Hacker News Reader

I don't know very much about geopolitical whatevers, but can anyone explain-like-I'm-five why everyone assumes that taking out the North Korean government has to involve 25 million refugees (which is the entire population of the country) streaming into China and South Korea? They're not going to nuke all of NK into inhabitability, people will still live there. I'm sure some people will want to leave now that they're not under pain of death for doing so, but probably the vast majority will stay. Did Russian emigrants overwhelm Europe when the Iron Curtain fell, or Germans when the Berlin Wall did?

(Not trying to be snarky, genuinely curious, because every time this subject comes up, everyone starts throwing around the "China doesn't want 25M refugees overnight" argument, so I assume there's some background I'm missing.)

> Did Russian emigrants overwhelm Europe when the Iron Curtain fell

Not Europe, no - because most of them didn't have the legal status to gain any european citizenship. But million jews rushed into Israel, with a total population of 8 million, which greatly affected the country.

Given that South Korea officially 'wants' unification, they won't have any other choice but to grant citizen status to everyone - and I don't doubt that a LOT of north koreans will jump on this opportunity right away.

> Given that South Korea officially 'wants' unification, they won't have any other choice but to grant citizen status to everyone

Of course they'll have the choice not to immediately grant citizenship to 25 million!

The comparison is East Germany vs West Germany, which did.

"Did Russian emigrants overwhelm Europe when the Iron Curtain fell, or Germans when the Berlin Wall did?"

Those were largely peaceful changes. Neither Germany nor the Soviet Union got nuked nor have millions of people die in a war, as is very likely to happen if war breaks out with North Korea. If they had, then yes, there would have been probably millions of refugees trying to run for their lives. Take a look at any other major war and you'll see that this is in fact what happens.

To me it seems like this assumption is based on the fact that relatively many North Koreans try to escape the country even though it's very dangerous. If trying to leave the country isn't going to get someone killed by the government any more, maybe more people will try to leave in search of better conditions. Will it be 25 million? Who knows, probably not, but you could imagine whole villages leaving together.

Keep in mind that NK is in far worse shape than most (all?) of the Communist countries whose governments collapsed around 1991. Not that life in those countries was all sunshine and rainbows and fluffy rabbits, but the life in NK is a whole different scale.

Those governments also fell internally, meaning the people were pushing for a change and were somewhat ready to make it happen. Invading North Korea would be pretty different.

One big unknown (at least to me) is the level of indoctrination. Related to the above, a lot of people in Eastern Europe were fed up with their government, didn't believe anything they said, and were ready to build something better. It seems like a lot more North Koreans might buy into their government's views, in which case they might flee the "evil imperialist invaders." Heck, even without indoctrination, a reasonable person might not want to be near the fighting.

25 million refugees is obviously a bit much. The entire country won't pick up and move. But it would probably be many millions.

Looks like by 2007, the war in Iraq resulted in about 2 million[1] refugees, that's roughly 5% of the population.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_Iraq#Iraq_War_.282...

I get what you're saying, but I think South Korea would bear that cost.

I personally know people whose family was split by the arbitrary North/South border divide. For them, I think absorbing and reintegrating the population of the North Korean means more to them than just an economic burden.

Given that the South Korean government were elected democratically, you would hope that they would be prepared to represent the interests of the population.

That's one example, but time is against it. The generation that was split by the border divide/war is dying out. The younger generation doesn't really care about the DPRK.

I've been told the same thing about Ireland and Northern Ireland - the younger generation of Irish don't care at all about Northern Ireland.

With Brexit and the possibility of a return to a "hard" border that is rapidly changing I think (ex-Newry, NI, person here, now living in London). Though I'd say this hasn't gone away at all - there's plenty of "young people" taking part in this visceral display every year[1] and it to me at least, every time I go back it seems to be getting worse not better for at least the past 10 years.

There's been lots of talk that this won't happen but it's hard to see how there won't be at least some sort of checks reintroduced. This isn't too unusual, we had the Common Travel Area[2] since 20s well before Schengen but a return to any sort of militarized or "formal" border could easily kick it all off again in the border counties.

For an idea of the difficulty here's what crossing the border looks like the BBC did a little drone video where it's very easy to see how "leaky" it would be [3]. When I was growing up it looked more like this for the main routes [4].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xz35L-TBt9M

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Travel_Area

[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-northern-ireland-40104333/cr...

[4] https://i.pinimg.com/736x/23/a3/54/23a354665613f3aa695f0e5c3...

I am sure you're right and I hope the old saying "where there is a will, there is a way" is true, but the numbers paint a very bleak picture. Even if the will is there, as GP said:

> South Korea doesn't have the money or the economic poweress help the DPRK like West Germany did with East Germany.

Realistically, a merger has to make sense for the chebols/conglomerates, right?

Edit: also where do China PR and Japan stand on unification? I've read claims that neither is very fond of it?

It's worth pointing out that East Germany was one of the most (maybe the most) prosperous countries in the Soviet sphere, whereas North Korea is horrendously poor. To put some numbers on it, the East German GDP in 1989 was about $160 billion, with a population of about 16 million, so about $10,000 per capita. North Korea's GDP is about $12 billion with a population of about 25 million, for a per-capita GDP of about $600.

Interesting point, but how many families were split between North and South ? If it's only people near the border, I bet a dollar the other ones will quickly bail out of helping NKans if the problem seems too large.

4 years ago I read this excellent comment on reddit explaining the same topic. (https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1etaxd/north_kor...)

That guy did a much better job then I, extra credit.

Considering the cost of war as seen in the middle east, wouldn't it be cheaper to make some kind of deal where the West, SK and Japan dump massive amounts of resources into improving NK's economy, in exchange for the regime opening up? Would they refuse a trillion-dollar offer?

Please explain US interventions in South America and invasions in Middle America in light of "do to their own people as long as they are not a threat to anyone else".

What's the relevance of that? They're not claiming that this is a universal principle.

Looking through Google Maps, my guess is that they are better than the average non-developed country. They just don't have open trade, so their GDP per capita is very low comparing to reality. For example, they have two underground metro lines. For a city of only 2.5million, that's more than what other developing countries have.

I think they'll be really fine.

Sure, but they still don't have an electric nor an internet network. I also wonder what is their level of education.

so... we should wait until NK population shrinks? or should we wait until NK prepares its population for its demise?

whatever you're suggesting, it's about now or some future time...

I said this in the other thread (before someone maliciously took the thread down using the dupe command):

If we have to address this at the root, it's China, the pink elephant in the room. China, our biggest trading partner and also an authoritarian government (US is probably kicking itself allowing such a horrible government to be so powerful), is propping up this vassel state and prevent any progress made in the peninsula. If China wasn't propping them up, North Korean government would have already fell long time ago.

So what happens now? Do we just let China keep protecting its puppet until the puppet has shipped a nuclear bomb to a port in Los Angeles? I hope not. I hope the world takes action before then - I hope the world punishes China and North Korea

China wants us a lot more than that puppet. China has uses for that puppet which why it exists, but if that puppet starts attacking the US it is safe to assume China will lead the war against them.