50th aniversary of Berlin Wall.

[Dave Saxton]

This week marks the 50th anniversary that the Soviets put up the Berlin Wall. It was put up to keep the people from fleeing the "benifits" of socialist philosophy and policy. The East failed and the West thrived. A testiment of the two competing approaches we must not forget as we all move forward. Thank God the wall is no longer.

[RF]

Indeed. And remember that it was the communist leadership in the DDR under Egon Krenz who had the political sense to see where things were going in 1989 and allowed it to open up.

[RF]

There is of course one other ''wall'' remaining from the communist era. How long will it be before the concentration camp known as the Peoples' Republic of North Korea is consigned to the dustbin of history and the whole of Korea is united? Once that happens - China will open up more.

[Dave Saxton]

..and don't forget those nice tropical vacation sites run by the Castro brothers and Hugo Chavez within Latin America. The lessons of history go unheeded in some cases. I don't see this changing anytime soon with the current leadership in el Norte.

[lwd]

... How long will it be before the concentration camp known as the Peoples' Republic of North Korea is consigned to the dustbin of history and the whole of Korea is united? Once that happens - China will open up more.

My reading of it is that North Korea is enough of a basket case the South Koreans aren't interested in reunification any time in the near future. There are indications that the Chinese aren't interested in seeing a united Korea as well. The most likely hope I see for the North Koreans is that the Chinese "sponsor" a new leadership some time soon that's willing to be more "reasonable". At that point it will be to pretty much everyones (and that very much includes said new leadership) benefit to see that they become at least self sufficent at the very least. When or if it will occur and how bloody it will be is anyones guess.

[19kilo]

I wouldnt mind seeing South Korea become just "Korea" and North Korea become "Part of China".

[RF]

My reading of it is that North Korea is enough of a basket case the South Koreans aren't interested in reunification any time in the near future. There are indications that the Chinese aren't interested in seeing a united Korea as well.

I would have thought that the attraction to the South Korean leadership would be the acquisition of a large, low wage labour force that would cut production costs in their economy. Yes there are the costs in modernisation of the industrial and transportation infrastructure in the North, but that would not be much more of a problem for South Korea than absorbing the former DDR was for West Germany. Give it ten years and much of the disparity will be reduced though not eliminated.

Its easy to see why China doesn't want Korea unified - a powerful capitalist neighbour with a substantial land border, with implications of the new challenges the Chinese Communist Party will find to its legitimacy.

[RF]

I wouldnt mind seeing South Korea become just "Korea" and North Korea become "Part of China".

North Korea has never been part of China, unlike Formosa. Koreans are no more Chinese than they were Japanese.

[RF]

..and don't forget those nice tropical vacation sites run by the Castro brothers and Hugo Chavez within Latin America. The lessons of history go unheeded in some cases. I don't see this changing anytime soon with the current leadership in el Norte.

I've never understood why at the end of the Spanish-American war that Cuba wasn't made a commonwealth territory of the US, and eventually along with Alaska and Hawaii, made a US state.

[lwd]

I would have thought that the attraction to the South Korean leadership would be the acquisition of a large, low wage labour force that would cut production costs in their economy. Yes there are the costs in modernisation of the industrial and transportation infrastructure in the North, but that would not be much more of a problem for South Korea than absorbing the former DDR was for West Germany. Give it ten years and much of the disparity will be reduced though not eliminated.
...

Well some think otherwise. See: http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/korea/a ... 10805.aspx

As the moment of collapse in the north gets closer, more South Koreans are agreeing with China taking over up there. For the last two decades, South Korean reunification experts have been studying what happened in Germany (after the communist East Germany was absorbed by the democratic West Germany). That cost the West German taxpayers about a trillion dollars. Estimates of what it will cost South Koreans to absorb North Korea are now close to three trillion dollars.

[Karl Heidenreich]

Lee:

Well some think otherwise. See: http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/korea/a ... 10805.aspx

Please note the way the sentence is constructed here: "... some think otherwise..." Not "I think otherwise" or "this is my criteria" but "... some think..." which is one of the rethorical tricks that are used to start a confrontation. This confrontation only calls to show how Lee have knowledge and wit, not to seek the thruth.

[RF]

Well some think otherwise. See: http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/korea/a ... 10805.aspx

Indeed ''some may think otherewise''. I would question how these trillions of dollars figures have been arrived at. In the case of Germany I suspect these costs include the devaluation of the Deutschmark by its rendering parity to the DDR Ostmark, which was a quick fix fudge, instead of valuing the Ostmark as practically worthless.

[lwd]

Lee:

Well some think otherwise. See: http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/korea/a ... 10805.aspx

Please note the way the sentence is constructed here: "... some think otherwise..." Not "I think otherwise" or "this is my criteria" but "... some think..." which is one of the rethorical tricks that are used to start a confrontation. This confrontation only calls to show how Lee have knowledge and wit, not to seek the thruth.

Actually I had two purposes for wording it that way:
1) To make it clear it wasn't just my opinion.
2) To demonstrate that indeed my opinion on the matter is very open. Refute this souce or even bring it into serious question and I'll reevaluate.
It's one reason that sources are useful. I will also state that the authors of that page have a very good track record. In summary I wrote it that way to facilitate discussion aimed at finding the truth and hardly at confrontation nor did it take much in the way of with or knowledge for me to post it. While it does appear that someone here is seaking a confrontation it is certainly not me.

... Indeed ''some may think otherewise''. I would question how these trillions of dollars figures have been arrived at. In the case of Germany I suspect these costs include the devaluation of the Deutschmark by its rendering parity to the DDR Ostmark, which was a quick fix fudge, instead of valuing the Ostmark as practically worthless.

How it has been calculated is a good question but even if it includes the above would not a similar problem occur in Korea? One should keep in mind that East Germany was much better off at the time of reunification than North Korea is now. They had some viable industry and starvation wasn't a problem.
The cost of reunification has been discussed in several articles on that page and while many don't mention numbers the general theme is the South Koreans aren't interested in paying what it would cost (especially if they can get the Chinese to foot the bill). Normalization of relations would lead to many of the benefits that reunification would without the associated costs. Supporting China in this would also keep a major trading partner who also happens to be the "big boy on the block" happy as well.

[RF]

Well the DDR had viable industry in so far that it was a state subsidised monopoly and grossly inefficient in both the allocation and utilisation of resources due to a ''closed market.'' Food supply was also tightly state controlled.
The essence here is of whether the reconstruction costs are state subsidised, namely paid for by the taxpayer, or the restructuring is made by the private sector without direct cost to the taxpayer.
Now the DDR was in a different position to North Korea. State funded integration into the West German economy was a political necessity for the purposes of the then EEC and also for NATO, particulary as the DDR armed forces became part of NATO. One objective here was the integration of the rest of eastern Europe into the EEC and NATO orbit, not least to weaken further the position of the still communist USSR.

North Korea is strategically important to both China and South Korea. The costs of restructuring the North could be met by the South Korean private sector, but that would be brutal to a degree that would be unacceptable to the West. The problems would be mass unemployment, starvation and thus refugees. The private sector would cherry pick whatever was useful in the North and let the rest rot and wait for the free market to depress wages to almost worthless levels. But at least transport infrastructure would gradually improve and the polluting smokestack factories would be shut down. After ten years things would start to improve in the North and then the imbalance would rapidly diminish.

[lwd]

That seems to be a pretty accurate assessment of things. I wouldn't have been willing to say 10 years but think it's a reasonable estimate. Both China and South Korea do want to avoid the potential flood of refugees from all I've read. Pointing out the different political dynamic as you did is also crucial in this case.