Unified Korea is a desperate, dystopian country, beset by police tyranny, ravaged by organized crime and roamed by a growing underclass of destitute northerners.
Lee Eung-jun paints a chilling portrait of 2016 for readers in prosperous, ordered South Korea. However, perhaps the most striking aspect of his novel The Private Life of a Nation is its rarity: Portrayals of a unified Korea are unusual enough — never mind such a bleak challenge to the rosy official image of the future.
Periodic crises and North Korean saber-rattling frequently fix the world’s attention on the divided peninsula, yet scant consideration is given to what might one day emerge from such tensions — an oversight, Lee said, that impelled him to write the book.
“The North Korean nuclear weapons [program] is a scary problem, but it is a one-time issue; the more frightening problem is what would happen afterward,” he said.
The peaceful pursuit of unification is inscribed in South Korea’s constitution. Questioning it would be political suicide for public figures, analysts say, because ethnic nationalism is a key element of political belief across the spectrum.
However, there is growing indifference, doubt and even opposition among ordinary citizens who fear the cultural, social and economic impact could crush their society.
“It’s still strong as an ideal,” said Stephen Epstein, an expert on South Korean society and its images of the North at the University of Victoria in Wellington, New Zealand.
“If you ask them: ‘How about tomorrow?’ Everyone backs off... When confronted with it as something that might happen, people are a lot less sanguine,” he said.
In 1994, 92 percent of South Koreans considered unification “necessary”; by 2007 that had fallen to 64 percent, according to research by Seoul National University. Support is lowest among the young: A 2010 survey found that only 49 percent of twentysomethings judged it necessary, compared with 67 percent of over-50s.
For many, the peninsula’s crude division by foreign powers remains a traumatic historical anomaly.
“As a foreigner perhaps you can think of other options, but unification is so natural to me,” said Kim Seok-hyang, a professor at Ewha Women’s University in Seoul.
“No one really asked any Koreans, do you want to be divided and stay like that for over 60 years? With your family members separated?” she added.
In the early decades after the division, South Korea repeatedly fell under military rule and lagged behind the North economically. Now it is a technologically advanced democracy with cultural clout and powerful economic ties across the region.
“I think young Koreans these days feel they have more in common with an American or European student than with North Koreans,” said Kim So-young, a 21-year-old student in Seoul.
She grew up at the height of the “sunshine era” of engagement with the North, when unification was more easily imaginable.
“I thought it would come by the time we were in high school or university... I imagined running around with [North Korean] children in their uniforms,” said her friend, 22-year-old Park Min-jin.
Kim has moved from indifference to opposition.
“There will be a lot of costs and problems. What should we do to help North Korea with cultural and economic issues? It’s not just the cost. They have had such a different education,” Kim said.
Park acknowledges the problems, but believes South Korea’s responsibilities cannot be dodged.
“I might be a little bit naive, but I wish the younger generation was not so preoccupied with economic priorities and would think in a more historical and humanitarian context,” she said.
Even the way people speak has diverged, leaving new arrivals in the South puzzled by differences in the vocabulary: As the old joke has it, they are divided by a common language.
Epstein believes growing knowledge of the North has increased rather than bridged perceptions of difference.
“There are almost 25,000 North Koreans in the South. The North is no longer anywhere near as mysterious as it was,” he said.
“Because of the famine and malnutrition, the difference between the two is not just linguistic, it’s been inscribed physically at this point,” he added.
Many refugees struggle to adapt; research three years ago found high unemployment rates and an average income of roughly half the average South Korean salary.
“There’s no longer this mystic idea of ‘we are one’ ... They think: ‘They are really different, [this is] a pain in the ass and why do we have to deal with all these sorts of issues economically just to bring them back into the fold?’” Epstein said.
The gulf stretching between North and South dwarfs the gap between East and West Germany before reunification. There, the difference in per-capita income was 1:2 or 1:3; in Korea it is at best 1:15 and some think closer to 1:40, Andrei Lankov writes in his book The Real North Korea. This year, the South Korean Ministry of Finance estimated that unification could cost the South up to 7 percent of annual GDP for a decade, although it would benefit from cheap labor and the North’s natural resources.
Earlier research commissioned by the South Korean Unification Ministry suggested the cost would be between 371.5 trillion and 1,253.5 trillion South Korean won (US$328.4 billion and US$1.1 trillion) if it happened by 2020. Unification almost certainly born of a crisis increases its difficulties. Attempts to manage the transition — such as controlling population movement while the North developed — could quickly be overtaken by events. Yet unification might prove equally traumatic for northerners, even if it brought a rise in living standards.
“A better option might be: ‘You go your way, we go ours; let’s do business with you and see you treat your own people better,’” Epstein said, who otherwise foresees rampant exploitation and an underclass.
Tellingly, Lee’s protagonist is a North Korean — a former army hero who has turned to crime — and his novel highlights the marginalization and exploitation of Northerners. He believes his compatriots should face unification head-on instead of seeking to avoid it. He thinks they have avoided discussion of the issue because of its complexity.
“Unification will come soon. I would say before 10 years and we need to prepare,” he said.
“Let’s say it is understandable that ordinary people don’t want to talk about it but this is a problem at the political and administrative level, with structural problems in that the government is not ready either,” he added.
“We need to know what to do when we are living next to each other,” he said.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with