a reliable delivery system is quite large. I think the risk of a direct nuclear attack from N Korea is quite low under any circumstances. Even so, it would represent little more than a harsh pin prick if used in a tactical manner. Going after cities would be a better option for the North Koreans as it would force the Chinese to consider counter value scenarios. But for this to be a real deterrent it would have to involve a fairly significant number of weapons and be reliable. Then the North would have to consider the Chinese response...


-DA

In a situation of total war, it wouldn't matter to the DPRK gov. what the response is. If they're on the way out and China is moving in, they will do everything. Though I agree that the damage would be insignificant in the big picture.

 

[tphuang]

invading North Korea is not the right action, but they need to send the troop in there to stop any kind of refugee crisis if that regime collapses.

 

[DarthAmerica]

In a situation of total war, it wouldn't matter to the DPRK gov. what the response is. If they're on the way out and China is moving in, they will do everything. Though I agree that the damage would be insignificant in the big picture.

In the case of regime survival I can see how thats a possibility. The only issue I have is that North Korea hasn't really demonstrated a true "weapons" capability(ie mating a working device to a reliable delivery system). It would suck to have one of your very limited supply on nukes land in Beijing and fail to detonate...

-DA

 

[Feanor]

I think we agree then.

 

[DarthAmerica]

One other thing I forgot to mention previously, and we learned this in Iraq, a PRC invasion might go very well militarily in the initial stages. But if the North Koreans can hold out long enough to create the impression of a credible defense/resistance, then it may make the PRC Generals "Seem" incompetent which would undermine the credibility of the PLA. That has the potential to cause serious trouble for the PRC since the threat of the PLA is a primary method of control.

The last thing Beijing would want is to have multiple domestic problems requiring troops combined with economic concerns. If the North Koreans execute a proper strategy they could cause a bit of grief. And it would not be the first time a much weaker country gave pause to the PLA. Remember VietNam?

-DA

 

[xudeen]

I do not see why China wld invade N.K. because:

1) N.K makes a good buffer zone b/w China & the S.Korea.

2) N.K. makes Japan feel uneasy.

3) N.K. is a pain in the butt for the US.

Keeping N.K on a lifeline is way more beneficial.

 

[crocodile]

If north Korea still under control，I think china not need to invade N K,but if N K lost control,PLA maybe will enter N K.

 

[Sampanviking]

If north Korea still under control，I think china not need to invade N K,but if N K lost control,PLA maybe will enter N K.

Far closer to the truth I think than much of this thread. Personally I think that the Korean Missile Crisis is one of the most dangerous situations that we have seen since the Cuban!

We have a convergence of some of the most powerful nations on the planet at a time of economic and political weakness in too many of the key players.

DPRK - Kim Il Jong undountedly a sick man following his major stroke which means that many will be jockying for position and only to happy to prove their patriotic credentials if called upon or the opportunity arises.

Japan and South Korea - both suffering severe Recession and ruled by very unpopular Governments. Both will need to appear tough in order to maintain their hold on power.

USA - A new Government with a Rookie President and a Military establishment far more comfortable with the previous Administration and desperate to ensure that massive budget cuts do not fall on them disproportionatly.

The chances of North Korea not launching their T2 missile between the 4th and 8th of April as stated, is very low and there is no precedence of their backing down. Japan has made very public threats against it and despite what is undoubtedly huge pressure from other countries in the region seems unwilling to compromise.

North Korea has of course stated that any attempt to shoot it down would be an act of war. The really dangerous part is that this means that not only an attempt, but a perceived attempt or even a claim of an attempt, could be suficent to erupt into open warfare.

Sadly there is only one thing that all the six members of the Six Party talks agree on, which is that a Unification of the Peninisular in a manner prejudicial to their interest is unacceptable. This means that the US and Japan (and possibly others) would not permit the DPRK to conquer the South, while China and Russia are no more prepared to countanence US forces on their respective Pacific borders now than they were fifty years ago.

This means that all major players; although commited to peace and intent on preventing the outbreak of conflict by any means at their disposal, would need to immediatly change the footing if fighting did erupt, to one of ensureing rapid unification on the peninsular in accordance with their Strategic Interest and thus be rapidly drawn into a full military commitment.

Of course nothing may actually happen, but in an area so sensitive and with key players so prickly and a reckless regime at the center, there is no room for any complacency whatsoever!

 

[s002wjh]

you forget what happen after you defeat the NK. with all those refugees, and backward industry. it will be a economic disaster for any country to absorb NK. japan, SK nor US can afford that.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Here's a great article on the possibility of regime change in North Korea, and the levers that will cause radical change.

http://www.securitychallenges.org.au/ArticlePages/vol4no1Habib.html

 

[HKSDU]

you forget what happen after you defeat the NK. with all those refugees, and backward industry. it will be a economic disaster for any country to absorb NK. japan, SK nor US can afford that.

The account balance of the US are dead last in the worlds list. From what I remember the last time I checked US is x5 to the second closet nation in debt, Spain. So saying nor US, like US is wealthy or something is laughable. Though "if" the US could somehow annex NK, (extremly impossible basically), it would give the US a key military advantage over the Russian and Chinese. The only asian nation. wealthy enough to even think of absorbing NK economy would be China, Japan, Russia. Not trying to start a debate, but its funny to see how people think US are wealthy, when their in excess of $730 billion in debt, in their national account balance.

 

[swerve]

The US debt is much more than $730 billion. Get your facts right. But you seem to have no idea of scale. $730 billion is less than 5% of US GDP. US GDP is the largest in the world, by any measure, unless you count the EU as one economy. That is real wealth - and the USA still has more of it than any other single country.

What's all this Russian wealth, by the way? The Russian economy is in sharp decline at the moment. It's spent about a third of its foreign reserves since last August. Extrapolate that forward a little . . .

Japan - oh dear. Exports down 50%! Japan is still a rich country (& I hope for the sake of my Japanese relatives it stays that way), but is in deep economic trouble right now.

China. In better shape than the others, so far, but the government says that unemployment has risen by over 20 million so far this year. Even allowing for the size of the population, that's a crisis. And per head, & in total, China is still much poorer than the USA.

I suggest a little study of economics.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

The US debt is much more than $730 billion. Get your facts right. But you seem to have no idea of scale. $730 billion is less than 5% of US GDP. US GDP is the largest in the world, by any measure, unless you count the EU as one economy. That is real wealth - and the USA still has more of it than any other single country.

What's all this Russian wealth, by the way? The Russian economy is in sharp decline at the moment. It's spent about a third of its foreign reserves since last August. Extrapolate that forward a little . . .

Japan - oh dear. Exports down 50%! Japan is still a rich country (& I hope for the sake of my Japanese relatives it stays that way), but is in deep economic trouble right now.

China. In better shape than the others, so far, but the government says that unemployment has risen by over 20 million so far this year. Even allowing for the size of the population, that's a crisis. And per head, & in total, China is still much poorer than the USA.

I suggest a little study of economics.

Just to add to your comments here swerve,

The US is by far the richest nation on earth. Russia and China are still, for the most part, pre digital (or even industrial) nations. They are both miles behind the west economically. Its laughable when people think that having a current account surplus (even a large one) means you are somehow "richer" than the worlds largest economies, especially while your nation is undergoing the industrial revolution (which the west did 200 years ago).

Japan has just emerged out of 10 years of no growth, and is now amongst the worst performing 1st world nations on earth.

Newsflash people, the Chinese growth model is inherently unsustainable, just like the Japanese growth model was in the 70's and the Tiger economies were in the 90's, simply because they grew out of fundamental socioeconomic weakness rather than strength. Fueled by government loans to the private sector that are usually made due to political connections rather than best business practice, leads to inherently unsustainable and unprofitable growth. Just like those other nations, there is a correction coming, but in china's case the correction is going to be massive.

The main difference with China is there are significant centrifugal forces that threaten territorial integrity all lurking under the surface, such as the massive regional imbalance of wealth. None of these forces were present in Japan or South East Asia. When the correction comes, and I guarantee you it will, there is every possibility china will tear itself apart. That's why Beijing is so worried about keeping growth to above 6%, if it doesn't unemployment would rise in the provinces (which is usually than indication of recession rather than growth) and the underlying social problems will rear their ugly head.

The whole thing has happened before. In the 1800's china was opened up to trade, (forcibly by the Europeans, hardly our finest hour), which lead to a comparable economic boom, which in turn lead to a regional imbalance of wealth, which in turn tore the nation apart.

The US is the center of the world trade system, much like Europe was in the 1800's. US economic (& military) dominance is not going to change any time soon.