North Korea VS South Korea

[evripide]

BTW, to go even further off-topic.
Isn't it a popular theory that the Japanese Islands have been colonised by people from all over the Asian coast be it Koreans from the south or people from Siberia from the north (resulting in the Ainu in the north) and that especially from the beginning of the Yayoi-time (300b.c.-300a.d.) more and more Korean settlers arrived at the Islands and influenced the later Japanese culture alot.

It is quite right. Many Koreans moved until the 7th century. If you check wikipedia with 'Japanese history', there are articles related with this issue. However, i am not sure it is colonisation. I'd rather call it immigration. and it is general pheonomenon for many island cultures. Anglo-saxons moved from Germanic world to Britania. But they developed their own culture which is different from German countries. Whether the 'ancient Koreans' did something or not, still these are unique Japanese cultures.

 

[eckherl]

C'mon... that's ridiculous and frankly quite childish subject to pursue with all due respects... For e.g. are Americans "bad tempered" as a people? NO. Yet they won the friggin' WW2. So please move on...



Please don't put words in my mouth to forward your argument. Where did I say "brotherly love"?

Many N Koreans live in China. Many Chinese live in N Korea. Fact.

Many North Koreans fought with the Chicoms against the Japs and the Nationalists. Many Chinese returned the favour in Korea. Fact.

And Soviet influence changed... what?



Where, did I say S Koreans trust the Chinese?



Over simplifying.

It is ridiculous to suggest that China will sacrifice her border security over trade with one single country like South Korea.

If a US-sponsored invasion of N Korea is successful, China will be within arty range of US military. Now tell me how is that supposed to help the Chicom continue thinking about making money?

You can think it is childish if you like but the fact is that no one is going to dictate to them that they cannot live with their North Korean counterparts, again - not China the U.S or anybody else, and it does piss them off that there could be the potential of countries meddling in their business, I follow Korean politics on a daily basis and I do have a full understanding of what is going on in that regoin. The U.S will not stay in Korea if the Korean government wants us to leave, we have already come close of doing just that even with nut case uncle kim in place. China is not going to jeapordize her economy over Korea and Korea will do the same in return, this is a new Chinese era and they are not going to risk going to war with the U.S or anybody else to set their economy back, again its a money thing, money buys investments, weapons and keeps your population most happy thus keeping you in power. China will put stipulations on the border issue in which South Korea would abide by.

And the debate that South Korea or a U.S sponsored attack to the North would occur is a bit comical, for what purpose, South Korea will play the waiting game.

 

[Chino]

I'm not talking about a US military solution, Where did you get that idea from?

My mistake, apologies. Answering too many posts at the same time.

BTW, why does China dread the prospect of US troops on its border?

That's a tough one... now why wouldn't China welcome US troops on its border?

I have to ask, what's your point in asking such an obvious question given:

* US troop presence means war, unless they are there for fun and games...

* war means destabilising the region

* if Iraq takes 5 years and still counting, how long will Korea take? 10? 20?

* what about all the mistrusts and rivalry in East Asia between the two? Are they suddenly friends?

And didn't the PLA ram a US spy plane off the southern coast not too long ago? If the Chinese cannot tolerate EVEN a single US spy plane, why would you possibly even imagine they won't mind a few dozen US divisions invading at the border?

China might benefit from intervening, ...demanding a UN-supervised ceasefire, offering to mediate.... a general settlement involving US withdrawal.

And what makes you think China is in any position to negotiate once US boots are at the Chinese border?

What makes you think US will be in a mood to negotiate after a victorious effort. Is anyone able to negotiate the US out of Iraq? I don't think so. The Americans will only leave if they decide to leave. No one can influence them. The UN is their plaything. The US control the UN, not the other way round.

 

[swerve]

But there is a fundamental difference between a possible unprovoced attack of NK against the south without consulting the Chinese government (Remember the more or less successfull bomb test?) and an offensive military action by the USA to solve the problem of the "axis of evil".

I think nobody here denies that such an offensive move by the US is going to provoke a very harsh reaction by the Chinese....

Certainly. I find it bizarre that when one person discusses a possible N. Korean invasion of the south, others confuse it with "a US-sponsored invasion of N Korea".

BTW, to go even further off-topic.
Isn't it a popular theory that the Japanese Islands have been colonised by people from all over the Asian coast be it Koreans from the south or people from Siberia from the north (resulting in the Ainu in the north) and that especially from the beginning of the Yayoi-time (300b.c.-300a.d.) more and more Korean settlers arrived at the Islands and influenced the later Japanese culture alot.

According to my local expert (she's useless on politics & history, but damn good on linguistics, having two Japanese & one English degrees in it), Japanese is best thought of as a hybrid language. The basic structure & much of the vocabulary is clearly related to Korean, which, BTW, she speaks - though she complains she's very rusty - and so can make direct comparisons. A large part of the vocabulary is derived from Chinese, but that's known to be due to borrowings in historical times, akin to the large Latin & lesser Greek vocabulary (e.g. "vocabulary" ) in English. There are elements in southern dialects, especially in Ryukyu, which appear to be derived from Malayo-Polynesian languages, & elements in northern dialects which suggest a different substructure.

All in all, it's consistent with northern & central Japan having been populated by people speaking one language or group of languages, possibly related to Ainu, & the south having been populated by speakers of Malayo-Polynesian language(s) akin to that of the Taiwanese aborigines. At some point, at least by Yayoi times but possibly earlier, speakers of proto-Korean arrived from Korea & spread over the islands, assimilating the locals, swamping their languages, but being influenced by them in the process. Several centuries later, Chinese writing (later adapted to make hiragana & katakana) & linguistic influence arrived, though without settlement or Chinese rule.

This is probably a simplification.

BTW, people I know in Japan tell me there are physical differences between northerners & southerners, the former being hairier & more Ainu-like, & the latter being more SE Asian in appearance. And that's far enough off-topic. End of my contribution.

 

[eckherl]

But there is a fundamental difference between a possible unprovoced attack of NK against the south without consulting the Chinese government (Remember the more or less successfull bomb test?) and an offensive military action by the USA to solve the problem of the "axis of evil".

I think nobody here denies that such an offensive move by the US is going to provoke a very harsh reaction by the Chinese.

But the majority here is just thinking that the Chinese support for an unprovoced attack by NK without consulting them is not going to end with the same result.

Chinese are not dumb.
There is a real possibility that if Korea gets united there will be no foreign troops on their soil anymore. It is not going to be that hard for the Koreans to make the US leave the country.
So China would have a united Korea on their border without US presence on their border. Right now SK is one of the big trading partners of China in this region and they have a normal relationship.
And the costs and problems of a reunification are going to give the Koreans so many headaches that China can count on them being totally busy with that for the next decades.
This is not East and West Germany when it comes to economy. East Germany was still the richest country of the eastern sattelite states while NK is just dark...


BTW, to go even further off-topic.
Isn't it a popular theory that the Japanese Islands have been colonised by people from all over the Asian coast be it Koreans from the south or people from Siberia from the north (resulting in the Ainu in the north) and that especially from the beginning of the Yayoi-time (300b.c.-300a.d.) more and more Korean settlers arrived at the Islands and influenced the later Japanese culture alot.

Good post Waylander, things have become so normalized now between the ROK and China that there is a average 50 flights on a daily basis between both countries and growing, good times between the two of them with further ROK investment in China on the way.

 

[Chino]

...no one is going to dictate to them that they cannot live with their North Korean counterparts, again - not China the U.S or anybody else, ...The U.S will not stay in Korea if the Korean government wants us to leave, ....this is a new Chinese era and they are not going to risk going to war with the U.S or anybody else to set their economy back, again its a money thing, money buys investments, weapons and keeps your population most happy thus keeping you in power. China will put stipulations on the border issue in which South Korea would abide by.

All very logical points. If US troops leave, that solves a lot of headaches for China. I am basically trying to say how paranoid they are of the US.

The US being the most powerful military in the world, and constantly showing it is not shy to use that power... bombing the Chinese embassy... spy planes... bad blood in the past... these things add up.

And the debate that South Korea or a U.S sponsored attack to the North would occur is a bit comical, for what purpose, South Korea will play the waiting game.

I thought the US was pretty serious about destroying WMD targets in N Korea? Again, such threats are not taken lightly in this region and increases concerns.

 

[Chino]

Certainly. I find it bizarre that when one person discusses a possible N. Korean invasion of the south, others confuse it with "a US-sponsored invasion of N Korea".

My mistake...

 

[eckherl]

All very logical points. If US troops leave, that solves a lot of headaches for China. I am basically trying to say how paranoid they are of the US.

The US being the most powerful military in the world, and constantly showing it is not shy to use that power... bombing the Chinese embassy... spy planes... bad blood in the past... these things add up.



I thought the US was pretty serious about destroying WMD targets in N Korea? Again, such threats are not taken lightly in this region and increases concerns.

We are serious about destroying weapons of mass destruction, but how we go about that needs to be decided in equal part by South Korea and China, they will be the two countries that will be most effected by the outcome, plus we will get more respect from both countries by giving them a equal say.

 

[alexsa]

"China achieved a strategic victory by minimizing the future possibility of a two-front war against the USSR and Vietnam."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/prc-vietnam.htm

The above quote paints for you the very desperate situation back when China was skirmishing with Russian military in the north, and Vietnam in the south. Putting one and one together, it is not hard for China to arrive at the conclusion that something much bigger was afoot.



If "body count" is the only measure of success or failure, then, shall we declare US the victor of the Vietnam War and Russia the victor of the Afghanistan War....?

That the PLA's performance was poor is undoubted. But you must see from the POV of "war being an extension of diplomacy".

Had China had not boldly invaded Vietnam, Russia and Vietnam might have gotten ideas about attacking first. At least this was what China feared.

The invasion took both Vietnam and Russia by surprise and showed a resolve they didn't think China had against such odds.

The invasion also proved conclusively that Russia will not intervene directly in Vietnam's favour. This must have given Vietnam a lot of second thoughts about its neat little arrangements with Russia.

"Beijing's policy was actually a diplomatic success, since Moscow did not actively intervene, thus showing the practical limitations of the Soviet-Vietnamese military pact."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/prc-vietnam.htm


In other words, a bad invasion was better than if China had just sat on its hands doing fxxkall. It eliminated any further thoughts of a combined pact against China. Instead it put Vietnam on the defensive.




No matter how badly China did in the 1979 invasion, Vietnam clearly will not want to invite another invasion, will they? And they did not introduce any foreign powers into the border region to cause further aggravation.

Therefore, I qualify Vietnam as a "buffer" for China against foreign powers. They only have to maintain the status quo there. China is clearly in no danger of being invaded by Vietnam. And as tension continue to ease, each side can reduce the number of divisions stationed there.

We are getting off topic but that makes about as much sense as saying the Ukaraine is a buffer against Poland or the rest of europe. They were part of a buffer before the Eastern block disintergrated but that is very qeustionalbe now and like your scenario:
i I doubt they want to be invaded either; and
ii they don't trust each other either.

Then there is the issue of what Vietnams is buffering against ...... Thailand perhaps? Actually i don't see them facilitating action action against China either.

If these states were all under the control of China you would have a point, the fact is they are not.

 

[Firehorse]

Well, most posts have valid points. I would like to clarify a few things though:
the Chinese had "commanderies" in Korea which were populated by military families and other support folks.

In 300 B.C.E. the Yen invasion took place, bringing Chinese economic, political, and military influence into the region of Old Choson. In 109 B.C.E., armies of Han China defeated the Wiman Choson kingdom and established the Commandery of Lelang, a permanent outpost at the othern end of the peninsula. Soon, four Commanderies were in place. Chinese interests rested mainly in Korean natural resources and in maintaining a secure boundary. While indigenous Koreans were allowed some political freedoms, most dimensions of their civilization were influenced by the Han presence. http://www.stockton.edu/~gilmorew/consorti/1deasia.htm

Several ancient kingdoms in what is now Korea were often fighting each other and forming pacts with/inviting both Japanese and Chinese to help them. I've visited S.Korea and Japan- as a non-speaker of both languages I noticed their similarity, and also alofness of S.Koreans. In the event of unification with the North they'll have to struggle against not only poverty but also cultural differences & their own prejudices. How long was Italy (I've been there too) unified for? Even today they have strong regionalism and disparity in cultures and economy in the North VS. South.

The north–south divide
The plight of southern Italy (the Mezzogiorno) has presented one of the most permanent and intractable problems since the formation of the Italian state in 1870. Existing poverty and backwardness in the south was further aggravated by the industrialization of the north in the late 19th century, and the reforms introduced by Giovanni Giolitti (prime minister several times in the late 19th and early 20th centuries) had little success. The massive wave of overseas emigration in the decade before 1914 provides an index of the deteriorating conditions in the south.
Despite early promises, however, the area was again neglected by the Fascist regime. After liberation in 1944 the south once again became the scene of bitter peasant risings and attempts to occupy uncultivated estates. De Gasperi's government in 1950 introduced agrarian reforms and established a special bank, the Cassa del Mezzogiorno, to encourage investment in the south. The renewed massive emigration of the 1950s and 1960s indicated that such measures were inadequate.
Other government plans to create incentives for investment in the south, the Vanoni Plan (1954) and the Pieraccini Plan (1965) were never implemented, and the Alfa Romeo factory built near Naples rapidly proved to be a costly blunder. The funds of the Cassa have often been directed to political, rather than economic, ends, and although some improvements have occurred, the gap between the north and south has tended to increase since the end of the war.
http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0019796.html

..the gap between the North and the South of Italy continues to grow.

And, even without the other factors, a united Korea will present a danger of separatism to PRC areas populated with ethnic Koreans. I strongly agree that Tibet is another case in point- strategicaly it's the highest ground in Asia to keep an eye on India. And I don't agree that China taught Vietnam and Soviets a lesson- it was another way around! The Soviet Union publicly threatened to, but didn't directly intervene - it wasn't necessary as Vietnamese were skillful & resourceful enough in defending themselves.
There is no guarantee when where American forces would end up in relation to present PRC-NK border in the event of a war on Korean peninsula. But if the PLA one day replaces the NK army on its side of the DMZ, that would guarantee a rather large security zone for China!

 

[eckherl]

Well, most posts have valid points. I would like to clarify a few things though:
the Chinese had "commanderies" in Korea which were populated by military families and other support folks.
Several ancient kingdoms in what is now Korea were often fighting each other and forming pacts with/inviting both Japanese and Chinese to help them. I've visited S.Korea and Japan- as a non-speaker of both languages I noticed their similarity, and also alofness of S.Koreans. In the event of unification with the North they'll have to struggle against not only poverty but also cultural differences & their own prejudices. How long was Italy (I've been there too) unified for? Even today they have strong regionalism and disparity in cultures and economy in the North VS. South.
And, even without the other factors, a united Korea will present a danger of separatism to PRC areas populated with ethnic Koreans. I strongly agree that Tibet is another case in point- strategicaly it's the highest ground in Asia to keep an eye on India. And I don't agree that China taught Vietnam and Soviets a lesson- it was another way around! The Soviet Union publicly threatened to, but didn't directly intervene - it wasn't necessary as Vietnamese were skillful & resourceful enough in defending themselves.
There is no guarantee when where American forces would end up in relation to present PRC-NK border in the event of a war on Korean peninsula. But if the PLA one day replaces the NK army on its all the way side of the DMZ, that would guarantee a rather large security zone for China!

So what do you think that the ROK will do when China takes over all of North Korea, just sit back, no way, they will be screaming all the way to the UN for action which they would get.

 

[Firehorse]

I doubt the UN will object- China will portray it as a humanitarian/stabilization mission and will actualy ask the UN for help, and ROK will be glad to have them take care of it- otherwise they'll have to tighten their belts for a looong time!

 

[sansei]

I doubt the UN will object- China will portray it as a humanitarian/stabilization mission and will actualy ask the UN for help, and ROK will be glad to have them take care of it- otherwise they'll have to tighten their belts for a looong time!

That is the most ridiculous statement I have heard in nearly all my life.

In this world people are not rational, they are TRIBAL: "US vs YOU"

People tend to let emotion get the better of them and delve into idiotic, pathological nationalism very fast as reflected in the history of the past century.

In the case of the ROK we already had a preview of Korean nationalism over the tiny island of Dokdo/Tsushima that for all purposes derailed years of positive bilateral relations not helped by the antics of a band of small but very vocal nationalists of my own country who tried to claim the island in the first place.

What makes you think the ROK would willingly allow the PRC to occupy the North despite the hypothetical benefits of not having to feed all those NK refugees?

People on this forum familiar with Korea (especially the ROK) would understand that most people in the ROK would rather be living on $1 a day rather than willingly give up any part of the North to the PRC-as reflected in a interesting conversation I had with a group of students over the symbolic importance of Mt Baekdu.

 

[Atilla [TR]]

I would hate to see something like this because in the End both sides are Koreans, same people and if they fought each other it would be like brothers trying to kill each other. I was worried something like this would happen if the Cold war became warm because Soviet Union would attack Turkey as one of the first places and to do so they probably would have used her arsenal in Azebaijan SSR, I would of hate too see something like this because if that war ever broke out Turks from Turkey would be fighting Turks from Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan, same people some even cousins would be fighting each other. What I would like to see happen in the near future is the 2 sides joining one Korea democracy because everyone in N Korea wants that other then the Dictators obviously, and so the wealth can go around and they can save some of the starving people in N. Korea. It also would be great if all those Turkish states joined together as one country but that is a little off topic.

 

[Atilla [TR]]

Well, most posts have valid points. I would like to clarify a few things though:
the Chinese had "commanderies" in Korea which were populated by military families and other support folks.
Several ancient kingdoms in what is now Korea were often fighting each other and forming pacts with/inviting both Japanese and Chinese to help them. I've visited S.Korea and Japan- as a non-speaker of both languages I noticed their similarity, and also alofness of S.Koreans. In the event of unification with the North they'll have to struggle against not only poverty but also cultural differences & their own prejudices. How long was Italy (I've been there too) unified for? Even today they have strong regionalism and disparity in cultures and economy in the North VS. South.
And, even without the other factors, a united Korea will present a danger of separatism to PRC areas populated with ethnic Koreans. I strongly agree that Tibet is another case in point- strategicaly it's the highest ground in Asia to keep an eye on India. And I don't agree that China taught Vietnam and Soviets a lesson- it was another way around! The Soviet Union publicly threatened to, but didn't directly intervene - it wasn't necessary as Vietnamese were skillful & resourceful enough in defending themselves.
There is no guarantee when where American forces would end up in relation to present PRC-NK border in the event of a war on Korean peninsula. But if the PLA one day replaces the NK army on its side of the DMZ, that would guarantee a rather large security zone for China!

Seriously alot of countrys can spring out of China like Turkestan but China would not let that happen even though in those areas there are no chinese people nither are there many assets for the chinese government, I am talking about North West CHina.

 

[Chino]

Then there is the issue of what Vietnams is buffering against ...... Thailand perhaps?

No, Vietnam is a buffer against invasion from Mars...

The USA, for one. That's why China supported the Viet Minh/Vietcong efforts - initially.

Secondly, when it seem the Soviets will join force with Vietnam to threaten China, Vietnam was invaded.

Since then, are there any danger of outside forces - i.e. US or Soviet - adding tension to the Sino-Vietnam border?

 

[alexsa]

No, Vietnam is a buffer against invasion from Mars...

The USA, for one. That's why China heavily supported the Viet Minh - at first.

Later on, when it seem the Soviets will join force with Vietnam, China invaded. So Vietnam and Russia cooled their pact against China. So for the past 20 over years, the Vietnam border is still volatile but not in danger of a foreign power like Soviet or USA there escalating tension.

This is way off topic but why would the US bother going though Vietnam, they don't have a support base in thailand or anywhere else in the immedaite area so it is not very likely and logic of your theory is pretty thin.

A buffer is an arrangment designed to preserve a main structure, body, vehicle from harm, usual at the expense of itself. don't really see vietnam doing that or anybody attacking China making antoehr enemy on the way (particualry one that doe not trust China in the first place).

Anyway I will refrain from further comment and let the thread get back to Korea.

 

[Chino]

This is way off topic but why would the US bother going though Vietnam, they don't have a support base in thailand .

Anyway I will refrain from further comment and let the thread get back to Korea.

When I mentioned US, I was talking about the Vietnam War when China supported the fight against the US (and the French?) so they would not have to worry about US being at the Chinese border.

Yes, please drop this.

 

[alexsa]

When I mentioned US, I was talking about the Vietnam War when China supported the fight against the US (and the French?) so they would not have to worry about US being at the Chinese border.

Sorry but this .....

These places form a almost complete 360 ring around China. With the exception of Vietnam, the rest are either client states, or under PLA control, or in the case of Vietnam, is kept in check militarily.

From the people who brought you the Great Wall, this is the modern version. A protective ring of buffer states. These places are on hair trigger as far as the paranoid Chinese are concerned.

Sounded like the present, not 1970. either youa re not very clear in your intent or you have change your ground.

Yes, please drop this.

With pleasure.

 

[Chino]

Sounded like the present, not 1970. either youa re not very clear in your intent or you have change your ground.

I am talking about buffer against a "foreign power". Thailand, is "foreign" but not a "power". Get it so far?

China and VN does not like each other, fact. But there is at least tacit agreement since the Sino-Vietnam War that VN will not again tie up with foreign power like Russia to threaten China's border.

1950s - 60s China supported the original Vietminh to kick out western armies.

1980s - China invaded VN to discourage a Soviet/VN pact to intimidate China.

NOW - The border has since been free of any foreign forces. Yes, including the "Thais"

Admin: Comment and icon deleted. Make sure you re-read the Forum Rules about posting behaviour and etiquette.