Live data from Hacker News

China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

english.yonhapnews.co.kr

81–90 of 127 posts

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

It looks like currently their estimation is that the West is too weak to oppose them and by taking a bellicose stance they can extract concessions, payments and other benefits. This is basically a blackmail/hostage situation.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plans, yes. Lots of artillery, but it's aging, and as was pointed out earlier, the number of pieces they possess that can actually reach Seoul (the 203mm Koksan) is not very great. As soon as they open fire, the counter-battery game begins. You can be sure the allies have photographed and analyzed every strip of dirt along the DMZ, looking for prepared positions so they can anticipate where the guns are and…

There would be no day 3 or 4. The US knowns in detail every inch of the DMZ and the NK side. The US counter-battery is the best in the world. Every NK gun that fires would be bracket and destroyed in the 1st 30 minutes. After they are gone any other mapped location would be hit for good measure. The ROK Army and the US Army would start to roll right over the DMZ in the 1st hour. The Air Force and Army attack helicopt…

I'd sure like to believe you're right. While I have every reason to believe the allies would prevail, I'm also wary of overly optimistic timelines.

Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#83
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

> Perhaps China wants to annex NK. No they don't. Why would they want this radioactive toxic dumpster fire as their full responsibility? They're much better it being within their sphere of influence - so that anybody who wants anything done has to deal with China and make suitable offers to get things done - while having pretty much zero responsibility for the welfare of the people and not being subject of criticism…

China has plenty of rural areas anyway, and NK population is 2% of Chinese population.

China is pretty much the only country that can pour enough money into NK to bring it out of poverty, and a border with an important US Ally (South Korea) would be priceless.

I don't think that's what they want to do, but it would actually make sense.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

> They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. I believe that NK was untrustworthy long before the events you cite. They didn't reach a rational conclusion. They always were belligerant, untrustworthy, lying bullies.

You imply that untrustworthy, lying bullies can't be rational. Read the parent again:

> This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival.

If you're a criminal bully, then the only way to not get taken down by the bigger kids is to get nuclear weapons.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'humanitarian crisis' - isn't NK already the very example of 'humanitarian crisis'? just that NK gov. is good at 'containing' its people & let then starve...

It's currently a humanitarian crisis that China don't have to (and to a large extent can't) deal with.

Right. It’s a disaster but it’s contained. As soon as the government can’t enforce it’s borders (there are some leaks now but it’s not open) then it’s going to become a huge issue in China and SK and anywhere else people can get to.

Of course China and SK could arm up at the borders and start shooting people but... that’s not really an improvement is it.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#86
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What they actually want is to win, and emerge "victorious" in the face of US "oppression". You don't think seeing what happened to Gaddafi has anything to do with it? Libya got rid of their nuke development plans in 2003. If Libya had nukes, would the Libyan revolution have played out as it did? Do you think Kim Jong Un wants to get dragged around, anally raped and murdered by an angry mob? Probably not. > Perhaps…

Libya was diplomatic failure of epic proportions. Furthermore the value of NK isn't the people, but the geographical position. It is a well known fact that China is amping up its projection of power, and using it to claim territory. Doklam is the most recent example. Furthermore I don't think China gives two shits about forcing people into doing what it wills. 25 million people is basically a negligible amount for Ch…

Or perhaps, the US has a vested interest in a divided and unstable Korea to have an excuse to maintain lots of military bases in the region, because China. And Russia.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

> They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. I believe that NK was untrustworthy long before the events you cite. They didn't reach a rational conclusion. They always were belligerant, untrustworthy, lying bullies.

> They always were belligerant, untrustworthy, lying bullies.

And US policy towards Korea has been something else?

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

There is a documentary on Netflix called The Propaganda Game that does a good job of explaining this. It goes way back to the history of when the Korean peninsula got split. It's an interesting watch especially if you're trying to escape the narrative in the echo chamber of the west for an hour or so.

edit: grammar

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#89

This makes me nervous and I fear that Kim Jung Un will have to do something big in order to save face. I hope we make him feel that he has a non-violent way to posture for his people as that's really what this is all about: posturing.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor.

North Korea is rational. They have a very good idea of how far they can annoy everyone else before it starts to hurt them, and they have proven very adept at being able to extract concessions from the rest of the world.

> The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve.

The only way the problem could be solved diplomatically is a grand bargain between China and the US (maybe Russia as well, but China is definitely required) to let the Kim government fall.

> Personally I think while China's interests are in maintaining a peaceful region, we must be wary of the relationship between NK and China. As there is a possibility of another game being played. Perhaps China wants to annex NK.

The real problem with North Korea, and the reason we're in this dangerous unstable equilibrium is that, as much as the relevant powers hate the current situation, the alternatives are even more unpalatable. No one wants to take on the task of absorbing North Korea--China and South Korea are already too rich (the gap is even wider than East/West Germany, and that took 20 years to close). Furthermore, China already has a rural-to-urban migration problem, and North Korean refugees would only exacerbate that issue.

War with North Korea would be a very unpalatable situation. The center of Seoul is only about 30 miles from the North Korean border, and some suburbs are even closer--within artillery range of the border. That gives North Korea the ability to raise the death count to over a million people in a very short amount of time even before rockets or nuclear weapons are involved, not to mention instigating a short-term refugee situation that makes Syria's look small. Furthermore, North Korean rocketry and nuclear weapons gives it the ability to threaten the megacities of Japan, and if Kim Jung Un feels he can't win, he very well could go out with a painful bang.

Put more simply, a war with North Korea, although likely very short, could easily produce a death toll commensurate with World War I. A military option is not a good option. There are no good options when it comes to North Korea. At this point, the least bad option to me is to ignore North Korea's tantrums, publicly reaffirm commitment to the defense of South Korea and Japan in the event of a war at any cost, and quietly work with China to develop post-Kim scenarios.

Re: China orders N.K. firms to close down within 120 days

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I don't get this sentiment. NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The NK problem can never ever be solved by diplomatic resolve. This goes beyond mere saving face, or diplomacy. This is simply about maintaining and expanding power. That is sometimes you need to be confrontational. Sometimes you need to stop being Chamberlain, and start being Churchill. Preferably before it's too late. What else is their develop…

> NK isn't some rationalistic actor. The way they're behaving is quite rational. They looked at what happened to Gaddafi and Saddam, as well as how the new administration is seeking to tear down the Iran deal, and came to the conclusion that the US/West could not be trusted to honor a nuclear disarment deal long term. This means a credible nuclear deterrent is the only way to ensure the regime's survival. Lest people…

I agree completely. Contrast those rogue nations with Pakistan - who has nukes - and it's a strong argument. Pakistan regularly taunts India with the same threats and they still get megabucks in aid.

NK made it past the finish line: they have a real program and a modest delivery system. I expect they will continue to follow the same diplomatic strategy as Pakistan.

Post reply on HN