Maybe this is getting into a touch of butterfly territory and unproven suggestions

I realize that Moscow denies they had a hand but i think its fair to say that most western observers agree that Moscow at least had a hand in the 1996 palace coup during the North Korean famine. I realize its not proven, but it makes sense to me. Given the Chinese instability and Gorbachev's emphasis on human rights I personally think he was much more involved than Moscow admits.

Regarless that coup directly led to the Minsk Summit of 1997 that laid out the fifteen year blueprint to unification and demilitirization.

So a few questions:

1. Do you think its possible the north Korean regime could still be around or were the economic problems to endemic for survival?
2. Do you think the North Korean leadership made a fundamental mistake in going for hereditary succession with Kim Jong-Il. Say what you will about them but thecommies dont like hereditary succession and i dont see how its a long term strategy
3. I know it sounds absurd to say but could we have still seen a divided with a demilitarized zone and US troops still there and no peace treaty and defectors and whatnot?

Bonus question: if you were a South Korean. And you knew what you know today, would you rather live in the unified Socialist Democratic Republic of Korea or would you take your chances being an independent south korean country
 
Last edited:
Maybe this is getting into a touch of butterfly territory and unproven suggestions

I realize that Moscow denies they had a hand but i think its fair to say that most western observers agree that Moscow at least had a hand in the 1996 palace coup during the North Korean famine. I realize its not proven, but it makes sense to me. Given the Chinese instability and Gorbachev's emphasis on human rights I personally think he was much more involved than Moscow admits.

Regarless that coup directly led to the Minsk Summit of 1997 that laid out the fifteen year blueprint to unification and demilitirization.

So a few questions:

1. Do you think its possible the north Korean regime could still be around or were the economic problems to endemic for survival?
2. Do you think the North Korean leadership made a fundamental mistake in going for hereditary succession with Kim Jong-Il. Say what you will about them but thecommies dont like hereditary succession and i dont see how its a long term strategy
3. I know it sounds absurd to say but could we have still seen a divided with a demilitarized zone and US troops still there and no peace treaty and defectors and whatnot?

Bonus question: if you were a South Korean. And you knew what you know today, would you rather live in the unified Socialist Democratic Republic of Korea or would you take your chances being an independent south korean country

1. As @StealthyMarat said, I'd consider this borderline ASB. I don't see any way other than if the Chinese reforms succeeded (which woupd require the Gorbachev reforms to happen and succeed) that North Korea could survive, and that would probably result in a scenario like what we see in Germany, with a capitalist half and a recently-reformed communist half gradually taking steps towards reunification (and allowing open travel between the two).
2. Definitely. Juche wasn't even pretending to be socialist anymore. It's basically neo-monarchism.
3. This has about a snowflake's chance in hell of happening.
Bonus: Definitely a united Korea. It still has stability issues, sure, but the sheer sense of national pride that being reuinted at last would fill me with (or rather, an alternate Korean version of myself) would be more than enough to compensate, even if I now have to worry about China instead of North Korea on the newly-gained northern border...
 
Top