Actually the unification issue in Korea is a very complicated one. Of course the northern leaders would like to unify on their terms, but that is not likely without a military conquest, also not likely.
In the south it is clear that many yearn for unification. But, there is also considerable trepidation and caution. They are struck by how hard the German unification turned out to be. The official ROK Ministry of Finance plan for unification involves not linking the currencies at par, limiting migration from the north to the south, renationalizing land in the north and then reselling it or leasing it quickly, and borrowing from abroad to cover the costs involved. Those costs were estimated for this plan (in 1993) to be US $980 billion. No wonder there is trepidation.
BTW, the DPRK has about twice as many men under arms as the ROK, about twice as many tanks and combat aircraft, and far more helicopters and submarines. Of course, the quality and support of all this stuff is way behind that in the ROK. OTOH, Seoul, fifth largest city in the world, is only 30 miles from the border. Would not be hard to grab it quickly and sue for a favorable deal. Barkley Rosser -----Original Message----- From: Yoshie Furuhashi <furuhashi.1 at osu.edu> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 3:02 PM Subject: Re: No Megalomania in Capitalism (was Re: seth & defusing koreatensions)
>>Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>>
>>>Besides, love of Bigness for the sake of Bigness does not run in
>>>the capitalist families. The art of capitalism dictates that you
>>>must know when you need to Downsize: firing workers, discontinuing
>>>product lines, closing factories, bankrupting companies & countries.
>>
>>Except that you downsize to maximize profits and elevate the stock
>>price. Smallness in the service of greater bigness.
>>
>>Doug
>
>Yes, and North Korea, too, should be discussed in this context.
>Unifying the two Koreas on capitalist terms should help the ruling
>class, I think. A large number of North Koreans will be left to fend
>for themselves in the labor market, pushing up the unemployment rate.
>Downsizing North Korean megalomania (= bloated employment &
>inefficient production, making goods that could be far more cheaply
>produced elsewhere) in favor of greater profits.
>
>On the other hand, in such an event, the U.S. will have one less
>"rogue state," but to qualify for "rogue state" status, a country
>doesn't have to be socialist even in name much less substance, so any
>old poor country in a strategically convenient location would do for
>the maintenance of post-Cold War imperialism. A "rogue state"
>doesn't have to possess a credibly modern military either; you can
>always argue that it has a "capacity" of posing a military threat.
>If a religious cult in Japan could develop & use Sarin, why can't
>Iraq, Iran, North Korea, etc.? Or any country (except America, of
>course), for that matter? Unlike Americans, they are all so
>irrational that they might use chemical & biological weapons. They
>are all out to get us, you know. (Not many Americans buy this
>propaganda outright, but since America isn't democracy, the opinion
>of the masses doesn't count.)
>
>And Diallo, et al. _could_ have appeared threatening to cops (it's
>America, so anyone _could_ have a gun!); Mumia _could_ have killed
>the cop; the Scottsboro boys _could_ have raped the white girls;
>Sacco & Vanzetti _could_ have been bomb-throwing anarchists; etc.
>All possible arguments with varying degrees of credibility, but
>credibility isn't the point in ideology. The point seems to me to be
>to create enough doubts in the minds of potential supporters of
>leftist causes. Doubts paralyze & immobilize most -- if not all --
>people, making them fence-sitters instead of activists. We don't
>have to believe in the ruling propaganda -- we can criticize it
>(mostly) freely (as long as we don't take any actions); we just have
>to take leftist propaganda with a giant grain of salt (enough to
>shrivel up passion for leftist causes).
>
>Yoshie
>
>