North Korea, China’s Fourth Northeastern Province?
by James Na ~ March 31st, 2006. Filed under: China, China-Korea Relations, Economics, North Korea.I’m a bit late to this editorial, but it raises a discussion-worthy point (h/t North Korea Zone):
It has been five months now, and there are rumors in the border city of Dandong that China is planning to integrate North Korea’s economy by linking it to the development of the three northeastern Chinese provinces of Liaoning, Jilin, and Heilung.Some observers say that China’s economic effort is aimed at integrating North Korea into China as its fourth northeastern province. If the speculation is true, it would be an economic version of China’s attempt to claim the history of the ancient Korean kingdom of Goguryeo that once dominated Northeast Asia.
It may (or may not) be true that the PRC is integrating North Korea’s economy with that of Liaoning, Jilin and Heilung. But if so, the motive may not necessarily be to incorporate what was Gogureyo in some sort of a historical theft.
Bonnie Glaser of CSIS stated at a Heritage Foundation event recently that the PRC government is looking to South Korean investment to resuscitate its “rust belt” in those same northeastern provinces.
If so, the Chinese may view North Korea as a competitor-of-sorts in attracting South Korean economic investment and development vis-a-vis the Chinese Northeast.
One way to seamlessly remove that potential competition as an investment destination would be to integrate the economy of the Chinese Northeast with that of North Korea, at which point South Korean development money would presumably flow to the intergrated economic zone as a whole (also presumably under the de facto control of China).
Although this idea cannot be verified with any degree of certainty, I think it is probable, certainly possible and should be considered as being in the minds of the PRC policy makers.
The more intriguing question, if the economic integration theory were true, is the political repercussions on not only the PRC-DPRK relationship, but the PRC-ROK relationship.
—–
—–
—–
March 31st, 2006 at 2:29 pm
China has a history of extraterritorial development. If true, this would be good news.
(I’d rather deal with Hu than Kim any day.)
April 10th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
North Korea, China’s Fourth Northeastern Province?
North Korea, China’s Fourth Northeastern Province?
North Korea, China’s Fourth Northeastern Province?
[...] It’s not surprising; the universities are some of Korea’s most ossified, inefficient, and uncompetitive Korean business, and they stand to lose plenty to an FTA, especially if its goes along with visa waiver. We can always run down the alternatives, of course. South Korea could isolate itself the way North Korea has, a decision that’s brought economic ruin even as China carves off colonies in the starving northeastern provinces. Or, it could just let itself drift into the Chinese orbit entirely, but of course, China tends to look with disfavor upon vassal states who try to play “balancer” or dare question the motherland’s historic boundaries. China tends not to care much for unruly strikers, either. On March 28, some 270 civic groups including the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, the Federation of Korean Trade Unions and the Korean Federation for Environmental Movement formed a coalition against a free-trade deal with the U.S. and decided to start their national campaign on April 15. They plan to declare the situation an “emergency.” [...]
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: sun bin
EMAIL: sunbinblog@gmail.com
china should not view NK as competitor for SK capital. it is not a zxero sum game.
in addition, there are extra benefits of political stability, less refugee, etc.
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: James J. Na
EMAIL: jamesjna@hotmail.com
We, in the enlightened West, understand this, by and large. But those who are still stuck in the 19th Century mercantilist notion of national development view such matters in a zero-sum manner.