Conclusion
Korean reunification is unlikely to be achieved in the foreseeable future; any policy that rests on assumptions that North Korea will collapse easily or imminently is dangerous. Precedents found in the international experience of divided nations suggest that systems with conflicting ideologies cannot be merged peacefully into a lasting unitary governmental structure. In the case of Korea, unification by absorption on the basis of two ideological systems as part of a unitary governmental structure. The impact of Korean unification on the regional structure of international relations will be mixed and uncertain, but the achievement of Korean reunification need not affect the stability of the region in any significant way. When the time for unification is ripe, the four powers will have no choice but to accept such a process regardless of their own anxieties and adjust to the new situation pragmatically without regard to narrowly selfish interests.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
John Deutch, Testimony before the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, December 11, 1996, “North Korea Collapse Predicted,” The Associated Press, March 6, 1997.
Nicholas Eberstadt, “Hastening Korea Reunification,” Foreign Affairs, March/April 1997, p. 82.
Most views about collapse came from my interviews with Korean scholars and officials in Seoul when I conducted a research in Korea from September 1996 to March 1997.
A view is shared by the director of the Institute of East & West Studies, Yonsei University; an economist of Sejong institute and a political scientist of Sogang University, Korea.
Those views are expressed by Kim Byong Hong, acting director of the Institute for Disarmament and Peace; Lee Yong-Tae, director of first branch, International Affairs Institute, DPRK.
Thomas H. Henriksen, “Political Leadership Vision, and Korean Reunification,” in One Korea?—Challenges and Prospects for Reunification, edited by Thomas H. Henriksen and Kyongsoo Lho (Hoover Institution Press, Stanford University, 1995), p. 65.
Jin Young Bae (ed.), Two Years Since German Unification: Economic Evaluation and lmplications for Korea. (Korea Institute For International Economic Policy and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, p. 31 1993.) This balance is less dramatic following Korea's currency devaluation in late 1997.
Peace and Cooperation—White Paper on Korean Unification 1990. Ministry of National Unification, Republic of Korea, p. 77.
Dieter Blumenwitz, “The Political and Legal Process of German Unification and Its Implications for Korea,” see German Unification and Its Lessons for Korea, edited by Ku-Hyun Jung, Dalchoong Kim, Werner Gampel, and Gotthriedkarl Kinderman (Institute of East & West Studies, Yonsei University, 1996), p. 69.
White Paper: Peace And Cooperation Korean Unification, p. 79. A typical view, I got was expressed by Professor I. D. Kang in 1996, then the Director of the Institute for Asian Studies, and later assuming the Minister of National Unification Ministry, Korea from February 1998–May 1999.
There are a lot of scholars supporting this argument, which is also reflected in a paper “German Lessons for Managing the Economic Cost of Korea Reunification” by Jongryon Mo, in One Korea?—Challenges and Prospects for Reunification.
Nicholas Eberstadt, “Hastening Korean Reunification,” Foreign Affairs 76:2 (March/April, 1997), p. 82.
Michael Krakowski, “System Transformation and System Integration in East Germany and Eastern Europe: Some Lessons” in Two Years Since German Unification: Economic Evaluations and Implications for Korea, edited by Jin-Young Bae, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy and Friedrich Ebert Stiflung, 1993, p. 25.
This opinion is widely shared by many common people, officials as well as scholars, but is also criticized by others in informal comments, writings, and public speeches. The most recently argument occurred in the process of South Korea's being admitted into the OECD in Nov. 1996.
Edward A. Olsen, “Korea's Reunification: Implications for the U.S.—ROK Alliance,” in One Korea?—Challenges and Prospects for Reunification. Also see Yong-Sap Han of the Korean National Defense University, “South Korea's New Security Strategy in the 21st Century: Strategy of Cooperation and Conflict,” a paper prepared for the International Conference on International Security Environment in Northeast Asia in the 21st Century and Korea's Security Strategy, June 9–10, 1997, Seoul, p.4.
C. S. Eliot Kang, “Korea Unification: A Pandora Box of Northeast Asia?” Asian Perspective 20: 2 (Fall-Winter 1996), p. 24.
Hideshi Takesada, “Current Situation in the Korean Peninsula and Japan's Roles—Options For Change,” a paper of presented at the International Conference on Korean Peninsular & the Northeast Asia Security, Seoul, Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, 26–27 November 1996.
Duk Min Yin, “Korean Diplomacy in the Transitional Period,” World Weekly (Japan), May 14, 1996.
C.S. Eliot Kang, “Korean Unification: A Pandora's Box of Northeast Asia?” p. 29.
Andrei V. Kortonov, “The Northeast Asia Policy of Russia in the 21st Century,” a paper prepared for the International conference on International Security Environment in Northeast Asia in the 21st Century and Korea's Security Strategy, June 9–10, 1997, p. 12.
Yang Zhao-quan, Sun Yu-mei, China-Korea Border History (in Chinese), Jilin Cultural History Press, p. 535; Lee Ki-hong, “The Scarred Past Should be Cleared” (in Korean), East Asia Daily, Aug. 27, 1992.
YangTai-jin, “North Korea, Communist China Border Conflict—A Historical Survey of Korean-Manchurian Border” (in Korean), North Korea, May 1979.
A high-level official of Korean Foreign Ministry assured me that Korea will respect the status quo of China-Korea border before it reaches a new agreement with China through peaceful negotiation.
Nicholas Eberstadt, “Hastening Korean Reunification,” p. 83.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, M. An obsessed task: Prospects, models, and impact of Korean reunification. East Asia 17, 30–53 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-999-0016-x
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-999-0016-x