War on the Korean Peninsula, Who Benifits
December 22, 2010 4:46 PM   Subscribe

Which countries would benifit from a war on the Korean peninsula? My students want to know.

I often use metafilter in my high-level ESL classes in South Korea. They really enjoy the topics which spark many great discussions. Recently they asked me if they could post their own question to Askmefi. I received a list of about twenty questions and may post one more later in the week, but don't want to crowd the board, of course!
posted by manwoo to Society & Culture (36 answers total) 7 users marked this as a favorite
 
Response by poster: Benefits! Ok, so I shouldn't let them type for me!!! Geez.
posted by manwoo at 4:51 PM on December 22, 2010


Neighbouring countries often benefit the most from wars, because their trade with the warring parties goes up. Expect China to be a big winner.
posted by UbuRoivas at 4:55 PM on December 22, 2010


> Expect China to be a big winner.

Nonsense. China is desperately afraid of a war, because it would mean Koreans flooding across the border, and they have enough problems with the refugees they're getting now. The answer is zero, unless by "country" you understand "tiny leadership group," in which case it's possible the North Korean rulers would benefit, or think they would. Only they know.
posted by languagehat at 5:08 PM on December 22, 2010 [6 favorites]


Actually, no one would benefit. The reasons are many: Korea produces many things sold in China, worth billions of dollars. Also, if there was a war, many more North Koreans would probably try to escape to China at the same time, which would be problematic for the Chinese government. The Chinese already support North Korea in many ways, in part to prevent this.
posted by StrikeTheViol at 5:08 PM on December 22, 2010 [1 favorite]


South Korea would suffer in all but the shortest conflicts. There's artillery within range of Seoul that could deal a significant amount of damage. And once the war is over, there's the matter of trying to integrate with an impoverished, brainwashed nation with a rickety economy.

The United States would get tied up in yet another foreign war, sapping troop levels and morale while boosting the debt.

China would be swamped by millions of refugees once the North Korean government fell. That would be difficult to absorb.

As for who'd be better off, I'd guess... Japan? Just because its rivals in the region would be in disarray. It's hard to say.

I'd recommend reading this Atlantic article about wargaming the logistics of a North Korean invasion to see just how difficult such an effort would be.
posted by Rhaomi at 5:12 PM on December 22, 2010


In an interconnected global economy, no-one will benefit from a war on the Korean peninsula. South Korea is one of the top 20 global economies. It invests in developing economies all over the world, including China, as well as in Africa.

You might think that China would benefit somehow from a war, but that is not the case. A war would destroy North Korea, creating a potential flood of refugees into China. China could choose to support North Korea, but that would risk turning what is now a limited regional cold war into a hot war against the US and Nato, which Nato would probably win. "Winning" would probably mean maintaining existing borders on the peninsula, but at huge cost, and at huge military and economic risk not only for the US, Japan, South Korea and their allies, but also for China.

Right now, the one country that benefits in the short term from tensions on the Peninsula (combined with Chinese aggression on Japan's southern border islets) is Japan. Japan has been able to move closer to South Korea, and South Korea has learned that Japan, which shares similar democratic values and a similar civil society, is a useful ally against China, which is becoming more and more unpredictable, and more and more aggressive against its neighbours in the region.

A war certainly would not benefit the United States, which is tied up in Central Asia and is suffering a prolonged recession.

Basically, the whole world would suffer if there was war on the Korean Peninsula.
posted by KokuRyu at 5:12 PM on December 22, 2010 [3 favorites]


No one in the region would benefit. None of the Koreas' neighbors want war due to refugees, loss of trade, weapons issues, etc. Japan fears refugees just as much as China and South Korea.

The grandstanding about war is done for domestic South Korean consumption considering domestic political factors as far as I can tell.
posted by vincele at 5:15 PM on December 22, 2010 [1 favorite]


As for who'd be better off, I'd guess... Japan? Just because its rivals in the region would be in disarray.

While I suppose you could consider Japan and Korea to be rival economies, in reality the region is so economically integrated - Japan has invested heavily in China for the past 15 years - that it's not really accurate to call the countries in the region "rivals", and it's an extremely pessimistic way to look at Japan. Japan's only rival, besides China (but it's complicated), would be Russia.
posted by KokuRyu at 5:17 PM on December 22, 2010 [1 favorite]


I think this at least possibly depends upon what you mean by "country", and the scope and timeframe of "benefits".

For example, I don't think it's inconceivable that a war on the Korean peninsula would be absolutely disastrous for the current government of North Korea, deadly and horrible for the current people of North Korea, and good for future people of North Korea.
posted by Flunkie at 5:18 PM on December 22, 2010 [2 favorites]


I agree with Kokuryu's fine analysis, except on the point about Japan. I think that the tensions between Japan and China are also primarily fueled by domestic political considerations in both countries, especially China. The fights with Japan broke out in the fall on historically significant dates in Sino-Japanese history-- no coincidence. Ultimately though, trade between China and Japan is too important to both sides to let some of these spats over minor islands get out of control. Then again these spats ultimately tie to access to energy reserves, so I, an internet stranger could be entirely wrong.

But Japan is home to a sizable North Korean resident population which sends money home to North Korea. That money are a huge are real. The Japanese worry about waves of boat people coming to Japan to find work and their relatives if North Korea falls.
posted by vincele at 5:22 PM on December 22, 2010


Japan and Taiwan would both benefit, assuming the conflict doesn't spill across the region. It's likely that in a shooting war, the North Korean navy would attack commercial vessels coming in and out of South Korea. Many of South Korean exports are tech-related, and an interruption in shipping would benefit their competitors; Japan and Taiwan both also are significant exporters of high-tech consumer goods.

China is not likely to benefit in the short run from a war in Korea. The PRC is afraid that if war were to break out, the North Korean government may collapse, and thousands upon thousands of refugees could flood across the border into China. It's widely believed that the fear of a refugee crisis is the primary driver of the PRC's policy toward the DPRK. In the long run though, China would probably benefit from increased trade, assuming whatever regime wins the conflict is more liberal than the existing DPRK government.

Russia is a bit of a dark horse here, but I could see some benefit for them as well. Russia has recently been stirring the pot regarding some disputed territories in the region. I wouldn't be surprised to see Russia use a Korean conflict as an excuse to mobilize forces on some of these islands.
posted by Guernsey Halleck at 5:29 PM on December 22, 2010


Japan is also in range of North Korean ballistic missiles.
posted by mr_roboto at 5:30 PM on December 22, 2010


Nonsense. China is desperately afraid of a war, because it would mean Koreans flooding across the border, and they have enough problems with the refugees they're getting now.

Uh, OK. I picked up that supposed truism about neutral neighbours benefitting most from the War Nerd (general link; can't find the specific article), and you'd think that an influx of refugees is standard in just about every such situation.

Another potential benefit would be a massive influx of dollars from any foreign troops en route to the war, or else on R&R, and you'd expect that the wealthier segments of South Korean society might bring their wealth with them for a temporary relocation - the first class version of refugees.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:48 PM on December 22, 2010


Countries which produce and export oil would find very very high prices on the world market.
posted by Fiasco da Gama at 5:59 PM on December 22, 2010 [1 favorite]


Another reason the Chinese leadership fears a new outbreak of war is because they know that NK would lose and be absorbed into SK, and that would put a large, powerful military with strong ties to the US right on the Chinese border.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 6:00 PM on December 22, 2010


You need to frame the question with a timeframe. No one would benefit in the short term -- everyone would lose people, money, prestige, etc.

In the long term, there could be several "winners," including the people of North Korea themselves, if the ruling group is overthrown.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 6:04 PM on December 22, 2010 [1 favorite]


Uh, OK. I picked up that supposed truism about neutral neighbours benefitting most from the War Nerd (general link; can't find the specific article), and you'd think that an influx of refugees is standard in just about every such situation.


Yes, that's true Ubu, but my (and languagehat's) point is that no country in the region is "neutral" in that way. China props up North Korea, and Japan would be on South Korea's side. Russia has a smaller version of China's problem, so no nation would actually welcome the onset of war.
posted by StrikeTheViol at 6:06 PM on December 22, 2010


I would think that countries and organizations being targeted by the USA would take heart at the extra distraction it would provide, spreading US resources thinner.
The same is presumably extends to parties that have China breathing down their neck.
posted by -harlequin- at 6:07 PM on December 22, 2010


Another problem is that the Korean peninsula is one of the places in the world where a real war might end up involving nuclear weapons. It's not clear that NK actually has reliable deliverable nukes yet, but they might and it's possible that, if they were losing, they might use one or more. If their nukes are missile-deliverable, it's possible they might shoot one at Japan, or China, or even try to hit Anchorage or Honolulu. (And no matter what they shoot at, it's possible the US might then retaliate with one or more of ours.)

If that happens, not only is it really bad for whoever gets hit, it would be the first use of a nuclear weapon in war since 1945, and it could make it a lot easier to take that step into the abyss the next time e.g. for Iran or Pakistan or India.

And if something like that happens, it opens a different floodgate. A lot of countries in the world would decide they needed nukes of their own. In particular, South Korea (what was left of it) and Taiwan and even Japan might take that step.

This is not good for anyone.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 6:13 PM on December 22, 2010


A better question would be who benefits from a threat of war on the Korean peninsula.
posted by rdr at 6:28 PM on December 22, 2010 [6 favorites]


A better question would be who benefits from a threat of war on the Korean peninsula.

Oh, yes.
posted by KokuRyu at 6:43 PM on December 22, 2010


Countries which produce and export oil would find very very high prices on the world market.

(Does not imply largest country in the world with cynical oil gangsters who speak Russian).
posted by ovvl at 7:45 PM on December 22, 2010


If a war came, North Korea's defeat (which would be certain, but at not at insignificant cost to the US or South Korea) would most benefit the North's civilian population, many of whom live no better than stray dogs. Famine is at times so severe that cannibalism is not uncommon in North Korea. South Korea throws out more food in a year than North Koreans consume.

There is no functioning local government, infrastructure, or food distribution for millions of people, and living as refugees in China or a China/South Korea/US/Anyone Else-occupied North Korea would at least ensure access to international aid. Current "aid" programs end up in the hands of the "Chosun few", which they sell for cash, with the product being sold in local markets.

I'm pretty much ready to pounce on anyone who glibly compares something terrible to the Holocaust, but it's not unreasonable when used to describe the situation of the average North Korean.
posted by holterbarbour at 8:03 PM on December 22, 2010 [3 favorites]


Follow the money.

SK doesn't want war because a) Seoul would be damaged, possibly devastated, and the country's economy would suffer and b) the ensuing humanitarian crisis of millions of hungry, poorly educated North Koreans needing to be integrated into South Korean society.

China doesn't want war because a) exactly the same humanitarian crisis and b) having US and SK military forces along their border.

NK doesn't want war because the leadership doesn't want to be annihilated. Hoever, they do benefit from small-scale provocations such as the sinking of the SK warship Cheonan and the recent shelling of Yeongpyeong Island. Internally, this bolsters support for the dictatorship, espeically since the upcoming leader Kim Jong-un needs to put some feathers in his cap and establish his credentials as the new "Dear Leader."

A lot of my fellow Americans are always wondering out loud why SK doesn't just "fix" the NK problem. The short answer is: it'd be too damn expensive. Also, if it was your children in Seoul who were in the line of fire you'd be much more hesitant to attack.
posted by bardic at 8:38 PM on December 22, 2010


Japan and Taiwan would both benefit, assuming the conflict doesn't spill across the region. It's likely that in a shooting war, the North Korean navy would attack commercial vessels coming in and out of South Korea. Many of South Korean exports are tech-related, and an interruption in shipping would benefit their competitors; Japan and Taiwan both also are significant exporters of high-tech consumer goods.

I don't see this being the case. Certainly Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea are all major exporters of high-tech goods, but there's a lot more interdependent relationships here. It's not as though all three countries make the same goods and compete against each other. A product might be designed and sold by a Japanese company out of South Korean parts and assembled in Taiwan. Most LCDs are made in South Korea (though more is moving to China), but most laptops are built in China and Taiwan. You can't build laptops without LCD panels, so if a major conflict crippled South Korean industry, Taiwan's manufacturing would be hurting too. Similarly, Daewoo Electronics might import electronic components from China to build a microwave assembled in South Korea. High-tech manufacturing depends on the integration of hundreds of commodity components, all of which are made in different countries. These countries aren't really direct competitors, they are trading partners, and when your trading partner is unable to produce due to a massive war, it's almost as big a problem for you as it is for them.
posted by zachlipton at 9:36 PM on December 22, 2010


Really, the main beneficiaries I see would be countries Iran, Syria, Libya, and perhaps Venezuela. Basically, countries hostile to US interests. A major conflict on the Korean Peninsula would tie up the US for years and shift its resources out of the Middle East, giving these countries more maneuvering room. There's also the potential for Iran to pick up North Korean WMD technology and scientists at bargain basement prices. The two nations have already engaged in some nuclear trade, and it's likely there would be a lot more of it as the regime tried to prop itself up.
posted by zachlipton at 9:50 PM on December 22, 2010


North Korea the regime would suffer, but many actual North Koreans trapped in their concentration camps might benefit.
posted by The ____ of Justice at 10:24 PM on December 22, 2010


Another reason the Chinese leadership fears a new outbreak of war is because they know that NK would lose and be absorbed into SK

Wikileaks cables reveal China 'ready to abandon North Korea'
Leaked dispatches show Beijing is frustrated with military actions of 'spoiled child' and increasingly favours reunified Korea

posted by mlis at 11:53 PM on December 22, 2010


Wouldn't countries outside the region be most likely to benefit? Like anyone that wants to compete with East Asian high-tech manufacturing.

Obviously any country that doesn't like the US might stand to benefit, although I don't see how e.g. North Korea is currently benefiting from US attention to the Middle East or Afghanistan.

If there was a nuclear war, and the US used its arsenal then I agree that Iran and other possibly nuclear states would take the moral high ground over their own (alleged) nuclear programs and seek to build more. This would be particularly the case in the (extremely unlikely) event that only the US fired nuclear weapons.

In the long run it's reasonably likely that North Koreans would benefit. There might even be a German-style reunification, which would probably cost a lot of money, but could benefit the North Koreans significantly economically.
posted by plonkee at 4:04 AM on December 23, 2010


Response by poster: These answers are really fantastic! I've discussed the North Korean situation with my students before but have kept my comments rather neutral as it's a complex issue and can be a sensitive one. (I have unification party organizers in my class) They asked for it and you guys delivered. Thanks again! If anything especially interesting comes out of the discussion I'll post more here.
posted by manwoo at 4:24 AM on December 23, 2010


On the one hand, I could see Iran benefiting for the reasons outlined above. This might be possible if the North fell after a series of small arms skirmishes and a lot of hand-wringing but without the millions of casualties that worry so many. On the other hand, I could see Iran being the big loser if the North did deploy a nuclear weapon that struck a large city in either South Korea, Japan, China, or elsewhere. In that scenario, there is no way Israel or the United States would allow Iran to continue with its nuclear enrichment program and you'd see a pretty heavy bombing campaign, I'd expect. Really tough to determine who wins or loses based on so many different possible scenarios and outcomes.
posted by (Arsenio) Hall and (Warren) Oates at 4:56 AM on December 23, 2010


Your question is state-centric. A better question would be what kind of people/strata benefit from a war or the threat of a war on the Korean peninsula.
posted by jfricke at 7:30 AM on December 23, 2010 [1 favorite]


North Korea is in a win-win situation. 1. If the NK government stays intact they would benefit by a negotiated peace that will include millions of dollars in economic aid. If the NK government collapses, if they lose a full blown war, or are overthrown the NK people will will because they will receive millions of dollars in economic aid. This whole thing is being perpetrated by the NK government to win aid based on NK concessions of either a. nukes, or b. more freedoms for their peoples.
posted by Gungho at 8:34 AM on December 23, 2010


that would put another large, powerful military with strong ties to the US right on the Chinese border
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 10:24 AM on December 23, 2010


that would put another large, powerful military with strong ties to the US right on the Chinese border

Pakistan and China are also allies.

It's the India/US alliance that worries China.
posted by wildcrdj at 11:04 PM on December 23, 2010


(More on India/China/US )

For example, in the recent Nobel Peace Prize scuffles, Pakistan sided with China but India and the US both attended the ceremony.

As said above, China is having second thoughts about North Korea.

Basically, the whole region is not a simple set of alliances (no Axis/Allies type scenario) but an interlocking web of situations where countries ally on some issues and fight on others. Which is why an actual war benefits almost no one.
posted by wildcrdj at 11:07 PM on December 23, 2010


« Older Do I feed the beast or starve it?   |   duties on a bike imported into australia Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.