WI: Unified, neutral and fully democratic Korea after WWII?

[Chörnyj Orel]

Which consequences would it have, if after WWII Korea keeps undivided and becomes a neutral democratic republic? I don't want to ask for how to achieve this situation, which other state could be divided between the eastern and the western sphere instead or what ever. Just Korea as a whole forming a democratic republic from the late 1940s on. This also means, of course, no Korea War.
Let's say this country is formed (and stays) completely neutral, but doesn't isolate itself. It is open for trading with the west, as well with the communist world. And let's say, the democracy index of this Korea is extremely high from the very beginning, as well as the corruption is really really low.

How would (East) Asia and the world effect such a scenario? How will be the effects on the further history/the Cold War (would this even effect Cold War much with a neutral Korea?), on the politics at all, on pop culture (movies and series, music, video gaming, etc.), on how humans would see Korea today?
What are your thoughts? What would be realistic and plausible?

 

[Marko]

It would heavily depend on the economic system they choose to follow.

Capitalism and we would see a slower developing Korea of today potentially tapping heavily into the future unaligned movement.

Socialism and I would expect the country to remain relatively poor for longer than OTL.


Now it would also depend in how much both West and the East would be willing to invest in Korea in trying to win them over.

 

[Garrison]

I doubt they could afford to be neutral. They will be either be under the thumb of the Soviets or the Chinese or have to look to the west for support.

 

[Lalli]

Agree with previous. Neutrality hardly is going to be option. Korea would be under threat of China and Soviet Union so it has ally with USA.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

The RoK is the 13th largest economy in the world at $1.67T. If it includes the north, that roughly doubles its area and population, so it would be twice as big. In addition, Korea would be spared all physical and demographic damage of the Korean War, and the cost of intense military readiness since the war. As a WAG, another 25%. So Korea could rank as high as 5th, just below Germany and Japan.

 

[Thisisnotausername]

I doubt they could afford to be neutral. They will be either be under the thumb of the Soviets or the Chinese or have to look to the west for support.

I don't see why they couldn't be neutral. There were plenty of neutral states in the Cold War, even ones right between the two blocs like Finland, Sweden, Austria and Yugoslavia. It might not be very likely but it's probably doable, although the changes you'd need to effect to make it happen would probably have repercussions elsewhere. You'd probably have a harder time with the OP's stipulation that the resulting country be one of the most democratic and least corrupt in the world right from the very beginning.

The RoK is the 13th largest economy in the world at $1.67T. If it includes the north, that roughly doubles its area and population, so it would be twice as big. In addition, Korea would be spared all physical and demographic damage of the Korean War, and the cost of intense military readiness since the war. As a WAG, another 25%. So Korea could rank as high as 5th, just below Germany and Japan.

It doubles their area but not their population: the South has pretty consistently had around twice the population of the North going all the way back to 1950.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

It doubles their area but not their population: the South has pretty consistently had around twice the population of the North going all the way back to 1950.

I was thinking that might be the case, but I was too hurried to look it up.

But... Suppose (as a very crude first approximation) GDP is proportional to the square root of area times population. Then the increase would be sqrt(2 x 1.5) = sqrt(3) ~= 1.73. Add in the 25% for no Korean War, and RoWholeK's GDP would be about $3.6T; still 5th, just further behind Japan and Germany.

 

[Cudymcar]

I doubt they could afford to be neutral. They will be either be under the thumb of the Soviets or the Chinese or have to look to the west for support.

Austria was neutral not because it could afford it, but because both occupying sides made an agreement.

 

[Blair]

A unified, neutral, democratic Korea is only possible if the United States and Soviet Union install the right leaders in their respective occupation zones.

United States:
American occupation leader John R. Hodge originally wanted Kim Kyu-sik and Lyuh Woon-Hyung, both moderate leaders, to be in change. He later came to favor the autocratic Syngman Rhee, whom even the State Department described as "a dangerous mischief-maker" and originally denied his request to return to Korea. If Hodge never changes his mind, or the State Department gets its way, the Rhee Dictatorship can be avoided.

Soviet Union:
I do not think Joseph Stalin wanted a unified Korea. However, it is possible for him to die early. His successor IOTL, Georgy Malenkov, wanted a united, peaceful and democratic Germany. Maybe his sympathies extended to Korea too? The Soviet Union did withdrawal its troops from Austria, which became a neutral state IOTL.

The per capita GDPs of North and South Korea were about the same until the 1970s. Maybe Korea ITTL picks up earlier. Avoiding the devastation of the Korean War helps a lot. Japan will recover slower ITTL since its recovery was fueled by its contributions to the Korean War. The Liberal Democratic Party of Japan probably never rises ITTL, since it was also the Korean War that convinced the American occupational authorities to rehabilitate hardline conservatism in Japan.

 

[Garrison]

The RoK is the 13th largest economy in the world at $1.67T. If it includes the north, that roughly doubles its area and population, so it would be twice as big. In addition, Korea would be spared all physical and demographic damage of the Korean War, and the cost of intense military readiness since the war. As a WAG, another 25%. So Korea could rank as high as 5th, just below Germany and Japan.

A unified Korea after WWII implies no Korean War, so Japan may see slower economic growth and Korea might well be ranked above Japan.

 

[magellan2022]

A unified, neutral, democratic Korea is only possible if the United States and Soviet Union install the right leaders in their respective occupation zones.

United States:
American occupation leader John R. Hodge originally wanted Kim Kyu-sik and Lyuh Woon-Hyung, both moderate leaders, to be in change. He later came to favor the autocratic Syngman Rhee, whom even the State Department described as "a dangerous mischief-maker" and originally denied his request to return to Korea. If Hodge never changes his mind, or the State Department gets its way, the Rhee Dictatorship can be avoided.

Soviet Union:
I do not think Joseph Stalin wanted a unified Korea. However, it is possible for him to die early. His successor IOTL, Georgy Malenkov, wanted a united, peaceful and democratic Germany. Maybe his sympathies extended to Korea too? The Soviet Union did withdrawal its troops from Austria, which became a neutral state IOTL.

Actually, I've read that Stalin was OK with Korea being independent. Meanwhile, FDR seems to have wanted the US to rule over Korea for like 10 years.
I'd say the factions would be
- Social Democrats, Centrists, Center-Right folks (Lyuh Woon-hyung, Kim Kyu-sik, and probably Cho Man-sik)
- Communists (Kim Il-sung, Park Hon-yong, probably Kim Du-bong)
- Communists/Leftists but probably more moderate (Kim Won-bong)
- Hard right wingers like Syngman Rhee
- Hard right wingers, but more nationalistic, less pro-American, and more willing to compromise with North Korea (and probably more pro-Chiang Kai-shek) like Kim Koo
- Fascists and their youth groups like Lee Beom-seok and Ahn Hyo-sang (Though the former did serve under Syngman Rhee's government)
- Right wingers but somewhat more moderate, filled with pro-Japanese collaboraters (like Kim Seong-su)

 

[Insane Ranter]

A unified Korea after WWII implies no Korean War, so Japan may see slower economic growth and Korea might well be ranked above Japan.

Do you think the US will dump as much money into Korea if it is unified after WW2 as in OTL? That will make a big difference in Korean and Japanese economic growth.

 

[Quintuplicate]

What if UNCURK survives?

 

[Garrison]

Do you think the US will dump as much money into Korea if it is unified after WW2 as in OTL? That will make a big difference in Korean and Japanese economic growth.

Well without a Korean War the US has no reason to pour money into Japan and Korea would on the frontlines of the Cold War. Given the antipathy towards Japan and no reason to ignore it I suspect most of the money will flow into Korea.