We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message
Contact Forum Editor

Send an email to our Forum Editor:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the Forum Editor know who sent the message. Both your name and email address will not be used for any other purpose.

Speakers Corner


It's free to register, to post a question or to start / join a discussion


 

While we're discussing horsemeat in frozen foods


Forum Editor
Resolved

Likes # 0

others are getting on with the job of destabilising the world.

It's a demonstration of what can happen when a deluded, all-powerful youngster at the helm of a totalitarian state starts messing with stuff he doesn't understand.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

"amonra"

"The big question is WHO really controls NK, or is it who are the faceless generals who are really in control, and can we trust them to keep on the straight and narrow path towards unity of north and south Korea."

The first rule of Dictatorship is 'Keep the army under control and on your side.'

Dictators know that successful coups are often instigated by senior military officers, and always supported by them - if you don't have the military on your side you can forget about running a Dictatorship.

Kim Jong-Un, the North Korean Dictator was taught all this by his father, and he will have made sure that the country's military leaders are well rewarded for their loyalty. If he's clever he will play the game of keeping these people on their toes by keeping them guessing about whose star is on the ascendancy at any one moment. They will all be looking over their shoulders, and there will be no such thing as peace of mind when it comes to job security.

If you live in a regime that can arrest and execute a person without any form of trial or media interest you keep your head down and do as you're told. Kim Jong-Un will have informers in high places in all branches of the military and the Civil Service.

Unity with South Korea just is not going to happen while that man is in control unless someone manages to plan and initiate a civilian uprising, and with a standing army of 1.1 million and and another 8.2 million active reservists that is a very tall order indeed. The North Korean leader's dearest wish is the complete destruction of South Korea, which is why President Obama has publicly pledged American military support, up to and including nuclear weapons, for defence against any military offensive on the part of North Korea.

That pledge makes it essential that China asserts its status as a global superpower, and issues a clear and unequivocal warning to Kim Jong-Un about further nuclear weapons tests. China and America need to be singing from the same hymn sheet on the North Korean problem, because the last thing the world needs is America having to make good on its promise to South Korea without the backing of the Chinese government.

Obama would avoid involving American forces at almost any cost, but the commitment has been made. Let's hope China will show North Korea that if it commits an act of aggression in the region it does so without the support of the Chinese people.

Like this post
pavvi

Likes # 0

The trouble is that NK is so secretive that we don't know whether Kim Jeong-Un is just a figurehead being run by the army or vice versa, or a combination. I have always found it slightly amusing that the communist states are/were called things like Deutsches Demokratik Republik, People's Republic of China, and in the case of NK, People's Democratic Republic of Korea. Nothing like a bit of irony.

Like this post
pavvi

Likes # 0

Correction - Democratic People's Republic of Korea

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

pavvi

This is how the North Korean government likes to present itself to the world:-

"The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a genuine workers' state in which all the people are completely liberated from exploitation and oppression. The workers, peasants, soldiers and intellectuals are the true masters of their destiny and are in a unique position to defend their interests."

I wonder how many North Korean workers and peasants feel liberated from exploitation and oppression, and masters of their destiny.

Like this post
fourm member

Likes # 0

North Korea doesn't always fit into our picture of it.

Try this interview with a former UK ambassador or listen

And this will probably suprise.

Like this post
pavvi

Likes # 0

forum member

Very interesting links. One of the key parts of the first article is the reference to Axis of Evil. The ambassador and the americans appear to completely misunderstand Asian culture. It's not because they don't know, of course not. It's just that the political niceties of the West over-rule it. The reassurances could very well have had little value to DPRK because of how they were being portrayed. This is where they would run slap bang into the whole "face" aspect, and the shutters go up. To the North Koreans the Face issue can be more important than the political convenience for the West of labelling them as evil.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

fourm member

From the Ambassador's interview - he says:-

"More likely is the smoke-filled room scenario, where either China finally decides it’s had enough of North Korea and sits down with the U.S. to cut a deal so that one day Kim Jong Un wakes up to find his world has collapsed around him."

I totally agree.

Like this post
Forum Editor

Likes # 0

pavvi

I can't agree with you when you say that "The ambassador and the americans appear to completely misunderstand Asian culture."

I think they both understand it very well. I have worked a good deal in China and Kong Kong, and in my youth I lived in Sri Lanka, spending a lot of time in India. I learnt plenty about Asian culture, and about 'Face', and in my business dealings with the Chinese I discovered that they're actually interested in one thing above all else, and that's winning. Once you understand that, it's not difficult to get along with them. Some of them like to play up the inscrutable Oriental , but deep down they're as easy to understand as anyone else. I got on very well with them,once I realised that in a business meeting business is the last thing to be mentioned. I'm sure that the same applies in diplomatic contacts.

North Korea is ruled by a despot of the worst kind, he'll pursue his aim of becoming a world influence if he possibly can, even if he has to bleed his country white and take it to the brink of a nuclear confrontation. Negotiating with him is a complete waste of time - he will only understand pressure, which brings me back to what I said in an earlier post about China's pivotal role in all this.

Like this post
pavvi

Likes # 0

FE

I should have said that they chose to disregard it rather than misunderstand it. I share your experience of business meetings right across South East Asia, that never seem to discuss business. It's more the other party trying to get their measure of you.

My take on face is that it isn't necessarily about winning but about not being seen to lose. Despots will always want to be seen to win, however, and one issue that is relevant is that the way to play it might be to portray the end of successful negotiations showing that NK achieved something. Often, however, the West wants to show how powerful it is and wants it to be demonstrated that it has won. This goes head to head with the asian concept of face.

The only chance that NK can be persuaded to stand back will be if someone can convince them that by pulling back, they haven't lost. The only people that might be able to achieve this would be as you say, China. Allowing NK to think it hasn't lost will dampen the West's ability to say it has won. Will the WEst's triumphalism be more important than peace?

Like this post
spider9

Likes # 0

"Will the WEst's triumphalism be more important than peace?"

Sadly, I think the answer to that might be yes. But that doesn't mean conflict is necessarily the outcome.

Since weapons (particularly those of mass destruction) were invented, man, by his very nature, will always strive to dominate others - and nothing suggests to me that this will ever change.

Fortunately, in some respects, the more fearsome the weapon the less likely will it ever be used, since we arrive at the scenario where if any nation used it then the probability would be that mutually assured destruction would follow - only worldwide - and including the instigators!

Even 'rogue' states have leaders who ultimately realise this and so the chances of any of them starting such a chain reaction seems less likely than ever.

The real fear might just be a development of a chemical/biological weapon with only one nation having a protective 'antidote'.

Like this post  

Reply to this topic

This thread has been locked.



IDG UK Sites

Samsung Galaxy S5 mini vs HTC One mini 2 comparison review: Design and price beats additional...

IDG UK Sites

Why local multiplayer gaming is rapidly vanishing: we look at the demise of split-screen and LAN...

IDG UK Sites

Colour-depth not resolution is what will make 4K a success or failure

IDG UK Sites

iPhone 6 vs iPhone 6 Plus: Which new iPhone 6 model should I buy?