Comments on: Possible end in sight?

By: foreigner

foreigner — Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:16:19 +0000

You’d have to ask Dr. Lankov, but there aren’t too many ideologies left these days, so I think he simply means that people would reject the current status. China is “investing” in the North more now than before (according to reports) but come on, it’s painfully obvious that S. Korea is guaranteeing the regime’s continuation, Prez Roh has said many things to that effect this year. When the shizzle hits the fan, it could be anarchy, but maybe, who knows, the South’s engagement now might actually alleviate it. I think their engagement is morally repugnant, but if it leads to an overall soft landing I wouldn’t begrudge them. However, it could just as likely be a big old mess.

By: Kushibo

Kushibo — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 23:41:55 +0000

Are “implosion” and “democratic revolution” the same thing in the North? That’s assuming a lot of things not in evidence.

If the Northerners want to throw off the current leadership, is there any guarantee that they will opt for democracy? I think the coming implosion will be anarchic, not democratic.

And since when is South Korea guaranteeing the existence of the North? It’s the Chinese who are doing that, sir. They could stop anytime they want to.

I’ll fisk Lankov’s comments later. Right now I have to leave the office.

By: foreigner

foreigner — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 23:32:33 +0000

Dr. Lankov has another great article on those fascinating Norks:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/GH04Dg03.html
The relevant point here is at the end, where he writes about S. Korean aid being used to prop up the regime: “In dealing with the broader public, such largesse is explained by nationalist and/or humanitarian concerns, but it seems that Seoul worries more about the political stability in Pyongyang. The South is afraid of a democratic revolution in the North, politely known as “implosion”. The German-style unification is now seen as a potential disaster since it could lead to a dramatic decline in the living standards of the South Koreans. Seoul believes that the aid money will help North Korean society afloat and thus allow postponement of the dreaded unification to some point in the distant future. Like the Soviets a couple of decades ago, the South Koreans want to keep the North afloat, no matter what happens inside this country.”

So, with the South basically guaranteeing the existence of the regime for the foreseeable, there isn’t much motivation for the norks to change their ways, is there? They might sign off on this “agreement” but its highly doubtful any truly verifiable denuclearization will take place.

By: snow

snow — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 21:59:20 +0000

If KJI is smart (we know he’s cunning) he will sign on to this and then drag out the process for years to come, while taking advantage of all the numerous benefits that are sure to come his way. Eventually a crunch time may come again, just as it did with the last agreement in ‘94, but he’ll have bought another 10 years or so in the meantime.

By: kleintag

kleintag — Thu, 04 Aug 2005 00:12:16 +0000

I entirely agree with you on the view that this talks is just a beginning. The most important result will be - if the draft is signed by all sides - that we can comment something other than ‘deadlock’.
What will follow is not certain as now but anyway
the prospect of continuing talks seems to me a sign
of change to a new stage. Only hope to see a better options coming up and feel the possibility of new geopolitical map-building in far east environment.

By: Janus

Janus — Wed, 03 Aug 2005 07:52:15 +0000

Follow-up discussions?

I fear the devil will be in the details…