I have seen that map (or something like it) of Korea before. It is from the Three Kingdoms priod.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Kingdoms_of_Korea

After Option 7, I vote option 1. I'd sat there is a 15% chance of option 6…but mostly likely that attempt would backfire because connectivity should favour the south way of things.

The implications of continuous South Korean agitation against Beijing aren't good, when combined with South Korean appeasement of Pyongyang.

We may be seeing the purposeful, planned emergence of of a Korean League in international relations. North Korea has always been hostile to America, and increasingly South Korea is agitating for Americans to leave. In spite of a cultural closeness, South Korea is pushing away China (through this sort of irrendentism) while North Korea is too (seizing trains, etc).

We have seen democratic-despotic leagues before — notably during the Second World War. Yet none have been fueled by the sort of shared national leftism we see in in the Seoul and Pyongyang governments.

I agree with your post [1]: “Sigh..USA does not need this distraction right now.” But what we need and what we have are different things.

We should collapse North Korea sooner rather than later. From the perspective of China, Japan, and ourselves, the worst situation is a nuclear, militant, rich, and semi-despotic United Korea. North Korea absorbed into China or North Korea absorbed in South Korea are both preferable. We should creating that future.

[1] http://purpleslog.wordpress.com/2006/09/01/past-history-and-future-fantasy-map-of-korea/

Here's something to ponder:
if the North Koreans happened to be fortunate to pull off their “1989,” could we see this liberated North Korea having to fight off annexation by a “progressive” (“neo-commie”?) South Korean regime?

What would be the chances of that happening?

I don't see South Korea adapting communism, but we might see a replay of German unification. The former East Germany today is probably the least-pro-American of all of “New Europe,” because her energies were swamped under the socialist welfare-state of the Western government. Even now, that West Germany's policies are shown to be uncompetitive and a former victim of Communism has the Chancellorship, the country is far from true reform. And under the previous Chancellor, Gerhardt Schroeder, we saw the United German government reach for easy popularity by playing the anti-America card.

Fortunately for us, the Germans didn't have the self-confidence to do much. Or the nuclear weapons.

(I don't think Northerners would mind annexation — the South is much, much richer — but it is something to think about. What if a military coup in the North establishes a more pro-American government there than Seoul is comfortable with? If a North would demand western forces be stationed in their country to guard against a return of the old regime, say, and Seoul wishes the peninsula to be free of all foreign forces…)

These groups, or the people promoting/advancing these ideas, seem to have a rather–how should I put it?–”nuanced” view the North's regime, which nicely syncs with the “usual” attitude (found in extreme-ideologues [whether Leftists or otherwise] anywhere else in the world, never mind SK) that that sort of power would be great it it was wielded by those who presumably know what they were doing (like, presumably, themselves).
And ISTR reports that certain folks like these have supposedly abused what political positions or powers they've managed to obtain. (Think of this as a dark parody of the Talents Parable–if a person can abuse a little power, think of what that person would do if he/she had *real* power…)

Anyway, it's just a speculation. But thought 'twould be ironic *if* such a situation would come to pass.

Granted, liberated Northerners would probably love to be annexed to a prosperous society, like their East German counterparts did (at the beginning, anyway). But 'twould be a shame to be liberated from one dangerous dictatorial ideologue only to come under another one, even if it is a richer society.

And wouldn't the fact that it would be a “richer” society would make it even more dangerous? Think of how much more advanced technologies relating to repression would be (police/military/surveillance/imprisonment/etc.).

A sort of destructive, anti-American Leftism, such as we are seeing in Mexico [1], is possible.

Given the low level of political maturity that South Korea is demonstrating, perhaps we should be routing for a Chinese annexation – a Shanization [2] if not outright Tibetization

PS: Coming Anarchy is now hosting a discussion on the fall of North Korea. [3] It's pretty good.

[1] http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/johnrobb/2006/09/mexico_and_the_.html
[2] http://tdaxp.blogspirit.com/archive/2005/02/16/chinese_colonization_of_shan_state_burma.html
[3] http://www.cominganarchy.com/archives/2006/09/05/when-north-korea-falls/

Declining Korean population? Yes, but what about Japan's? It's in much more of a decline. I believe the Japanese would be the first to be so sci-fi-freak and create warrior robots. But we won't have to worry about that— Japan will be long sunk into the ocean by that time.

And it's not Chosen. It's either Joseon or Hanguk. When you write about Korea, you refer to it in proper terms– not the Japanese ones.

The government of Japan is publishing anti-Korean mangas? Can you provide a reference?

I understand that Beijing and Seoul tend to have a positive relationship, however.

Not that I'm criticizing South Korea for being closer to a one-party dictatorship than a democracy. Realities are what they are. But should there at least be some introspection about that?

Thank you for your comment.