The Norks are Suspected of Sinking South Korean Shipping.

[FSTargetDrone]

If feasible, how likely is it that the South Koreans would attempt to raise and bring the wreck back home?

[Highlord Laan]

Isn't the Korean peninsula exploding one of the "oh, fuck" scenarios that no sane military strategist wants to see?

If war erupts again, the US is pretty much guaranteed to get involved, which may or may not get China involved, which has a good chance of dragging Russia into the mess too. Thats the broken down version I've heard, anyway.

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't know, I find it really hard to believe that China would come in on North Korea's side. Do they really like enough North Korean enough to risk Mutually Assured Destruction?

[Lusankya]

As if America has the troops or money for another major war right now...

Sounds more like Shep is encouraging a Chinese invasion of North Korea than an American one. Which, given that China believes that large swathes of North Korea (conveniently enough of it to give China a port on the other side of the Korean peninsula) are part of China's "traditional territories", isn't completely far-fetched. Especially given the fact that North Korea is enough of a dick that it would be easy enough for even China to invade without becoming too much of a pariah.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, that's a whole different question. I honestly don't know enough about China's military capabilities to comment much on weather they'd find it harder or easier than America right now. Though I can't say I like the idea of China growing any more powerful right now either.

[Lusankya]

Personally, I think that China would have an easier time (relative to their military power), because they'd wait for an occasion when shit was flying anyway to waltz in and do their land grab. And then once they had the territory, they'd actually develop it. The idea of China actually striking first in any situation other than one when they believe that war is inevitable anyway does not sound very Chinese at all.

Remember, America's difficulties in the US and Iran aren't actually primarily due to a lack of military power, but rather due to discontent amongst the general population. The fact that the relationship between China and North Korea is different from the relationship between America and Afghanistan/Iraq will make the occupation stage take on a different tone.

[Big Phil]

China occupying North Korea in the name of "peacekeeping" would probably be the best thing that could possibly happen on that peninsula. Might make the South Koreans uneasy, but the Chinese are far saner than Kim Jong Il.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Personally, I think that China would have an easier time (relative to their military power), because they'd wait for an occasion when shit was flying anyway to waltz in and do their land grab. And then once they had the territory, they'd actually develop it. The idea of China actually striking first in any situation other than one when they believe that war is inevitable anyway does not sound very Chinese at all.

You might want to look at the Indian-Chinese border war. The Chinese struck first. And the Chinese will strike if they deem it necessary. Vietnam should be a test case. They would punish the N. Koreans if they see they are going over their heads.

[Lusankya]

Personally, I think that China would have an easier time (relative to their military power), because they'd wait for an occasion when shit was flying anyway to waltz in and do their land grab. And then once they had the territory, they'd actually develop it. The idea of China actually striking first in any situation other than one when they believe that war is inevitable anyway does not sound very Chinese at all.

You might want to look at the Indian-Chinese border war. The Chinese struck first. And the Chinese will strike if they deem it necessary. Vietnam should be a test case.

What bit of "when they believe that war is inevitable anyway" don't you understand? If Indian soldiers were making forward bases in and around what you considered to be your territory, and then you ran into a bunch of Indian soldiers who you thought were on your side of the border, would you not consider that to be an aggressive act? Or do you think that the Sino-Indian war would have happened without India stirring the pot as well?

They would punish the N. Koreans if they see they are going over their heads.

So you mean that when China thinks that war is inevitable?

[Darth Wong]

Remember, America's difficulties in the US and Iran aren't actually primarily due to a lack of military power, but rather due to discontent amongst the general population.

Well, that and the financial burden associated with the logistics of occupying countries so far from home. China would be much better-positioned that way.

[Lusankya]

Remember, America's difficulties in the US and Iran aren't actually primarily due to a lack of military power, but rather due to discontent amongst the general population.

Well, that and the financial burden associated with the logistics of occupying countries so far from home. China would be much better-positioned that way.

Yeah. That too. I thought that would be self-evident, though.

On the other hand, North Korea's more heavily armed than either Iraq or Afghanistan. I certainly wouldn't want to be the poor schmuck put in charge of conquering liberating them. Though I do wonder how much of the North Korean military is in China's pocket. I'd wager it was a non-zero amount, but beyond that I wouldn't want to guess.

[Darth Wong]

Remember, America's difficulties in the US and Iran aren't actually primarily due to a lack of military power, but rather due to discontent amongst the general population.

Well, that and the financial burden associated with the logistics of occupying countries so far from home. China would be much better-positioned that way.

Yeah. That too. I thought that would be self-evident, though.

On the other hand, North Korea's more heavily armed than either Iraq or Afghanistan. I certainly wouldn't want to be the poor schmuck put in charge of conquering liberating them. Though I do wonder how much of the North Korean military is in China's pocket. I'd wager it was a non-zero amount, but beyond that I wouldn't want to guess.

I wonder how well-trained, well-supplied, and well-led the North Korean military is. I wouldn't be surprised if they're good for nothing more than parading and sabre-rattling. Kim Jong-Il seems like the kind of man who would appoint sycophants rather than competent individuals to run his armies, and to emphasize appearance rather than practical effectiveness in terms of his demands upon the military.

[Lusankya]

I wonder how well-trained, well-supplied, and well-led the North Korean military is. I wouldn't be surprised if they're good for nothing more than parading and sabre-rattling. Kim Jong-Il seems like the kind of man who would appoint sycophants rather than competent individuals to run his armies, and to emphasize appearance rather than practical effectiveness in terms of his demands upon the military.

You got me there. The only issue is that there are a lot of them, though that doesn't really matter if you can buy them off with a bag of rice each.

[Pelranius]

The Chinese would go into North Korea simply to keep out North Korean refugees if nothing else. And China does want a strong unified Korea, if nothing else to annoy the Japanese with (though I've heard that Beijing wants some semblance of American military presence to remain post reunification, so Seoul and Tokyo won't shoot at each other. Beijing is fine with them making noises at each other, but a war would be highly unprofitable).

[DudeGuyMan]

Isn't most of the NK military deployed along the border with SK? One would think China could be all over them before they could do much about it.

[mr friendly guy]

As if America has the troops or money for another major war right now...

Sounds more like Shep is encouraging a Chinese invasion of North Korea than an American one. Which, given that China believes that large swathes of North Korea (conveniently enough of it to give China a port on the other side of the Korean peninsula) are part of China's "traditional territories", isn't completely far-fetched. Especially given the fact that North Korea is enough of a dick that it would be easy enough for even China to invade without becoming too much of a pariah.

Hmm. I am not expert, but I thought Korea was mainly tributary state from the last two dynasties prior. That is a more apt term would be within China's "sphere of influence" rather than traditional territories. Prior of that of course some Korean kingdoms contested with Chinese dynasties over what is considered Manchuria, of which it pretty much, most of the disputed territories lie within the PRC's borders anyway.

Anyway don't you guys know, a Chinese takeover of North Korea would be the start of an expansionist China and only the good ole US of A can stop them. Now if only someone could write a fantasy techno thriller book detailing their 60 million man army invading in 2010.

[Lusankya]

I think the way it works is that one of China's ethnic groups is Korean, and they used to be a part of the ancient Korean kingdom of Koguryo, which at its peak controlled a territory that consisted of parts of China and the lion's share of the Korean peninsula (actually, I was wrong earlier when I said that it was part of North Korea - it's actually all of North Korea and the top third of South Korea). Anyway, since China is a multi-ethnic state and the Koguryo Koreans are a part of that multi-ethnic state, then obviously, the lands of the Koguro are a part of China's traditional territories, right? Never mind that Koguryo pretty much collapsed in the 7th century.

It's a very flimsy justification, and I don't think it's really taken that seriously even in China anyway. The reasons for existing are probably two-fold: 1) it is consistent with China's policy regarding minority ethnic groups - that being that they are distinct ethnicities, but an integral part of the Chinese state, and have been since forever. Holding the same policy in regards to how the government views its territorial claim over Tibetan territories and how it views its claim over Korean territories has some advantages when it comes to dealing with minorities who are more troublesome than the Koreans. 2) China is concerned that conflict in Korea could result in the border being redrawn, but disadvantaging China - so they invent this flimsy excuse they can use so they can make a land grab which will help protect their existing border (and give them great tracts of land in the process - yay!).

In general, it's not a particularly sinister viewpoint - so long as you're understanding how China is viewing it.

[KlavoHunter]

Frankly, if the Chinese moved in tomorrow and took over for Kim Jong-Il, could it POSSIBLY get any -worse- for the North Koreans?

[Serafina]

Frankly, if the Chinese moved in tomorrow and took over for Kim Jong-Il, could it POSSIBLY get any -worse- for the North Koreans?

That depends on the occupation method (which depends on the culture of the occupant, local resistance etc.).

If it is peacefull, it would propably be better for the Norks (nice term, btw).
However, any other case would propably mean that they are worse off.

[Lusankya]

It'd probably improve. One of the CCP's big schticks is to keep food affordable and available, because starving people are too likely to riot. And if China was properly conquering them, they'd start sending development money in, because the CCP is currently basing its right to power on improving living conditions. It's not like the Chinese would want to genocide the North Koreans or anything. After all, they don't genocide Tibetans or Uighurs, and Koreans are a much better-behaved ethnic group.

It could be the kind of war where everyone ends up happier, assuming Seoul doesn't end up glowy and radioactive: China gets a bit of North Korea; South Korea gets a bit of North Korea; North Koreans get food; the entire world doesn't have to deal with North Korea anymore. Smiles all round!

[Serafina]

It'd probably improve. One of the CCP's big schticks is to keep food affordable and available, because starving people are too likely to riot. And if China was properly conquering them, they'd start sending development money in, because the CCP is currently basing its right to power on improving living conditions. It's not like the Chinese would want to genocide the North Koreans or anything. After all, they don't genocide Tibetans or Uighurs, and Koreans are a much better-behaved ethnic group.

It could be the kind of war where everyone ends up happier, assuming Seoul doesn't end up glowy and radioactive: China gets a bit of North Korea; South Korea gets a bit of North Korea; North Koreans get food; the entire world doesn't have to deal with North Korea anymore. Smiles all round!

I am not accusing China of any desire for genocide (since they are not doing it in Tibet etc.).

But what are the odds of a resistance movement in NK (however big or small it may be), and what are the possible chinese reactions to that?

[mr friendly guy]

I think the way it works is that one of China's ethnic groups is Korean, and they used to be a part of the ancient Korean kingdom of Koguryo, which at its peak controlled a territory that consisted of parts of China and the lion's share of the Korean peninsula (actually, I was wrong earlier when I said that it was part of North Korea - it's actually all of North Korea and the top third of South Korea). Anyway, since China is a multi-ethnic state and the Koguryo Koreans are a part of that multi-ethnic state, then obviously, the lands of the Koguro are a part of China's traditional territories, right? Never mind that Koguryo pretty much collapsed in the 7th century.

Well obviously those lands are part of China's traditional territories, it just depends on how far you go back to be counted as "traditional". Unless you mean those lands when they were under the control of Koguryo, in which case I wouldn't worry since they have been a part of the Qing dynasty, ergo its been under China's control longer than Australian has been under the control of Europeans. I think that counts as long enough to be called traditional without having to suggest things like the lands were part of China when Koguro was around.

2) China is concerned that conflict in Korea could result in the border being redrawn, but disadvantaging China - so they invent this flimsy excuse they can use so they can make a land grab which will help protect their existing border (and give them great tracts of land in the process - yay!).

I am aware that they are worried a unified Korea might cast its eyes on those territories. Although from my little knowledge (so I could be vastly inaccurate) the Koreans lost those territories after being defeated by the Chinese (although they didn't get the reward of those spoils so to speak) to the Khitans who moved in, who lost to the Jurchen of the Jin dynasty, who lost to Genghis Khan's mongols, who might still have kept it even though the Chinese drove them out from most of their lands, but the land falling to the Manchu, whose dynasty was overthrown leading to the ROC and then finally the PRC after a civil war.

The point is the territory has changed hands over the centuries with the current Chinese successor state taking over from the Qing rulers, so China's leaders must be very paranoid if they worry that the Koreans will claim such territory based on traditional grounds. Unless they are afraid the Koreans would claim it because of Koreans living in China, but then that type of excuse was getting old after WWII. Any way, they sound very paranoid.

[Lusankya]

To be honest, I think the odds of a popular resistance movement in NK would be quite small. Chinese occupation would probably bring quite significant gains to their quality of life early on. It would probably be more successful than the occupation of Tibet, because Korean culture is more similar to Han culture than Tibetan culture is, which would make developing social programs easier - and even then, if you look at Tibet, most of the resistance for nearly the first 50 years was politically motivated resistance from the former power structure (which was still kept largely intact as a group, though its power was vastly diminished) rather than being based on dissatisfaction from the people. And given North Korea's location, it probably wouldn't have to worry about the kind of economic inequalities that Tibet still has to worry about now, because it's in a prime location for development and to become a transport hub in East Asia, whereas Tibet is this cold place in the middle of nowhere, surrounded by mountains.

Organised resistance from the former government forces, on the other hand, well, I can't say for sure. It would probably depend on how well they were defeated/integrated into the new governmental structure.

But take that all with a grain of salt: I'm not really familiar with your average North Korean's view of China. If there were a significant resistance movement, however, China would probably just use their normal reaction, though: send the soldiers in, arrest the leaders, and then try to swamp their culture with a wave of Han immigrants.

EDIT: This post was addressed to Serafina.

[Lusankya]

I am aware that they are worried a unified Korea might cast its eyes on those territories. Although from my little knowledge (so I could be vastly inaccurate) the Koreans lost those territories after being defeated by the Chinese (although they didn't get the reward of those spoils so to speak) to the Khitans who moved in, who lost to the Jurchen of the Jin dynasty, who lost to Genghis Khan's mongols, who might still have kept it even though the Chinese drove them out from most of their lands, but the land falling to the Manchu, whose dynasty was overthrown leading to the ROC and then finally the PRC after a civil war.

The point is the territory has changed hands over the centuries with the current Chinese successor state taking over from the Qing rulers, so China's leaders must be very paranoid if they worry that the Koreans will claim such territory based on traditional grounds. Unless they are afraid the Koreans would claim it because of Koreans living in China, but then that type of excuse was getting old after WWII. Any way, they sound very paranoid.

I don't think it's a huge worry - more along the lines of "Koreans might breach our territory while dealing with their own shit" than "Koreans might try to conquer us onoes". The main reason for the claim is really reason 1, which is just maintaining consistency with its minority ethnic group policies. This is useful, because they can say to Tibetans (and India) "look - we view Korea the same way, and they're a well-behaved ethnic group - see, we're not being mean to you just because you are difficult children."

[mr friendly guy]

Wow, Shep the original poster who sparked this tangent made a one line statement but other people have contributed thoughts to his um, hypothetical of the PRC invading liberating NK.

In any event doesn't NK have like 23 million people or something? Unlike Tibet or Xinjiang its going to be harder to swamp them with immigrants, especially if the region can't feed itself at the present. No doubt he will come along a give us his military analysis on how China should depose Kim Jong Ill.