From the New York Times.

I'm glad to see LMB taking the right move towards strategic cooperation with ASEAN states. Both Korea and ASEAN states have a lot to earn from this mutually benefitial relationship by counteracting Chinese influence in Asia.

I think South Korean government is trying to balance the trade because South Korean businesses are increasingly leaning towards China, just like South Korea did to U.S in 1990s, South Korea is trying to diversify the trades in case China stop dealing with Korea.

But look at the bright sight, because China is also heavily investing at North Korea. It means China wants to be friendly with Korea, they even said Goguryeo was Korean Kingdom, I think Chinese government is starting to realize the importance of Korea.

China, Japan and Russia even US is betting on possible unification of two Koreas.
United Korea could become top middle power that every Superpower wannabe and current Superpower want be friendly with.

I was like "cool" before I read that.. why's everything got to do with countering China.. don't be so sinophobic.

I'm scared of the Korean presence in Hanoi. I went to a mall one day, and I probably saw more Koreans than Vietnamese. Some years ago I didnt' know who the Koreans were or nobody was simply paying attention to them, now they are just everywhere, suddenly also in Europe here. everywhere!!! crazy XD
My feelings about the Koreans are mixed.

If you feel that way, you didn't really understand the point of the editorial.

white people will always try to split people up it is for their gain
now, I don't know why, maybe because of korea's popularity they are trying to get korean into their side lol

Lee Myung Bak is East Asia's Nicolas Sarkozy. Big talk and grand gestures but nothing of real significance. Just bloated self importance really.

Haha, China will be much worse, trust me. You should embrace Koreans because Korea could significantly help Vietnam and as China rises, Vietnam will probably need Korea more than she thinks. Let's think multi-dimensionally, shall we?



This has nothing to do with white people. China has already demonstrated why its rise would be a threat to regional stability. Korea is simply finding new ways to ensure a better tomorrow.




Lee Myung Bak is the fu-king genius called CEO of Korea. Thx.

Yes, we're everywhere. xD
But seriously, there are way more Chinese and Indians in the world, and soon they're going to be rich enough to move out of their countries to Hanoi and Europe (basically anywhere they can make money).

where do you mean in Europe? (Koreans are very few overhere -still-)

Nicolas Sarkozy is douche bag Hungarian immigrant who betray his wife to marry French celebrity.
Lee Myung Bak is nothing like Sarkozy, he was humanitarian fighter before joining rank of top CEO and have been working hard to place South Korea into top rank.

You should have seen his achievement when he was Mayor of Seoul.
Lee is now most popular South Korean president ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFvO2BKhWqg

how terrible their own government betrayed it's people. this reminds me of what happened to japanese who went to hawaii to work the plantations and they were mistreated, japan did something about it and cared. if it was korea, they would have done nothing. there is the difference

Out of topic issue.
North Korea have been kidnapping not only South Koreans, but Japanese, Chinese, Romanian, American & Chinese etc..
South Korean government have been addressing kidnapping issues, and this is very reason why North Korea is still listed as rogue state.

Using North Korea to attempting to bash South Korea for justification of Japan's position is really lame.
This is typical Japanese trolling.

yes but only after much pressure as south koreans (the victims) gained inspiration from the japanese. the japanese government demanded they be returned right from the getgo.

and that's what korea should have done but that reunification thing might have something to do with it. to be fair, japan has no such reunification issues and don't care if they rock the boat. but still, korea should have demanded they be returned.

LoL, inspiration?
Did you know South Korean government have been demanding return of kidnapped victims since 1953?

You need to lot to learn my Japanis friend.
Do you honestly believe Japanese government was only govt that demanded return of kidnapped victims?

Wasn't six party meeting was all about reaching this goal as well?

^just because someone criticizes something about korea doesn't mean they aren't korean or are japanese. lol

that's a stereotype and some don't think that way. some praise and criticize where they see fit, sometimes it's correct, othertimes not but it's not always out of some underhanded agenda to just insult or demean though there are those who do.

Asians have much bigger fish to fry than to be in-fighting with each other. What is it with Santa Klaws Anti-china sentiment?

Chan-Ho, China's rise will be for the benefit for the Entire Continent of Asia and perhaps the non-western world. we finally see a dimninshing status of the Western Hegemony over the rest of the Planet. I'm sick of Western Central Banks controlling and economically terrorizing every single former sovereign country out there. As with Lee Myung Bak, he's a puppet like all the past presidents in the ROSK 50 year history. This guy is more of a tool than any president I have ever witnessed., maybe with the exception of Kim Dae Jung.


As for the Korean diaspora into the world, you have to blame Western powers for making Korea a broke @$$ country in the 1950's killing millions and displacing thousands. The economic tumultuity the Western IMF BIS have basically funnelled perhaps trillions of South Korea's potential earning ability into the hands of very wealthy overlords. As a result, Korea becomes a broke-back country and thousands every year look elsewhere for a better opportunity.
The presense in Vietnam, you speak of is not such a bad thing, since Vietnam and South Korea are allies. South Korea helps build Vietnam's infrastructure, and Vietnam in return trades valuable raw materials to a resource poor South Korea.

South Korea can help Vietnam and Vietnam can help North Korea. This is a win-win situation.


Vietnam is closer to North Korea than North Korea and South Korea.

I still find it strange how people love to bash China. China won't engulf Korea. China isn't out to destroy Korea. The more we fear China, the more xenophobic one becomes, and it feeds into the inferiority complex that Koreans seem to have since it is stuck between two definite world powers and possible third in Russia. And trust me, this inferiority complex exists. I see it both as a Korean and as a Canadian (Canada also seems to have an inferiority complex with respect to America).

In fact, from the looks of Korea's international trade, working with China has greatly benefited Korea. China is Korea's biggest trade partner.

Now, if we're going to bash China, why don't we bash Myanmar? It is extremely anti-democratic. Probably one of the worst human rights records in the world. The entire world has placed economic sanctions on the country, but yet...

Hyundai Heavy wins $1.4 bln Myanmar plant order



Isn't Korea, by working with the Than Shwe government in Myanmar, feeding political and social repression by doing business with Myanmar? Many ethnic groups in Myanmar are being systematically wiped out by this government, yet Korea is supporting that government? If you want a good recent movie fictionally documenting what is really going on in Myanmar, watch Rambo 4. Brilliant military sequences.

We as Koreans need to look in the mirror. Can we really look at ourselves in the mirror if we hate a country like China, who is democratizing in miniscule steps, but work with Myanmar?

Look at what happened to North Korea, Tibet and Ughiur? Remember when China invaded Vietnam and got their @$$ kicked during the pre-lude to the Vietnam war? What about what China is doing in Sudan and other African nations right now? I cant believe anyone can actually defend China on these issues.



Is this some kind of joke? What the Chinese government is doing in North Korea is the complete opposite of what Hyundai is doing in Myanamar.

Hyundai is creating jobs, helping the economy, building infrastructure and will most definitely become a positive influence within Myanamar. And even if Hyundai was "evil", they represent the interests of a single corporation rather than the Korean government or the Korean people.

The Chinese government on the other hand is responsible for much of North Korea's misery and suffering today. They are the ones who feed and arm Kim Jong Il's million man army. It is for this reason that Kim Jong Il cannot be toppled. Because of Chinese aid. Whenever the UN sanctions North Korea, China simply sends more food and oil. The Chinese government does this, even though they are fully aware that Kim's government regularly butchers and starves its own people. And they do this while stealing North Koreas mineral resources and mines via unfair treaties and bribery of corrupt North Korean officials.

The Chinese government sends thousands of North Korean refugees back to North Korea where they will at the least be sent to many many years of hard labor within a concentration camp, and at worst be executed and their entire family up to 3 generations locked up in re-education camps. China doesnt create jobs within North Korea or prop up the economy. China only aids one of the most brutal dictators in history simply to keep the communist buffer state alive. Hyundai is a positive influence. China is a negative influence.

What about that? As long as China doesn't do that with South Korea, who the hell cares what China did in 1979? You actually believe China will do anything like that to South Korea?

Some (not even most, but just some) people here amaze me. Do you really believe that China is going to just invade every single Asian country to create some grand empire under a red and yellow flag? That's conspiracy theory and paranoia at its finest. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but the inter-connectedness of our global economies and collaboration of mutual institutions helps to prevent the pre-21st century imperialism that we saw.

China did many wrongs in the pre-Deng era. I'm not excusing that, but that was an entirely different era. By your logic, we should HATE the Japanese and Americans. I mean, American soldiers did rape many Korean women, initiated many civilian massacres in Korea in the name of fighting communism, and used napalm to burn entire villages of innocent men, women, and children. I don't even have to go into what Japan did to Korea in the last century. Do you similarly hate Japan and America too?

Don't let history from hundreds of years ago or even several decades ago distort your image of a country today. Different leaders, different mind-set, and different era.




If you understand the political economy of Myanmar, you would understand that it is not different. All aspects of life in Myanmar are controlled by the military dictatorship of Than Shwe. Any business you do in Myanmar fills up Than Shwe's pockets full of money. Building oil/gas platforms in Myanmar and any other related technologies will result in money flowing into Naypyidaw's government bank accounts.

Any business activity in Myanmar is aiding and abetting the regime there.

Personally, I don't care about it, because I can see the economic reality of such things. I'm a realist. On the other hand, you're more idealistic, but you pick and choose your idealism. So when China gives hand-outs to North Korea or does business in Myanmar, it's bad. But when Korea gives hand-outs to North Korea or does business in Myanmar, there is no mention of it.

As Korea grows and becomes even more powerful, and it will, Korea will take similar actions as China. Why? Because Korea is a sovereign country with the aim to improving its own interests. Even if that means doing business with vile dictators or shady CEOs.




No. The fact that Hyundai is allowed to do business in Myanmar shows South Korea is allowing it. Other countries, such as America and Canada, have economic sanctions on Myanmar. No American or Canadian companies are allowed to do business with Myanmar except those companies that had prior arrangements before the sanctions were put into effect.

The fact that Hyundai is allowed to do new business proves that South Korea is okay with doing business with Myanmar.

Personally, I support Hyundai's businesses and its operations in Myanmar. But, for arguments-sake, you shouldn't. It is aiding and abetting the suffering of millions of refugees within the country.




What if South Korean aid to North Korea? What of American and Japanese aid to North Korea? Is that suddenly not prolonging the misery and suffering of the North Korean people?

Sure, China does have a hand in North Korea. No question about it, but ONLY because the US has a garrison in South Korea. I guarantee you that if South Korea weren't so American-centric, then China would have no reason to have any influence in North Korea. America isn't in South Korea to help protect the country. America is there to keep tabs on China's rise. Now, if you support that, then fine. Personally, I don't. I don't like the fact that America has full operational control of the Korean army. Neither does China.




I don't like the treatment of the North Korean people within North Korea either. Why not just invade and get rid of the Kim regime? Instead of negotiating with them, like Korea, Japan, and America are doing, just do what America did to Afghanistan and Iraq.

But what country likes refugees in its own country? Even America doesn't like Mexican refugees fleeing from the terrible economic and social situation in Mexico. Cuban refugees are made to go back to Cuba too.

Would people in South Korea suddenly like it if thousands (theoretically, millions) of North Korea refugees fled to the already overcrowded South Korea? I doubt it.

In any case, the remedy is this: get the US out of East Asia. Let South Korea dictate its own policies irrespective of American influence. China will tend have no reason to have to aid the Kim regime, since they will have no fear of American attempts to reinforce its hegemony in East Asia. Anyone who supports American military bases and American control of the South Korean military (or any control at all of military affairs) hates Korean sovereignty. I 100% support Korean sovereignty and I support China's peaceful rise.

^ I may attempt to rebuttel your above arguments at a later time... but in my opinion, you seem to have a naive perspective of the geopolitical reality in East Asia.

North Korean's current situation is not China's fault, it is the sole responsibility of the Stalinist Regime and the Kim's dynasty. Actually, North Korea doesn't even take China's advice serious and is determining its course of action autonomously. Perhaps that is why it is so crazy and secluded, the very antithesis of "Socialism with Chinese characteristics".

Tibet and Uyghur's land are rightful Chinese territory and has been that way since the Qing Dynasty. This view is share by the vast majority of the international community, no question ask. Also, China never invaded Vietnam before 1979. The Sino-Vietnamese War took place after when Vietnam decided to invade the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia and topple the Pol Pot Regime.

What China is doing in Sudan and other African nations is of no comparison to what the Europeans had already done. Besides, Africa's current state is probably even more terrible than that of North Korea without the Chinese. China's investment and interventions can only boost needed revenue and revitalization after centuries and concurrent destruction and chaos.

^ Are you Chinese? I thought you're Vietnamese.

Okay, why does it matter? 0.0

My point is that some people keep griping about how North Korea's current state is all about the Chinese when in actuality it is all about the North Korean government's fault. I would love to see North Korean's imminent collapse but we cannot really solve anything if we don't know the source of the problem. Which in this case, is the totalitarian dictatorship of Kim and his henchmen.

Because my views are different? Sure.

I'm someone who wants the peaceful rise of both China and Korea.

It seems that many on here don't want that. They seem to want hate between China and Korea. There are many on here want the disintegration of China, as if Korea will somehow benefit from it. And sure, there are many on the China board that want the disintegration of Korea, as if China will somehow benefit from it.

State your rebuttal if you want, but my views are the realist point of view of East Asian geo-politics. I used to be idealistic, but that doesn't fit into the reality of the situation on the ground. Like it or not, China and Korea are going to become closer and closer, and they'll rely on each other more and more. The faster the Americans leave and the faster Korea and China can develop further relationships, the faster China will see that a reunification between the North and the South is a good thing for everyone, including them.

I don't want Korea to be on the WRONG side of Asia when China becomes the biggest economic power in the world by 2030, as well as having as advanced technology - if not more advanced - than America. Once China has the ability to throw it's muscle around decades from now, I don't want Korea playing victim. I want Korea playing friend.

If that's naive, I don't care. They are my uncompromisable views.

Actually it does matter.
Because China is trying to prevent North Korean regime from collapsing.
According to Chinese media, Chinese government doesn't want to see North Korea to collapse because it will cause huge influx of North Korean refugee and as well as they don't want to see Pro-US government to their boarder.
That was their excuses.

Several years ago the Korean government arrested senior managers in Daewoo International for illegally exporting weapons to Myanmar. This resulted in Myanmar cancelling the contract with Daewoo International then granting it to China. South Korea doesn't have economic sanctions on Myanmar, but it does have weapons sanctions on the country.






Most Americans and Japanese don't believe that Korea should become a part of their empire. Many Chinese do. As they believe Tibet and East Turkestan are legitimate parts of their empire. And this imperialistic ideology is on the rise in China in the name of Chinese nationalism, and it's an essential trend to consider in understanding the "peaceful" rise of China.

China and Vietnam were part of the Second World and staunch communist allies during the Vietnam War, but nonetheless China invaded Vietnam after the Sino-Soviet split. If you assume that Asian countries will have to choose sides in the future when China becomes powerful enough to start bullying its neighbours, why do you suppose that China's rise will be peaceful? Why should Asian countries have to choose sides if China will not use its muscle around? Why should Korea become a victim if China doesn't use aggression?

In the end, even from your uncompromisable view, China's peaceful rise is not a given - it's conditional. Conditional on which "side" you choose. Then the question that should be asked is what could we benefit from taking China's side, and if China's rise to becoming the most powerful economy really does benefit Korea.

You may believe that people such as myself who don't trust China and believe it to be a rising threat to be paranoid, but from OUR perspective you are naive and unrealsitic, not to mention irrational in hoping for America to leave the region entirely for a "better future". China today is militarily overwhelmed by America and its allies, and the day when China is able to overcome those odds is a different era in itself, and it's simply naive to believe that a rising power indoctrinating its people with imperialistic ideology will be peaceful in that different era.

BTW, in case you didn't know, the evil taint of China's image in Korea doesn't even go back a decade.

Yes, but how on Earth would the Chinese achieve this goal? North Korea doesn't even listen to China. They may listen to advices and counsels but it is just mere lip service. North Korea is basically a rouge state. Even if the the North Korean regime does collapse in some twist of fate soon or eventually in about 2060, China could do no more than watch and fortify Manchuria's border. And as for giving aids to North Korea, China is not the only one to do so. The United States, South Korea, and possibly Russia have all been major contributors just as much or even more in some cases. Are they trying to prevent the North Korean regime from collapsing as well?

Besides, South Korea doesn't even want to merge with its accursed and ragged Northern counterpart. The South Korean government hopes for eventual unification but as of right now, it would be unwise economically. Until the North can shape its economy up, I'm fairly sure that South Korea would not wish for its collapse anytime soon. In fact contrary to popular beliefs, the South Korean government would want North Korea to be healthy and strong as long as it doesn't infringe on the safety of others at least.

China doesnt need an excuse to do business with North Korea

a lot of people like to say half the story, its because of China the regime is still in place.

its ALSO because of China that NK was not overrun by America and SK. that is a pretty big debt for NK and so far everyone complains about China trading or giving things to them.

it is not 1900s, China does not care if pro american gov. was beside them. there is no need for a buffer state anymore.

The problem with China is that its leaders are inscrutable, and besides the task of making China "great again," they don't seem to agree on what they want. If I were to judge based on current opinions among Chinese citizens and intellectuals, the notion that China would take over Korea to complete its empire is ludicrous. But sea changes of opinion in China are not uncommon - the switch from dogmatic Communism to full-throttle Capitalism being a recent example. As with any country, there are hawks and doves. China's doves fully believe that they could accomplish a "peaceful rise" and develop China into a stable, modern country. China's hawks fully believe that they must prepare for war and instability in order to secure China's interests. The two are often at odds in foreign policy, leading to a "two-face" or "good cop, bad cop" image in which China's civilian elites are cast as the "peacemakers" and its military and security elites are cast as the "warmongers."

Who triumphs, between these two forces, is a product of China's general well-being, which is tied to its economy. Yet economics, being an art that even the West has not mastered, is itself unpredictable. This is what makes China worrying.

China's war path has always been Viet Nam. It strengthens in arms only to take over the lucrative oil seas of the south and also to keep parts like Tibet from breaking away. It still has a lot of the same gang problems and war lords dating back since ancient time. But I think China's corruption is less than Viet Nam currently.

And from many points of view, that is still a terrible thing. As I've stated before, the government of Myanmar under Than Shwe runs all aspects of the country - economic, financial, commercial, media, social, etc... . Any business you do in Myanmar will aid the dictatorship.

Of course, the point of this isn't to show how bad South Korea is. Me? I don't care who South Korea does business with, as long as Korean domestic interests are promoted and catered to. My contention is that many people will blast China for economically supporting North Korea, because China is aiding and abetting Kim Jung-Il, but when South Korea does the same - i.e. economically supporting North Korea and even Myanmar - the very same people stay silent or ignore me, because they know they've trapped themselves logically.




Sorry, who are "many Chinese"? Do you mean politicians? If you mean average Chinese citizens, so what? Those citizens don't influence the course of events that go on in the CCP meetings. Citizens are a lot more emotional than politicians. Average citizens of any country are a lot more polarized than most politicians and they speak out of emotion instead of logic.

I don't think China actually wants Korea as part of it's territorial empire. I think that's absolutely absurd. What evidence do you have that suggests the current Chinese government actually wants to seize control of the Korean peninsula and consolidate it within the People's Republic of China? If they really wanted to, I'm surprised as to why they haven't seized North Korea yet, especially if they want Korea to become a part of their empire. Why not have 1500 missiles pointed at South Korea like China does against the province of Taiwan? (And before anyone complains as to why I refer to Taiwan as a province, even South Korea doesn't recognize Taiwanese independence, so you have no logical basis to criticize me). Chinese actions don't suggest they want to incorporate Korea into its "empire" at all.

And if you're going to look at it historically, yes, China has attempted to make Korea a part of its empire. But so has Japan, and quite brutally, as you already know. America hasn't even been the most hospitable ally either, approving many massacres and actions contrary to Korean sovereignty in the name of fighting communism and buttressing its own defences against the imaginery communist threat.



And? Iraq and America were staunch allies in the 1980s, yet America invaded Iraq twice in the last couple of decades. Does that suddenly make America untrustworthy to you too? Imperial Japan brutally treated Koreans and was our enemy during WWII, then we became friends, but Japan still wants to seize Dokdo Island from Korea. Does that mean Japan is sneaky and is evil too?



I want Korea to always be on the side of the strongest. There will come a time in the next few decades when siding with America won't be in Korea's interests, because American power will be waning. I don't want Korea to be in a position where it is siding with a declining power. I want Korea to always be with the strongest for its own benefit. And when there comes a time, hypothetically, that India surpasses China, then I want Korea to align itself with India instead of China.

And if you are so worried about Chinese aggression, let's just compare the number of overseas military bases China has and compare it to the number of overseas military bases America has. If that doesn't convince you, then calculate the number of military conflicts - official and unofficial declarations of war - that America has participated and initiated and compare them to China. One side is CLEARLY more belligerent and aggressive than the other. Let me give you a hint: it isn't China.

No Asian countries will be forced to do anything. China won't bully it's neighbours. It's bullying stage is over, except for territorial disputes that it has. But that is hardly bullying as many countries have territorial disputes with others. It's how you deal with it that shows whether or not you are aggressive, and so far, China hasn't used military force to stamp its mark on territorial disputes (i.e. I don't see the Chinese military currently "invading" the Spratly Islands).



Is it conditional? As I said, Korea can continue to side with America. It won't affect my love of Korea nor will it affect the fact that I'm of Korean-descent. I just don't want Korea to be siding with declining power. Let me give you a simple example. Let's say you are a runner and you want to improve. Does it help to train with people who are slower than you or slowly coming down to your level, or is it better to train with people who are faster than you and improving even more? Another example. Would Kim Yuna be as good if she stayed in Korea and trained with her Korean coaches or did training with a former Olympic medallist (Brian Orser) help her? I know these are very, very simple examples, but I state them for a reason.

I think Korea has far more potential than it currently seems to have. I think Korea can be a top 5 power in the world, economically, militarily, technologically, scientifically, etc... . When you want to reach the top, you don't side with weaklings. Even China's rise to economic power wasn't solely due to itself. It was the fact that Deng opened Chinese markets up to foreign investment in the late 70s and especially due to its economic alignment with its former enemy and the world's premier economic power, the United States.

If China had solely relied on, say, the USSR and its communist allies, China would NOT be a world power at all. It would still be a middle power, and we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.

My point is, China will have more to offer Korea in the next 30 years than America will, and vice versa. When you align with the top, you can adopt what the top has.



I state paranoid, because the Chinese aren't out to get the Koreans or the destroy the country. I don't understand what threats you are referring to. Are Chinese troops awaiting orders to invade South Korea? Are Chinese ballistic missile submarines operating in Korean waters, waiting to nuke Seoul? Are Chinese businesses hoping to buy out all Korean-owned conglomerates and look to collapse the Korean economy?

The threats you are referring to were of a different era, under a different regime. As I've stated MANY times before on here and on the Chinese board, the Mao era of China and the eras before that are totally different from the post-Deng era.

Why is it irrational for me to want America to give control of Korea's military back to Korea? Why is it irrational of me to think that Korea has the ability and know-how to defend itself? Why? Do you doubt Korean capabilities? I don't. I think Korea is a very capable country that can defend itself without any foreign influence.




Militarly overwhelmed by America and its allies? Sound pretty belligerent and aggressive to me. And if you mean nationalism, instead of imperialistic ideology, most countries are nationalistic, especially Korea and America. The Chinese government isn't indoctrinating it's people to support invasions of countries around it. Again, Taiwan is different, because it's a province of Taiwan and NOT a country. The Chinese government isn't indoctrinating its people to preempt warfare against overseas countries, like for example Iraq. The Chinese government isn't indoctrinating its people to prepare for a War on Terror against an Axis of Evil.


If you still feel that China is out to rule the world and to enslave billions of people on earth, that's your belief. I respect it, but I disagre with it.

I'd like to commend you on a well written post and I have to say I respect your perspective.

Let me share my perspective. Let us agree that every country is after its geopolitical interest. However, at the same time, the age of ruthlessly pursuing a country's interest is over. Even the United States needs to carry out its interests with a mind on the international community and moral principle.

Let's look at China's current situation:

1. China is without a doubt an imperial power. It's greatest fear is instability.
2. China has an insecurity complex because of its history. This creates a need for Chinese to "prove" something to the world. You could say the same for Koreans.
3. If everything progresses the way it is now, China is on the path to superpower status, and as history has shown, power corrupts.

Now let's look at China's policy towards Korea thus far:

1. China has been distorting Korean history and occupies parts of Manchuria that have had long historical ties with Korea, while also disrespecting Korea's cultural legacy in the region.
2. China supports North Korea which I consider to be the greatest crime against Koreans. It doesn't matter if South Korea also supports North Korea, the intent is completely different.

From my perspective, if we were just to assume that China was after its own geopolitical interests, its pretty clear they run counter to Korea's, only because they are in a position to take advantage of their upper-hand position. And why wouldn't they? Thus, Koreans can't just let opportunities slip into Chinese hands. The future stability of East Asia depends on balance, in order to ensure that power isn't too far tipped to one nation. Those with power will always use it to get more and in most cases, it will be at the expense of others.

For me, I want to embrace China's rise, but until they respect Korean history and sovereignty, deal with the North Korean issue, and accept growing Korean influence in the region, they will be a threat to Korea's interests now and increasingly in the future.

Thanks. I've always considered you among the best on Asia Finest. Others may disagree, but I feel you are a great moderate voice among the loud nationalism that can be prevalent on this site.



Let's analyze your 3 situations one by one.

1. I think China's internal instability, which does exist, and what people feel is China's attempt at imperial power are two different things. As you state, later in your post, about Korea's historical ties to Manchuria not being acknowledged, I feel many don't acknowledge China's historical ties to Tibet and Xinjiang. The only difference between the two is that Mao, who I despise, actually went out and retook what was once China's. Korea hasn't done the same.

I don't think China is an imperial power anymore. I fully acknowledge and admit to the fact that Mao was an obvious imperialist. He was bent on conquering. But since then, what has modern, post-Mao China done that was imperialist? I'm not excusing any of China's actions. I'm just wondering what those actions are.

2. Indeed. I think European/American/Japanese imperialist history has fueled the desire of Koreans and Chinese to make themselves better than they were historically when they were constant victims of bullying.

3. Power does corrupt, but I would rather Korea on the side of that eventual superpower than being against it. As I stated, if China starts to decline, then I want Korea to realign itself with others. The only reason why I'm pushing the China angle so much is that I know, for a fact, that China will be the greatest economic and military power in the world in a few decades. Wouldn't you rather be their side than against them, seeing the close proximity between Korea and China?



With the above claims, I'm not going to dispute them with you. They are probably correct. It just seems that both China and Japan is distorting the Korean cultural legacy.

I'll state my hypothesis one more time. Again, it's just my hypothesis. I feel that if Korea were to not have an American military garrison in the country, then I feel that China will have more impetus to not support the Kim regime in North Korea. Why would China need a buffer zone if South Korea were it's own sovereign country with control of its own military? I'm not saying China will just go about and give up support from North Korea the day after America leaves, but I think it would grease the wheels that would lead to an easier path to reunification that will sit well on both sides; i.e., for Korea and for China.

As has been seen in recent years, North Korea is actually an embarrassment for China. China wants North Korea to stop with its nuclear weapons research, but North Korea does it anyway. What does North Korea really do for China anyway? What incentive for China is there to continuously support an out-of-control, ruthless regime anyway that does nothing but cost it precious rice and oil? Nothing, except for the fact that North Korea is a buffer zone between it and the American military in South Korea.

You get the Americans to leave, and you'll most likely get China to stop support the Kim regime, and then we can see a collapse of that idiotic government and higher probability for a peaceful reunification on South Korea's terms. There is nothing I want more for Korea than that.



The future stability of East Asia depends solely on relations between China, Korea, and Japan. As long as there is conflict between them, there won't be stability. You can't have stability in the region if three of the top 10 powers in the world are trying to out-do each other and gain the upper hand. I would much rather the three countries pursue a common policy that benefits all three countries and promotes all their interests against the interests of America, the EU, and India.

The more we try to back China into a corner, the more aggressive it will be. The more we try to pigeon-hole China as an imperial power, the higher the chances it will actually turn into one.



Dealing with the North Korea issue automatically implies that China respects Korean sovereignty and influence in the region. Getting the US military off Korean land will be a gigantic first step. If Korea doesn't eventually do that, China has no choice but to support an evil dictatorship in the North as a buffer zone.

Xinjiang and Xizang are definitely Chinese but of all the Chinese i've delt with, I've never (then again i don't go on crazy racist forums (besides this one lol))

heard of anyone claiming Korea should be a part of Chinese empire.. infact one of the more prominant CCP slogans is against

imperialism.

Keep it up Chan-ho and CCL1, this has been a very interesting thread. I often have a hard time trying to second guess where the cards will fall in East Asia geo-politically in the coming decades.

There are a lot of variables but I for one think that China's rise to the top is as inevitable as people might think. Chinese stabiltiy is not a given, and if the Chinese economy overheats they'll be in trouble. For now, the recession has been very good to China, they are growing at an acceptable level and they are holding the US by the balls economically. The thing is, can it keep the Chinese middle classes happy if current growth cannot be maintained? (I'm talking maybe 5-6 years down the line).
Also,we are reaching peak oil, and a post peak era oil means basic foodstuffs will start to get incredibly expensive for all nations, both East and West. With East Asian nations scrambling to secure garunteed food supplies at stable prices for the coming decades it could get interesting.

Whatever the outcome, I think Korea is very well positioned. It's in bed with the US but isn't afraid to play ball with China's advances.It also has signed a free trade Agreement with the EU (pending ratification by Korea I believe?) which I think was a very shrewd move. Basically I believe it has played a blinder so far and it's holding all the cards, pretty impressive for a medium sized power.

Here is an article that sheds some light on my concerns:



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My point being that your argument makes many assumptions that China will wield its superpower to the benefit of all East-Asian countries including Korea, but realistically speaking, what is China's incentive to help its neighbors when it wields such power? If China has the power to distribute geopolitical opportunities to itself, what is its incentive to share? If China has the power to pursue its interests at the expense of Korea's, in a situation where Korea is powerless to stop the country because of its over-dependence on it, what would stop China from doing so?

We are both making assumptions here. You assume that China will be a benevolent superpower that will act in the interests of all East-Asian states, whereas, I see China as a growing superpower who seeks to "peacefully rise" because it is in their "geopolitical" interests to do so. Considering human political behavior and also actions that have been repeated by imperial powers throughout history, I think my assumptions are not only more realistic, but more accurate to the geopolitical reality of China's rise. As China becomes more powerful, there will only be more incentive use such power for its own interests, not the interests of others.

Thus, the only way to mitigate the inherent risks of China's rise is to look for sources of balance:

1. Strengthen Korea's military alliances or co-operative pacts with Japan, the US, India, Russia and ASEAN.
2. Further integration of all Asian economies such as China, Korea, Japan, India, Russia and ASEAN.
3. Increasing Korea's own influence and geopolitical power in the region.
4. Opening up North Korea, strengthening its economic, cultural, social and political power in the region and leverage Korean influence in Japan, North-East China, and Mongolia through greater economic, cultural, social and political integration of North-East Asia.

By taking such measures, a strong network of interdependent alliances will form allowing Korea to leverage these relationships to ensure that Korea's geopolitical interests are also served and are not completely overpowered by a superpower China right next door. Korea needs to find ways to protect itself - there must be a price to pay for going against Korean interests - and also capitalize on opportunities that promote Korea's interests in what is a dynamically evolving East-Asia. Thus, Korea must seek ways to increase its own political power, while micromanaging the inevitable multi-polar powers of the region to maximize its own benefit. Luckily for Korea, many of China's neighbors and even ethnic groups within China itself share common interests and are equally wary of a hegemonic China.

Personally, I think the most important steps for Korea to achieve in the next 20 years are:

1. Develop North Korea economically, socially, and politically.
2. Sign a comprehensive and interdependent alliance with Japan. (possibly even political integration)
3. Continue its close and largely successful relationship with the US while continuing to seek greater interdependence.
4. Forge alliances with India, the ASEAN nations and Russia.
5. Continue to pursue regional leadership economically, culturally and politically. Take every possible measure to prevent being over-taken by China in Korea's core competencies.
6. Seek further integration with China economically, culturally, and, to en extent, politically.
7. Seek ways to wield tremendous influence in North-East China, Mongolia and Russian Far-East, a region where Korea has had long and intimate historical ties with, by rekindling those common-bonds and sense of brotherhood (not quite pan-altaicism, but that is a concept that can help Korea leverage influence in the region). The opening up of North Korea would be a tremendous catalyst to achieving this goal.
8. Utilizing oversea Koreans and the opportunities they may provide in Japan, North America, China, Russia and ASEAN states.

If a unified Korea and Japan united, that political identity would be powerful enough to fend off any aggressive Chinese policies, while strong ties to the US, ASEAN states, Russia and India would ensure China is kept in check long-term. I believe this balanced approach will ensure EAST ASIA'S PEACEFUL RISE and that the distribution of East-Asian opportunities would be more equal among all parties in the region (rather than China wielding the power to take most of the benefits should it seek to do so).


It's funny... while I'm typing my strategy here, I'm reminded about the drama Jumong. I am reminded about the history of Korea because balancing of regional powers is a primary activity Korea has used to survive throughout most of its history. Hopefully, after centuries of practice, Koreans have learned a thing or two and will able to finally balance competing powers to its own benefit. This is Korea's destiny. lol.

What incentive does China have? The same incentive that all powers have in forming key alliances and being friendly with key nations -- it doesn't want that country to be on the other side.

Again, I hope you don't underestimate the ability of Korea. In the future, Korea will be even stronger and more globally influential than it currently is now. China will NOT want to mess around with Korea in the future. Korea will not be powerless in the situation that you presented. At the same time, China will be powerful, and it will not be in Korea's interests to underestimate the power that China will wield. It will be beneficial for both sides to work with each other, since they share close proximity.

I'm going to continue to repeat this again and again, but I do not want Korea to be on the wrong side of geopolitics when China overtakes the US as the premier power in the world.

Everything people say about fearing China, I see the EXACT same thing happening with Korea and the US. I've seen both the good that the US provides, but I also see the bad. People assume that, due to China's domestic interests, Korea will be swamped and destroyed, yet those same people fail to see that America has it's own domestic interests which FREQUENTLY are not compatible with Korean domestic interests.

I'll repeat again. American bases aren't present in Korea to protect Korea. We would like to feel that way, because it gives us Koreans sentimental feelings and all. America is doing it for themselves to spread its interests in Asia and so that if a war were to ever occur between North Korea and/or China and the United States, the battlefield will be South Korea and Japan and not continental USA.




And it's interests will be to have extremely friendly relations with a united Korea once the Americans are gone.

It will NOT be in the domestic interests of Korea to continue having American military bases on its soil. Korea can defend itself. China will not support a war against South Korea anymore. The ideological, global communist brotherhood era is over. Economic interests and geopolitical stability are primary concerns to China and it will not be in China's interests to see any harm done to South Korea, particularly due to the close economic relationship they share.



I'm wondering. Why do people constantly refer to balancing out China's influence, yet when the Americans ran amok in Asia (assassinating leaders, installing their cronies, manufacturing a war in Vietnam, and threatening the sovereignty of countries like Japan), no one seems to care about balancing out American influence? Why is that? Are we blind to America and only see China as threats? Why? Because America has only been doing it for the past few decades, while the Chinese have had a longer and bloodier history with Korea?

My number one concern in Asia is Korea's interests. Not China's and especially not America's.

And refering to your four sources of balance, #3 and #4 redundant.

#1 leaves out China, again. How can you have military alliances and pacts and leave out China? It's like someone asking you, "I'll offer you a $1 million grand prize or three $1 hotdogs" and you choose to take the hot dogs. It's illogical to leave out China, especially if you want to mitigate the risk between China and Korea. How would you possibly promote Korea's influence in the region without having a military alliance or cooperative pact with China? Don't you want Korea to be friends with China?

Your #2 is wonderful. Integration of the Asian economies is crucial.



And who is to say that a resurgent India won't exploit Korea? Who is to say that the US won't further exploit Korea? We're pointing fingers at the China, but should we be blind to the other countries?

Korea has a great future ahead of it, but it won't happen if we keep our distance from China. Korea didn't become powerful on its own. Park Chung Hee opened the country up to Japanese investment, and the Japan was the colonialist power that treated Korea brutally. Much worse than China ever did. Now look at Korea. It's strong and growing, and it still maintains part of its sovereignty (that part that isn't given up to the US military).

There will come a time when Korea will have to do the same to China. And while people assume that China will just rape Korea of everything it has, just remember that people assumed the same thing in the 1960s with President Park. China's interests won't be to exploit Korea or plunder it. On the contrary, China will want a strong and stable relationship with a strong and stable Korea.



I politely disagree with about half of the things you mentioned. Instead of trying to constantly fight China that will probably end up eating precious Korean resources, why not to try to be friends with it?

I especially disagree with #3. Not the fact that Korea has relations with the US, but I see the US military presence in Korea as a barrier to reunification. Have military and economic relations with the US, but discard the bases.



A unified Japan and Korea can fend off aggressive American policies too, so I agree with such a unification. A strong Japanese-Korean-Chinese alliance could ensure peace in East Asia.

What you are proposing and seem to want is a perpetual cold war in East Asia, where China/Russia will constantly have to fight US/India/Japan, with Korea stuck in the middle. I want TRUE peace in the East. I want Japan-Korea-China allied. That is true peace. That is true balance in East Asia. That will ensure a peaceful rise of each of those three countries.




I want Koreans to be at the top of the world too. I want Korea to decide for itself what to do, not at the whims of the US military.



Chan-ho, you and I ultimately want the same thing. We both want to see a strong and peaceful Korea that can wield a lot of influence globally. The main difference is that you see no stake that China has in this. What you are asking for is literally impossible, which is why I think you are more idealistic. You are essentially wanting Korea to somehow grow without any ties to the soon-to-be strongest country in the world. The funny thing is, you want peace in East Asia, but what you are arguing for is a cold war in East Asia between Korea and China. You want bad relations with China, it seems. You want to exclude China from almost everything, yet you are eager to turn to India, who is as unstable (or worse) than China right now. You want to turn to Japan, yet Japan has recently elected a Prime Minister that wants CLOSER relations with China and LESS relations with the US. I fail to see your logic. You want peace with China, but you seem to not want peace with China at the same time.

You continue to want to invest in a relationship with the US, the same US that invaded Vietnam due to false pretenses (the fake Gulf of Tonkin incident, read about the declassified documents), the same US that invaded Iraq under false pretenses (non-existent WMDs and non-existent connections to Al-Qaida), the same US that carried out masscares in Korea during the Korean War (why is NOBODY addressing this on Asia Finest?), the same US that carried out countless assassinations in Asia, Central America, and Africa to have its cronies in power, and the same US that forces developing countries to privatize their industries so that American businesses can compete better in those countries or even buy up those privatized companies.

China isn't innocent, I constantly admit that, but I think America is even guiltier. They are a threat to Korean national security in the long run.

Remember, it isn't China that has undermined South Korean sovereignty. It is America, as America commands the South Korean military.

I think we should just agree to disagree, because we want the same thing, but we each advocate entirely different approaches. Neither of us will compromise and neither of us will back down in our logic.

lol, chan-ho wins this arguement by default.

this guy is a moron living in his own world.

Many also acknowledge the difference between doing business with a dictatorship and supplying weapons to a dictatorship. And those that you speak of haven't trapped themselves logically. China, not South Korea, provides the North Korean military with the essential supplies and is its primary sponsor, and since the nuclear standoff South Korea's economic support has significantly faltered whereas Chinese economic support has rockected. If they were silent, they simply didn't know the details.





They are college-educated citizens and ex-military. It's rather surprising that the uneducated workers from the rural areas are far less nationalistic and more hospitable towards Koreans compared to their urban and educated counterparts. I've been saying this a lot in this forum - the very existense of China is flawed and is an imperialistic creation, and the Chinese historical view forged to justify that creation reinforces imperialistic ideology inherent in Chinese nationalism. When I said that, I haven't been pulling that out of my @$$. It's a common line of thought among many Chinese which goes as, "hey we got Tibet and East Turkestan, why not Mongolia and Korea too?".

If you know the slightest detail of modern history and geopolitical conditions of this region, you shouldn't be too suprised why China couldn't seize North Korea. During the Korean War and the Cold War, there was always the Soviet Union keeping China in check. This balance of power collapsed along with the Soviet Union, and without support from the Civilized World(ROK, US, Japan, etc) as the result of its nuclear ambitions, North Korea is more vulnerable than ever, and China is, as we see today, taking maximum advantage over this to the detriment of Korean national interests. China's economic colonization of North Korea is one among many things that have turned Korean minds away from China in the last several years, realizing that in the long-term China has to be kept on a leash for it to take on a productive relationship with Korea.





.

Now I realize that you have a strong anti-American/pro-Chinese bias, which I must admit was quite common in the earlier Roh-era. This view pretty much died down when China began to show its true nature to the Korean people, and it's regretful that you didn't have a chance to share this awakening collective experience and is still too close-minded and ignorant to share it.

Anyways, to get to the point, you're ignoring one very important fact. The US is powerful and has the capability to project its military-backed influence, whereas China still lacks that capability. However, in places such as the Spratlys islands where it can exert military-backed influence, China used military aggression to further its interests multiple times. And you're saying China isn't bullying around only because you're very unaware of what China has been doing to Korea during the last several years. Just to mention a few, China has been threatening South Korean politicians and even dared to mock South Korea's economic strategic policies. Still, South Korea is among the ones better off. As for the weaker states neighboring China, they are victimized by reckless border incursions, provocations over maritime border disputes and military aggression against civilians. All that in the last few years.

Strictly from a Korean point of view, many, if not most, view China as a grave potential threat that lacks the moral integrity to refrain from starting an imperialistic conquest on vulnerable states, particularly North Korea. You may call it paranoid, but so far China has been making a lot of reckless cultural/historical claims on Korea and most disturbingly it began indoctrinating the general population with an imperialistic ideology disguised as nationalism. These extremist lines of thought lead Japan to imperialistic conquest when it achieved military supremacy over other powers in the region, something that China hasn't achieved yet, and probably never will. Even if the US is on the decline and someday China overpowers the US, I doubt the US will be completely powerless as being unable to provide military support for Korea and other allies in East Asia to successfully keep China in check. And if not for the US, there's still other powers with the potential to cooperate with Korea, such as Russia, India, or perhaps even the EU or ASEAN. As for China however, I see very little potential for any long-term mutually benefitial relationship with Korea in its current state, unless China goes through radical sociopolitical change.

Overall, you seem to be overly optimistic of China's rise and the level of dominance it will eventually achieve, and naive and ignorant of the potential for negative ramifications of Korea siding with China. Again, the question is, how will China's rise benefit Korea, and how will Korea taking China's side benefit Korea? So far, the Korean government has shown very little interest in commtting itself into a trade pact with China, while it's been aggressively pursuing for trade pacts with the US, EU, ASEAN, South America, etc. Military ties between Korea and America has been getting stronger in the recent years, and distrust and hatred towards China is only getting stronger in the general populace. As far as I'm concerned, the current administration has its priorities straight and the current trend will keep the nation on the right track.

As for the issue with ROK-US military alliance, it's simply not a matter of "handing over" command. Military command of the combined forces is more complex than you may think, and strictly in terms of Korean national interests, "handing over" command may not be as benefitial as you believe.

Truth: China is mostly cooperative and always open to communication be it multi-party or bilateral. It was infact because of Chinese effort that the 6-party talks were possible.

Fact: USA profusley reject NK offers of direct talks, prefering only to communicate with KJI by forum.

For what possible reasons? To sow dissention between participating parties ofcourse.

At the 6 way talks; China, Russia and SK were the only willing, cooperative participants actually trying towards a postive outcome. NK was at first dragging it's feet but slowly opening up to compromise. USA and it's lapdog Japan only b!tched and moaned at every possible corner. They were so blatantly unwilling to compromise, bringing up issue from NK's past counterfeit USA money operation to Japan's moaning over its kidnapped citizens 3 decades ago, that with each complaint we saw NK take a harder and harder stance untill the three were only playing hardball.

Seriously, what does USA have to gain from Korean Unification? What does it have to lose?

This is entirely off-topic but I'm having trouble looking past the phrase highlighted above to concentrate on the rest of that comment and the thread.

I would say that what the USA gains or losses depends on what political and economic form a Unified Korea takes.

My impressions are that if unified under NK leadership, the loss in the US would be an economic shift with losses in trade and the increased expense of supporting a rise in new immigration from SK. But the damage to the US economy would be temporary compared to that within Korea itself. The US would probably benefit in the long run from the industry of the immigrants.

If unified under the SK leadership, the USA might not gain much at all for a while, and in fact have additional expense of more humanitarian aid to the former NK. But in the long run the world would gain an impressive competitor in the world economy by the reunification of the north's resources for heavy industry and the south's more agrarian and commercial industries.

US does not lose anything from Korean unity even if united Korea under Kim's dictatorship.
But US can gain more leverage against to China and Russia if they can convince united Korea to allow U.S missiles to station inside Korea.

Just to be clear, at least Kim Jung-il has made it clear that he's not opposed to post-reunification presence of US troops on the Korean peninsula, and just a few weeks ago the North Korean representatives went as far as expressing the willingness to "welcome" stationing of US troops in North Korea if it could bring about good relations with the US.

ccL1:

Did you check out this thread in Chinese chat? It paints a pretty clear picture about China's rise. My perspective mitigates the risk whereas yours puts Korea at whim of an increasingly nationalistic China:

While US President Barack Obama has been sitting down with China's leaders seeking ever closer co-operation, some observers are concerned as to how China will behave as it gets stronger.
Beijing is building up its military forces, while some fear that popular nationalism is a growing and worrying force.
In the dark, cavernous space of a rock club in Beijing's university district, Liu Lixin is warming up. Crashing chords resonate from his electric guitar.
It is the sound of China's stirring underground. Mr Liu and his group Ordinance are at the radical edge of Chinese music. Their latest album, Rock City, has been banned from the airwaves.
The lyrics criticise the government, they tell of democracy, corruption. They say: "Taiwan is ours, Tibet is ours. Compromising with the United States and Japan is a disgrace".
"Our lyrics are aimed at our government," says Mr Liu.
"It takes a very tough line towards its own people. But outside China it is very soft. When your people are being bullied by others, you should stand up for them. Right now they are being very soft."
Liu Lixin articulates a new nationalism that is a growing and increasingly powerful force in China.
It is almost always hostile to the US and Japan, apt to believe that other nations are bent on thwarting China's rise.
Government 'afraid'
China's nationalists are often critical of their own government too, saying it is weak, not doing enough to stand up for China's interests.


A powerful country like China of course needs a powerful army, an army that can conquer anybody in any part of the world
Wang Xiaodong
"Right now the government brainwashes people into thinking that the country is strong," Mr Liu says.
"The authorities have banned our songs but we are not afraid at all. I think it is the government who are afraid, and that is why they banned us."
Beijing's biggest bookshop is a vast place with thousands of titles on sale. For part of this year one book was riding high in the best-seller lists.
It's called Unhappy China and is a collection of pieces by a group of nationalist writers about the vision they have for China.
They say it has sold 800,000 copies since it was published earlier this year. The day we went to the bookshop, there was just one copy left.
One of the men who contributed, Wang Xiaodong, lives in a grey, nondescript apartment block in a Beijing suburb. He is one of the men giving a voice to the growing current of nationalism in China.
I ask him what he means when he writes in Unhappy China: "If you don't respect us we will beat you up."
"If there is a powerful country, and if you don't try to please that country, you will be in trouble," says Wang Xiaodong. "That's exactly the way the United States behaves."
When I ask if he believes China should have a powerful military and be prepared to go to war he replies: "Definitely. A powerful country like China of course needs a powerful army, an army that can conquer anybody in any part of the world. This should be our grand vision."
In recent years China has embarked on a rapid military build-up, acquiring the ability to project its power far beyond its borders.
One day it may even be in a position to challenge the US as the dominant power in Asia.
China's leaders says their nation's rise will be a peaceful one. But US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg recently called on China to reassure other nations about its intentions.
"Just as we and our allies must make clear that we are prepared to welcome China's arrival as a prosperous and successful power, China must reassure the rest of the world that its development and growing global role will not come at the expense of the security and well-being of others," Mr Steinberg said.
'Dangerous scenario'
One of his predecessors, Susan Shirk, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian affairs under President Bill Clinton, goes further.

Li Nan was stopped from holding a nationalist protest
She says the combination of China's growing military and growing popular nationalism presents dangers.
"It creates the risk, not a high probability, but a risk, that one day China's leaders could feel that to look strong in the eyes of their public they have to make a threat to Japan or to Taiwan and that they will feel that they cannot back down from that threat without jeopardising their own domestic support or even their own survival in power. So I think that is a very dangerous scenario," she says.
Perhaps aware of the dangers of unchecked nationalism, China is trying to control some on the more radical fringe.
Three years ago there was a confrontation on some disputed islands in the East China Sea.
Chinese nationalists had sailed there to try to evict Japanese soldiers from the islands.
In the Chinese boat was Li Nan. He says his anti-Japan alliance has had more than 70,000 supporters registered on its website. But when he tried to stage another protest this year the Chinese authorities stopped him.
"I am not just targeting Japan but all those who threaten the interests of the Chinese people," says Li Nan. "Maybe even the United States and some others, I would see them all as enemies."
And Li Nan offers a view of how a future crisis, such as one over energy supplies, might spur on nationalist sentiment in China.
"In the future, energy supplies will become more and more scarce. Today each American consumes 10 times as much energy as each Chinese person. So every nation will have to think about their own survival. At that time, nationalism will be the mainstream."
It is a vision that will give some in America pause for thought.
The US National Intelligence Strategy this year described China as presenting a complex global challenge.
A China with a strong nationalist current and a powerful military could be seen as an even more troubling prospect for Washington.

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=217673

yeah, to make the us more in debt so it can go bankrupt sooner. good one

This is really good news. China and South Korea should be as far apart as possible.

China will never pick a fight with the rest of the world... and the rest of the world is exactly where a unified Korea will be... China is always welcome to join as a strategic partner of course.