General Question

Unofficial_Member's avatar

What would happen to North Korea if it's successfully taken over by US?

Asked by Unofficial_Member (5107points) June 10th, 2017

Note: This is not a question about whether or not US will do that or if it will be sucessful in doing so. This is a hypothetical question about the situation when NK have already been taken over by US.

It always puzzles me what will happen to NK after, lets say, they have already been defeated by US, all their leaders executed, and the whole NK region secured by US army. Some people believe that US will give the country of North Korea to South Korea so that they can merge in to one single true Korea country (provided that SK helped in the war and made agreement with US), others believe that US will annex NK as part of their own country. Some other people also believe that a liberated NK will ended up just like Iraq, independent but still under supervision.

What do you think? What will be the most likely scenario that will serve as the fate of the liberated NK? Who gets to own NK?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

25 Answers

ragingloli's avatar

China will not tolerate a shared border with the colonial aggressors.
WW3 would happen.

Darth_Algar's avatar

A clusterfuck, that’s what would happen.

Unofficial_Member's avatar

@ragingloli If I’m not mistaken the news said that China has declared that it will remain neutral had US (and its alliances) decided wage war against NK. Not sure with Russia, though. Personally, even if China didn’t say that I believe they won’t risk their own country and their international integrity with other countries just for the sake of NK. If you positively believe that WW3 will happen (and suppose that US and alliances win) who gets to own NK?

@Darth_Algar Then in the end, what country do you think that will most likely have the authority and ownership over NK?

jca's avatar

The US would probably make a plan for an interim democratic government (like “Occupied Japan”) and then after they have elections for a new leader the US would pull out and go home.

flutherother's avatar

The same as if it were unsuccessfully taken over by the US.

SavoirFaire's avatar

The official goal of the US is reunification with South Korea, and it would be strongly in the country’s interests to follow through on that goal if it had the opportunity. The US would have no reason to annex North Korea when they could just hand it over to one of their strongest allies and get essentially the same benefits with fewer responsibilities.

Since you’re asking us to ignore the China factor, one difference to consider between North Korea and Iraq is that Korea was divided by force, whereas Iraq was consolidated by force. South Koreans are generally in favor of reunification (though less enthusiastically than they once were), and what little data we have about North Koreans suggests that they probably are as well. This is in stark contrast to the people of Iraq, who don’t have nearly as strong of a tie to the idea of a unified nation.

Another consideration is that South Korea has been thinking about the logistics and economics of reunification for a long time. It is well known that Korean reunification would be harder than German reunification due to the greater economic disparity between North and South Korea as compared to East and West Germany. That said, South Korea could really use the type of labor that the North Koreans could provide, particularly given the quick technological and economic expansion of the North that reunification would necessitate. This isn’t to say that everything would go smoothly. Such things rarely do. But there are reasons to think it wouldn’t be as much of a disaster as Iraq.

ragingloli's avatar

Remember the Cuban Missile Crisis?

kritiper's avatar

Of course, the US would never do that. The police action in Korea is and has always been a United Nations concern. If the situation could be resolved, the two Koreas might reunite and be controlled by a centralized, democratic government.
I totally agree with @SavoirFaire .

stanleybmanly's avatar

Bravo @SavoirFaire I will add that China might well prefer a non nuclear unified Korea on its border to the volatile, psychotic, potentially unstable nightmare.

seawulf575's avatar

First off, the US would not “take over” N. Korea. If it came to war, and the US won, we would do like we always do…support a new government, one that would be less…bizarre. Aggressive. Look what happened with Iraq, Japan, Germany, etc.

Jaxk's avatar

Seems like an unlikely scenario but given the provisions of the question, reunification with S.Korea is the only logical outcome. We have no interest in taking territory there nor setting up a new government where one already exists.

flutherother's avatar

North Korea shouldn’t be allowed to develop nuclear weapons and the UN is quite clear about that. It is a big step to go from agreeing with this sentiment to talk of the US “owning” North Korea” and of “giving” it to worthy third parties. This is imperialist thinking from two centuries ago.

Response moderated
ragingloli's avatar

@flutherother
Why not?
Is it not the right of any country to defend itself by any means deemed necessary?

Jeruba's avatar

I can’t think of many worse ideas right now. That would be like asking the most dysfunctional family you know to take in a dozen foster children, half of whom have spent their school years in juvenile hall.

Both Koreas dream of reunification. The South wants a liberal democracy that respects human dignity; the North wants the South to join it in isolated “independence” under a supreme leader. The more we tried to interfere in and manage the situation, the less likely (it seems to me) that any workable and peaceful solution would be found. Acknowledging that we (together with Russia) devised the split, still, I think we should be tending to our own reunification right now and not thinking about orchestrating someone else’s.

To the North, we (the U.S.) are the enemy, and the South would have to eject us as a condition of reaching an agreement.

Here’s an analytical paper presented to the Brookings Institution in 2014 on the topic South and North Korea‚Äôs Views on the Unification of the Korean Peninsula and Inter-Korean Relations. Both Koreas have proposed unification plans featuring transitional stages. They don’t include inviting the U.S. to manage or oversee. A pertinent line: “it appears that North Korea has been pursuing a unification policy that aims to secure the survival of the North Korean regime” (page 16). The conclusion, which speaks about how both transitional plans need to be modified in order to align them, proposes no role for the U.S. Korea, north, south, and entire, belongs to itself.

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

The N.K. reporters will have to take a chill pill after their god falls from grace in handcuffs and taken to Guantanamo. Beef burgers will be called hamburgers again. Trade embargoes will be lifted.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
Jeruba's avatar

True, @janbb, we do have plenty else to worry about. But I happen to think that NK is the most dangerous country on the planet, and not taking them seriously enough could be the biggest mistake we ever made. Our scrappy, vindictive, ego-driven, know-nothing president could be just the one to make it.

flutherother's avatar

@ragingloli It is exactly that kind of thinking on the part of Kim Jong-un that created this situation in the first place. To be fair though it is similar thinking that has led the US to create military bases all over the planet.and to support unending military conflicts in half a dozen places at once.

Patty_Melt's avatar

Execute the leaders?
That is not our style.
Reunification is a goal, but highly unlikely.
I would like to see it listed on ebay, see who is willing to be high bidder.
The only way I see to end the north/south clashes would be if some country marched in, took both, refugee status the citizens, and take ownership.
I don’t think anybody wants the real estate badly enough to bother.

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

Kim Jong-un would could be given to N.K. custody like Saddam Hussein and tried. Might not work seeing they N.K. citizens think that he is a God or god. The North Koreans would probably be forced to sign a statement that Kim Jong-un is not a god. Like what happened in WWII with Japan’s emperor Hirohito .

filmfann's avatar

Reunification with South Korea is the only workable outcome, but it ain’t gonna happen.

stanleybmanly's avatar

You never know. The present setup in the North is strained as word leaks in of the comparative splendors elsewhere.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@SavoirFaire has an actual answer and a correct one. Regardless of how this plays out it’s likely going to be a mess. The longer this goes on the worse the outcome will probably be.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther