3 ms·

It's a complicated issue. Part of the problem is nobody really wants to fix it because the costs will be enormous. When and if the regime falls it's going to ta

by leeter 3y ago

It's a complicated issue. Part of the problem is nobody really wants to fix it because the costs will be enormous. When and if the regime falls it's going to take tens of billions of dollars in aid to keep it from destabilizing South Korea. Not to mention the massive refugee crisis that will occur. I'm pretty sure that's one of the many reasons why China hasn't dealt with it. Because the vast majority of refugees would go north across their border. China has made it clear they aren't particularly thrilled with the idea of having someone not under their thumb next to their border as well. As a consequence of that... the "best" scenario would probably be China invading. But "best" is definitely in scare quotes as that could go VERY wrong very very quickly. I think the PRC is aware of that too. So unfortunately that means the DPRK will starve, because the realpolitik is such that solving the issue is just not a tenable solution for all the other parties.

arp242 3y ago
> When and if the regime falls it's going to take tens of billions of dollars in aid to keep it from destabilizing South Korea. On the other hand, the current costs of hostilities isn't free either as militaries don't pay for themselves; e.g. a 10% decrease in military spending for countries like South-Korea and Japan would save billions every year (right now, both are increasing spending). I agree it's not a simple situation because there are 25 million mostly uneducated starving North-Koreans you've got to do something with, but in purely financial terms you're probably going to save money in the long run.
pydry 3y ago
The regime is very stable - contrary to the impression western media imparts. It could easily continue for another 50 years. Part of the problem is that threatening North Korea plays into the hands of the Kims - it makes the "strongman leader" more attractive. Invading Iraq and tearing Libya to pieces really didn't help.

by leeter 3y ago

arp242 3y ago

> When and if the regime falls it's going to take tens of billions of dollars in aid to keep it from destabilizing South Korea. On the other hand, the current costs of hostilities isn't free either as militaries don't pay for themselves; e.g. a 10% decrease in military spending for countries like South-Korea and Japan would save billions every year (right now, both are increasing spending). I agree it's not a simple situation because there are 25 million mostly uneducated starving North-Koreans you've got to do something with, but in purely financial terms you're probably going to save money in the long run.

pydry 3y ago

The regime is very stable - contrary to the impression western media imparts. It could easily continue for another 50 years. Part of the problem is that threatening North Korea plays into the hands of the Kims - it makes the "strongman leader" more attractive. Invading Iraq and tearing Libya to pieces really didn't help.