 |
|  |
 |
|
ranskaldan
|
 |
Beijing ~ Singapore ~ Toronto ~ All hail to the new Rome
Sep 2001 time: 00:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Velociryx
Once more, I find that we are largely in agreement, Rans. |
With so much agreement, I wonder what this argument is about. 
quote: I definitely don't believe that we need to USE our military force in Asia....but in order to keep the Chinese in check (this speaking not from personal preference, but from the perspective of American aims in the larger sense), then yep. We absolutely need a base on the mainland of Asia. |
Of course. A superpower would be insane not to maintain a base in a strategically important area.
quote: Further, I believe we absolutely would spend the necessary bucks to ensure our position there, first by installing a pro-US government in NK, or by paving the way for reunification with SK, and then, by dropping whatever money was required to rebuild infrastructure in that nation. |
Not necessarily in that order. I think the "rebuilding of infrastructure" comes first and foremost; reunification is only a dream until NK is sufficiently rebuilt.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:25
|
|
We're not gonna just hand Kim a wad of cash and tell him to go build infrastructure so we can merge his country down the line. Can't happen.
That's exactly what Ranskaldan is telling us we have no choice but to do. I don't buy it. If he wants his nukes, then I doubt we can do much about it. The administration appears resigned to this, although I hope they have an ace up their sleeves (probably not, though, we'll see).
But not a red cent of American money to him under those circumstances. No food. No energy. No trading. No normalization. No World Bank and IMF loans. Nothing. He's got his row to hoe, so he might as well get to it.
If the SK wants to shovel money into the pit, that's their business. But I doubt they'll have much company, considering the mood in Japan and Europe. The food program is already extremely underpledged for '03. The US is probably the only country that has the necessary amount of ready rice available to give.
Last edited by DanS on 02-02-2003 at 09:11
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ranskaldan
|
 |
Beijing ~ Singapore ~ Toronto ~ All hail to the new Rome
Sep 2001 time: 00:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DanS
We're not gonna just hand Kim a wad of cash and tell him to go build infrastructure so we can merge his country down the line. Can't happen.
That's exactly what Ranskaldan is telling us we have no choice but to do. I don't buy it. If he wants his nukes, then I doubt we can do much about it. The administration appears resigned to this, although I hope they have an ace up their sleeves (probably not, though, we'll see). |
No one is "handing Kim a wad of cash". If you want to do that as some sort of short-term buy-our-way-out-of-this-mess tactic, you can go ahead, but this is not what I'm advocating.
SK has been making progress in convincing NK to open itself up; and that's the approach that I'm talking about.
quote: But not a red cent of American money to him under those circumstances. No food. No energy. No trading. No normalization. No World Bank and IMF loans. Nothing. He's got his row to hoe, so he might as well get to it. |
Kim doesn't care, and in the meantime, this approach would only further isolate his country and starve his people. It maintains the current status quo but that's about all it does.
quote: If the SK wants to shovel money into the pit, that's their business. But I doubt they'll have much company, considering the mood in Japan and Europe. The food program is already extremely underpledged for '03. The US is probably the only country that has the necessary amount of ready rice available to give. |
China is a major participant in the dumping of rice into NK.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:25
|
|
That future makes me want to purge my dinner, Ali.
Committed Democrats like Roh should not accept this future.
Last edited by DanS on 02-02-2003 at 10:58
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:25
|
|
Here's an NYT article about China's reactions (or inaction) wrt NK.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/02/w...&partner=GOOGLE
China could end up with a nuclearized SK and Japan, even as SK reunites with NK. You gotta wonder how China would view that possibility. And yes, I agree with the Chinese analyst that we alone could not stop this from occurring.
China needs to look toward its interests. Exports to the US represent over 1/10th of China's economy--and we can take at least 1/10th more. Exports to NK, less than 1/100th.
And it looks like China might make the Hungary bargain after all, at least with Japan.
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/newse/20030202wo42.htm
And here's how much the tourism concession is worth...
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SEO57259
Last edited by DanS on 02-02-2003 at 11:31
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Propaganda
|
 |
From Russia, With Love.
Jun 2002 time: 21:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Alinestra Covelia
And economic reforms would take far shorter time in NK than they would in China, simply through smaller populace and lesser land area.
I reckon that SEZs on the line of Shenzhen and Macau could potentially save NK. Once Kim relinquishes power (possibly through natural old age) then a new elite would rise, which would be half military and half economic.
Given another generation, the economic elite would hold most of the rulership.
This is pretty much how China tried to modernize whilst keeping political reform to a manageable (some might say minimal) pace. NK could potentially do it much faster and absolutely than China too. |
Either that, or Kim will be pressured into ushering in reforms and/or subdued by the Russo-Sino alliance. I doubt he'd be subdued by American rhetoric(he's already shown his belligerence), but perhaps by Russia and China. Both Russia and China still to some extent maintain their paranoid character, especially when it comes to the West, and while the US might continue it's hostile policy towards NK and vice versa, Russia and China might be willing to cede some concessions to NK, in the name of stability. Obviously, neither Russia or China want US forces too close to their borders for too long, because while all of them are in good business relations, they don't exactly see eye-to-eye on other issues, and all of the above still have hostile elements in their respective administrations/governments, who have been scarred, so to speak, by the Cold War.
I, myself, would advise the US to scrap its hostile policy towards NK. All of this(Iraq, Afghanistan, Balkan conflicts, etc) is just a little too much, and a little too close for comfort, for both Russia and China. America must understand that eventhough both Russia and China have went through some cosmopolitan changes, their objectives have largely remained static, and their attitude, while given some readjustments still remains hostile.
Thank you and goodnight.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Urban Ranger
|
|
Apolyton Duke of Off-Topic
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Velociryx
UR: One word for why the US would care.
China.
Like it or not, *ready* or not....they're coming.
Their troubles at home won't be an infinite pool, and don't kid yourself....China has a long memory and plenty of territorial axes to grind.
Watch and see.
Chief among them, is that China WANTS the US out of the region. We're their own personal boogy man, and from the Chinese perspective, it is the US who is responsible for keeping China from flexing her muscles fully in the region.
-=Vel=- |
That means you agreed with my previous post. The US won't care one whit unless it could get a friendly government to bring about a better geopolitical situation.
With that out of the way, then, I see that letting DPRK implode is the way not to do it. It will get everybody in Northeast Asia to have this deep-seated hatred of the US. They aren't stupid, they could see this "help" in rebuilding no more than a bid to install a friendly government, so the North Koreans will say "bugger off," and you can kiss the base in RoK goodbye. The PRC will not be at all pleased, and you can be sure that they will play hardball in international politics against the US whenever it is possible.
Not wise.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:25
|
|
Well, back when I was at Durham university, quite a few of my fellow students were overseas Indians - they all spoke very disparagingly about their nation's elections. They talked of "vote barons" who would be able to deal in the mass votes of largely illiterate voters by simply ordering them to vote for a given candidate.
Yes, I understand. But by that token, Americans could all kvetch about the city of Chicago. Yet we still know that America is reasonably democratic.
As far as North Korea goes, I'm sorry if economic change in the line of China makes you sick.
Economic change without political change does nothing for me. It's still man in bondage to the State. That's why I'm not too hip on China's progress, some minor experimentation notwithstanding.
I'm happiest to see how SK turned out. At least two credible parties that can govern. Democracy should have been introduced there much earlier. Sometimes the US doesn't fully appreciate how potent a weapon democracy is.
If you want to go in bombing and blasting, then you have overlooked the repercussions on the people who have to live next door to your target.
I don't want to do either. What made you think that I did? We should have a credible detterent.
I think China has to either reel in and support its client, do Washington's bidding on the matter, or do nothing and roll the dice on the consequences.
I think that the US should not deal with Kim Jong Il unless he gives up his nukes. If he doesn't, then I don't want to pay to prop up his regime. Further, we should refer this to the Security Council for discussion and/or action. But overall, we should just sit there and wait for him to fall, encouraging the eventuality through small measures.
I think that SK should be circumspect about what it gives NK, because it sends bad information to NK. Further, they should act principled in the matter and prepare for governing NK under a somewhat messy unification. If they want to continue the Sunshine Policy, they should do so on a limited basis, if only to help prepare for a fairly immediate reunification.
I think Japan should send the message to NK and China that if NK goes nuclear, so does Japan.
Lastly, NK should be our b!tch and heel. 
That sums up my position.
Last edited by DanS on 02-02-2003 at 23:30
|
|
|  |
 |
|
ranskaldan
|
 |
Beijing ~ Singapore ~ Toronto ~ All hail to the new Rome
Sep 2001 time: 00:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DanS
Economic change without political change does nothing for me. It's still man in bondage to the State. That's why I'm not too hip on China's progress, some minor experimentation notwithstanding.
|
That is where our greatest disagreement lies. As long as we're talking about how well people are living, then economic condition is the single best way to measure the wellbeing of any nation.
What use is a "democracy" if it is simply a demagogic sideshow, a fiesta of extremist parties in rapid succession while the country goes down the drain? Okay, so "man is not in bondage to the State", but so? Try telling a starving man in India that he's "not in bondage to the State". I'm sure he'll be thankful.
Or how about Singapore? It's not a democracy, there's only one party that effectively governs. But the living standards of Singapore are among the highest in the world. In fact, the very reason those living standards exist is because the State kept the nation under control during the first turbulent 20 years. Singapore in 1970 was a wreck - a riot every day and a non-existent economy. We (Singapore) could have continued with that, with four hundred tiny parties attempting to fan the fury of their own supporters. I'm sure Singapore would still be some hellhole, like East Timor. Would you call that "freedom from bondage"?
Ultimately, democracy is an afterthought, it is the insurance that once a nation reaches economic affluence, it can stay there. In other words, democracy is the means to an end, not the end itself. It is always economic affluence that is the highest goal, because that is where the wellbeing of each citizen lies.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25. Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|