DOCSLIB.ORG

Keep US Forces in Korea After Reunification

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Keep US Forces in Korea After Reunification ABSTRACTS 191 Keep US Forces in Korea after Reunification Michael O’Hanlon Today’s US force posture in Korea has a simple purpose: helping stop, and if need be reverse and retaliate against, an attack by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). If that mission be- comes obsolete, either because of Korean reunification or a major reduction in the magnitude of the military competition between North and South, any continuing US military presence on the peninsula would require a fundamentally new rationale. This paper develops such a rationale, and considers various options for corresponding US force postures. My principal conclusions are that a continued and substantial US military presence on the peninsula makes sense for the United States, Korea, and the region as a whole. It might consist of roughly 20,000 to 30,000 troops, and be oriented to a broad range of security tasks including nontraditional missions such as counterterrorism and peace operations. The US presence would ideally consist of fewer army forces than are now based in the Republic of Korea today, but potentially more marines and navy sailors. In short, this proposal might be termed a “liberal vision” for the US-Korea alliance. It envisages an alliance that focuses less on tradi- tional deterrence of nearby major powers-without abandoning that mission-but that emphasizes a much broader array of security goals as well. Pursuit of those other goals could potentially allow for the inclusion of other countries, perhaps someday even China, in a broader collective security framework. Strong arguments for this type of approach can be found in international relations theory, in post-World War I1 history, and in the specific security needs of the northeast Asia region today. MICHAEL O’HANLON 5 Keep US Forces in Korea after Reunification Michael O’Hanlon Today’s US force posture in Korea has a simple purpose: helping stop, and if need be reverse and retaliate against, an attack by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). If that mission be- comes obsolete, either because of Korean reunification or a major reduction in the magnitude of the military competition between North and South, any continuing US military presence on the peninsula would require a fundamentally new rationale. This paper develops such a rationale, and considers various options for corresponding US force postures. My principal conclusions are that a continued and substantial US military presence on the peninsula makes sense for the United States, Korea, and the region as a whole. It might consist of roughly 20,000 to 30,000 troops, and be oriented to a broad range of security tasks including nontraditional missions such as counterterrorism and peace operations. The US presence would ideally consist of fewer army forces than are based in the Republic of Korea today, but potentially more marines and navy sailors. Assuming that governments in Seoul and Washington come to agree with this analysis, they should start laying the political and diplomatic groundwork-with their own legislatures and publics on the one hand, and with other countries in Northeast Asia on the other. The views of China should be solicited and considered, but only up to a point: if Korea and the United States see such forward basing of American troops to be in their fundamental interest, they should stand firm. They should explain why they think such US forward basing would serve China’s interests too, possibly helping to serve as a foundation for a broader 6 THE KOREAN JOURNAL OF DEFENSE ANALYSIS regional collective security arrangement that could eventually include the PRC if circumstances so warranted. But they should also be prepared to sustain the US presence unapologetically, regardless of the reception the idea engendered in Beijing. The stakes involved in this issue are very large. Korea, a relatively small country geographically, is nevertheless the third largest economy in Asia and the eleventh largest in the world.’ Perhaps even more importantly, it is the only focal point in Northeast Asia where all large regional countries have a keen interest in the prevailing local balance of power.2 The urgency of this issue is unclear, but potentially considerable. North Korea may find ways to adapt from its current crisis, and survive many years.3 It also may prove willing to gradually demilitarize its differences with South Korea and promote a policy of “one country, two systems” over a protracted transition period toward eventual merger. Or it may collapse in a few months. We simply do not know. For that reason, it behooves policymakers to begin focusing on this subject without further delay, at least in a preliminary fashion. The Republic of Korea and the United States should first forge a common position, at least in its rough contours, between themselves and then begin articulat- ing their thinking to Japan, China, and other countries in the region. The two specific questions addressed in this paper are as follows. What would be the overarching purposes of the US-ROK alliance, and associated American military presence on the peninsula, after an end to the ROK-DPRK conflict? In addition, what specific types and numbers of US forces would best serve those purposes? 1 World Bank, World Development Report 1996 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 210-1 1. 2 See Richard K. Betts, “Wealth, Power, and Instability: East Asia and the United States After the Cold War,” International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3 (Winter 1993/94), p. 46. 3 See Marcus Noland, “Why North Korea Will Muddle Through,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 76, NO. 4 (July/August 1997), pp. 105-18. MICHAEL O’HANLON 7 Purposes of US Forces in Korea after Reunification The basic rationales for keeping US forces in Korea after resolution of the current military standoff are of two types: deterring specific threats or dangers on the one hand, and helping provide a pillar for an eventual regional collective security system on the other. Deterring Threats A US military presence on a reunified Korean peninsula could help deter any untoward Chinese actions against Korea, dampen tensions in the Japan-Korea relationship, and provide a regional hub for military activities against other threats such as pirates, terrorists, and possible instability in the waterways of Southeast Asia. In each case, stationing US forces in Korea would produce a much more credible form of deterrence than simply retaining a formal alliance agreement between the two countries. Only the presence of US forces would guarantee that Americans would be immediately involved in any conflict, and demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt the seriousness and military readiness of the alliance. As for the first concern, a major overland Chinese threat to Korea appears quite improbable. To the extent it causes other countries in the region concern in the future, China seems less likely to put direct military pressure on Korea-a longstanding independent country with a clear ethnic, linguistic, and cultural identity that makes it a poor candidate for invasion-than to use force to gain resources or territory it considers its own. Taiwan and the South China Sea are the most notable examples of where China might use force, though disputes over overlapping economic zones could also arise with Korea and with Japan. In other words, to the extent it may pose a threat to its neighbors, China seems more likely to act as an irredentist power seeking to back up claims to specific localized regions, most of them at sea, than to pursue empire or regional hegem~ny.~This conclusion is reinforced by the fact 4 See Robert Ross, “Assessing the China Challenge,” Henry Stimson Center. Washington, DC, May 14, 1997. 8 THE KOREAN JOURNAL OF DEFENSE ANALYSIS that China has resolved a number of territorial disputes with neighbors and demilitarized several borders in recent years.’ However, sovereign countries being what they are, it is not im- plausible that someday China could appear seriously threatening to Korea’s core interests. Having US forces in Korea would give future Chinese leaders who contemplated making any such threats further reason for pause. Knowing in advance that this dynamic might operate, Korean leaders would probably be less inclined to develop a nuclear arsenal as a hedge against Chinese pressure.‘ A US force presence in Korea would also be beneficial for Japan- Korea relations. First, it could reassure the Koreans, who would not have to wonder if they were a second-class ally of the United States in the event of a major dispute with Japan over disputed territories or maritime resources. Second, the Japanese government might also prefer this arrangement. With US military facilities also in Korea, Japan would avoid becoming what Richard Haass calls “singularized” as the only country in the region hosting US forces, and Tokyo would probably find it easier to sustain the support of the Japanese people for the security alliance.’ Both Japan and Korea are small, mountainous, and heavily populated countries where land, airspace, ports, and other necessary ingredients for military bases and operations are at a premium. Also, although both countries recognize the importance of having a deterrent in place against instability in the region, both are also appropriately sensitive to the need to cultivate good relations with their neighbors and avoid creating the perception that they are trying to contain China or any other specific country. Under these circumstances, asking either 5 See David Shambaugh, “China’s Security and Military Policy and the Potential for CBMs in the Region,” Henry Stimson Center. Washington, DC, December 17, 1996. 6 See Barry R. Posen and Andrew L. Ross, “Competing Visions for US Grand Strategy,” Internationul Security Vol. 2 1, No. 3 (Winter 1996/97), pp.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Preparing for the Possibility of a North Korean Collapse
    CHILDREN AND FAMILIES The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that EDUCATION AND THE ARTS helps improve policy and decisionmaking through ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT research and analysis. HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE This electronic document was made available from INFRASTRUCTURE AND www.rand.org as a public service of the RAND TRANSPORTATION Corporation. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LAW AND BUSINESS NATIONAL SECURITY Skip all front matter: Jump to Page 16 POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Support RAND Purchase this document TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY Browse Reports & Bookstore Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND National Security Research Division View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This report is part of the RAND Corporation research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for re- search quality and objectivity. Preparing for the Possibility of a North Korean Collapse Bruce W. Bennett C O R P O R A T I O N NATIONAL SECURITY RESEARCH DIVISION Preparing for the Possibility of a North Korean Collapse Bruce W.
    [Show full text]
  • China on Asia's Mind
    BRIEF POLICY CHINA ON ASIA’S MIND François Godement SUMMARY Talk of an “Asian century” is increasingly overshadowed by This brief is based on a study trip to Tokyo in speculation about the prospect or risk of a “Chinese century”. June 2014, during which a group of ECFR’s China, India, Indonesia, and Japan will make up half of the Council members met with a wide and world’s GDP by 2030. The continent is becoming the global distinguished group of interlocutors from Japan, South Korea, and elsewhere in Asia, price maker for oil, iron ore, copper, and aluminium – China and discussed how they see the future of the and South Korea alone make up 67 percent of the world’s continent and its implications for Europe. iron ore consumption. Speculative bubbles from China’s What had often been predicted to be an “Asian currency reserves and runaway lending now drive global century” is turning out to be one in which property markets and their excesses. China has amassed China is foremost in Asia’s mind. Tensions in $4.5 trillion of currency reserves – an amount that seems East Asia are becoming the new normal and immense until one compares it with the estimated cost of it is increasingly clear that trade does not Korean reunification – estimated at around $5 to 6 trillion.1 guarantee peace and stability. Europe can Its defence budget, which is becoming four times as large neither take Asia’s stability for granted nor every 10 years, looks set to approach America’s by 2030. afford to be complacent about Asian security.
    [Show full text]
  • Reunification of Korea: Economic Consequences from an External Point of View*
    International Studies Review Vol. 6 No. 2 (October 2005): 21-33 21 Reunification of Korea: Economic Consequences from an External Point of View* EDWARD M. GRAHAM ** Korean reunification remains an uncertainty. When and if it comes, the condition of the North Korean economy is primitive compared to the economy of South Korea. Because of massive investment needs in the North, and under plausible assumptions regarding savings rates in a unified Korea, the balance of payment of a reunified Korea is likely to deteriorate significantly in the event of reunification. Foreign direct investment could ameliorate this result, and might contribute to a more rapid catch-up of the North to the South. Keywords: Korean reunification, economic effects of Korean re­ unification, balance of payments effects of Korean reunification Originally Prepared for 2005 IKUPD Forum "Korean Reunification in Korea-US Relationship," Harvard Law School, April 9, 2005. " The author would like to thank Ted Kim, Jim Lister, Paul Karner, Marcus Noland, two persons of Korean nationality who wish to remain anonymous, and two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on an earlier draft. Direct all correspondence co Edward M. Graham, Senior Fellow, Institute for International Economics, 1750 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036-1903 USA; Tel: 1-202-454-1326; E-mail: [email protected] Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 05:49:58AM via free access 22 Reunification of Korea I. INTRODUCTION lmost all Koreans dream that the "two Koreas," the Republic of Korea A (ROK) in the south and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) in the north, reunify.
    [Show full text]
  • Korean Reunification: the Dream and the Reality
    KOREAN REUNIFICATION: THE DREAM AND THE REALITY CHARLES S. LEE Conventional wisdom, both Korean and non-Korean, assumis the division of this strategicpeninsula to be temporary. Officially, the Korean War still has not ended but is in a state of armistice. Popular belief also accepts as true that the greatest obstacles to Korean reunification are the East-West rivalry and the balance of power in the North Pacific. Charles S..Lee, however, argues that domestic conditions in North and South Korea actually present the more serious hurdle - a hurdle unlikely to be disposed of too quickly. INTRODUCTION Talk of reunifying the Korean peninsula once again is grabbing headlines. Catalyzed by the South Korean student movement's search for a new issue, the months surrounding the 1988 Summer Olympic Games in Seoul featured a flurry of unofficial and official initiatives on reunification. The students were quick to seize this emotionally charged issue as their new rallying cry, for the nation's recent democratic reforms (including a direct and seemingly fair presidential election in 1987) effectively deprived them of their raison d'etre. By June last year, thousands of them were on the march to the border village 6f Pahmunjom for a "summit" meeting with their North Korean counterparts. Not to be upstaged, the South Korean government blocked the marchers with tear gas, and on July 7, announced a sweeping set of proposals for improving North-South relations, including the opening of trade between the two Koreas. Capping last summer's events was South Korean President Roh Tae Woo's October speech at the UN General Assembly, in which he called for his own summit meeting with North Korean President Kim II Sung.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Road to Korean Reunification by Jan Dehn
    THE EMERGING VIEW June 2018 On the road to Korean reunification By Jan Dehn A solution to the Korean Conflict is about a quarter of a century overdue, but now there is movement. The outlook is naturally highly uncertain at this point. Still, we explain here what we imagine may happen in the coming months and decades. Reunification of the two Koreas would be a logical consequence of a peace deal, in our view. This possibility should therefore now be given serious consideration. Reunification would require significant and sustained social and infrastructure investment in the North by the South. The return would take decades to materialise, but would ultimately favour Korea itself, while China would be the other major beneficiary, mainly via increased economic influence. The US President would gain from being seen to strike a deal to help end the Korean conflict, but the US as a nation would lose political and military influence. If Korean reunification takes place Japan would also become more isolated as America’s last remaining ally in the region. Introduction The Korean conflict was rooted in the A solution to the Korean Conflict is about a quarter of a century ideological battles, which prevailed at the overdue. On one side of the negotiation table, South Korean President Moon Jae-in gets the credit for spotting the height of the Cold War. A solution to the opportunity for peace, while US President Donald Trump has Korean conflict is well overdue so far been kind enough to side-line the national interest of the US in order to pave the way for a deal.
    [Show full text]
  • Chinese Views of Korean History in the Cold War Era Jin Linbo 150 | Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
    Chinese Views of Korean History in the Cold War Era Jin Linbo 150 | Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies This chapter draws a rough sketch of the evolution of Chinese views on Korean history in the Cold War era in three parts. The first focuses on the formulation of Chinese views of the Korean War in 1950 and the mainstream assessment of the war after Sino-South Korean diplomatic normalization in 1992. The second focuses on China’s attitudes and policies toward the two Koreas in the Cold War years. The third deals with the changes and limits of perceptions on Korean history after diplomatic normalization and their impact on bilateral relations between Beijing and Seoul. For centuries many Chinese have firmly believed that the relationship between China and the Korean Peninsula is like that between lips and teeth, they are not only close to but also dependent upon each other. If the lips are gone, the teeth will be cold. From the middle of nineteenth century, the geopolitical proximity and interdependence between the two have become the determining factors in formulating Chinese perceptions towards Korea. Since then the national security concerns symbolized by the sense of lips and teeth had been frequently stressed by some Chinese intellectuals and officials when both China and Korea were exposed to the growing imperialist expansion and geopolitical competition in East Asia. In order to maintain the traditional tributary relationship between China and Korea, China fought the first Sino-Japanese War in 1894-95. Although it was miserably defeated, and Korea was consequently annexed to the Japanese empire in 1910, the Chinese sense of lips and teeth remained undiminished.
    [Show full text]
  • Demography of a Reunified Korea
    a report of the csis korea chair Demography of a Reunified Korea January 2013 Author Elizabeth Hervey Stephen CHARTING our future a report of the csis korea chair Demography of a Reunified Korea Author January 2013 Elizabeth Hervey Stephen CHARTING our future About CSIS—50th Anniversary Year For 50 years, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has developed solutions to the world’s greatest policy challenges. As we celebrate this milestone, CSIS scholars are developing strategic insights and bipartisan policy solutions to help decisionmakers chart a course toward a better world. CSIS is a nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Center’s 220 full- time staff and large network of affiliated scholars conduct research and analysis and develop policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change. Founded at the height of the Cold War by David M. Abshire and Admiral Arleigh Burke, CSIS was dedicated to finding ways to sustain American prominence and prosperity as a force for good in the world. Since 1962, CSIS has become one of the world’s preeminent international institutions focused on defense and security; regional stability; and transnational challenges ranging from en- ergy and climate to global health and economic integration. Former U.S. senator Sam Nunn has chaired the CSIS Board of Trustees since 1999. Former deputy secretary of defense John J. Hamre became the Center’s president and chief executive of- ficer in April 2000. CSIS does not take specific policy positions; accordingly, all views expressed herein should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Perception of Korean Reunification Among Japanese Experts: the Collective Frame Approach
    Perception of Korean Reunification among Japanese Experts: The Collective Frame Approach Perception of Korean Reunification among Japanese Experts: The Collective Frame Approach KOROSTELINA, Karina and UESUGI, Yuji Abstract With the unfolding process of reunification between two Koreas, Japanese experts have very limited informa- tion to make reliable predictions. This study asks how experts in Japan assess and construct meaning of the reunification of two Koreas and evaluate its impact on Japan. Our assumption is that while Japanese experts have incomplete knowledge about perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs of North Koreans, they form their expectations and predictions regarding reunification of two Koreas based on their views gained through their interactions with South Koreans as well as meanings of national identity and the perceptions of the position of Japan in the region. The results show that in assessing the possibility of reunification of two Koreas, the respondents used four major frames—(1) protection; (2) moral responsibility; (3) restorative justice; and (4) peace—with four overlap- ping areas that united pairs of frames. All four frames represent the same structure: (1) a definition of the possible outcomes of the reunification, (2) a justification of this definition based on perceptions of national identity in Japan and relations between Japan and South Korea, and (3) prescriptions for future actions and policies. They also represented the three sets of perceived problems of reunification, expressed by all respondents: (1) low sup- port towards reunification among the population in South Korea, (2) uneven political, economic and social status of two Koreas, and (3) the attributed position of North Korea on the reunification.
    [Show full text]
  • Inter-Korean Relations and Multilateral Organizations: Problems and Prospects *
    International S11tdieJ Review Vol. 2 No. 2 (December 1999): 4 3-62 43 Inter-Korean Relations and Multilateral Organizations: Problems and Prospects * YOUNG WHAN KlHL Department of Political Science, Iowa State University The extent of linkage between inter-Korean relations and North and South Korea's simultaneous membership in international organizations (including both inter-governmental organizations and non-governmental organizations) is examined. This research questions whether inter-Korean cooperation can be promoted and 11ltimately be attained via multilateral organizations. Empirical evidence shows three types and patterns of linkages: a) s11ccessful cases involving the inter-governmental organizations ([GOs), such as the UNDP. b) unsuccessfitl cases ofengaging established UN spedalizedagencies, such as the UPU and the ITU, and 1) cases with intemu:diary results, mch as the KEDO and the /CAO. Simultaneous membership in multilateral organizations does not automatically tram/ate into promoting inter-Korean relations. Other contextual factors. like the international system structure, changing strategic envirunment, and the opportunity cost estimation by decision-makers. are likely to intervene. The paper discusses political problems and prospects for internationalizing North-So11th Korean relations and condudes by drawing certain implications for the mixed resit/ts of linkages between inter-Korean relations and m11ltilateral organizations. • A revised and updated version of the paper initially presented at the 11th U.S. Forum on the Problems of the Korean Peninsula, held at the Crystal City Marriott Hotel, Crystal City, Virginia, August 18-20, 1995. The author wishes to acknowledge kind assistance of Seo-Hang Lee, W ook Kim and Miriam Bae for gathering information. He also wishes to thank three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Korean Reunification Crisis
    asdf Korean Reunification Crisis Chair: Erica Choi Committee Chair: Person ‘year Director: Korean PMUNC 2015 Reunification Crisis Contents Chair’s Letter………………………………………………………………………...…..3 Japanese Occupation and the Division of Korea…………………………………………5 Tensions Leading Up to the War…………………………………………………………6 The Korean War (1950-53)………………………………………………………………7 The Koreas Today……………..…………………………………………………………9 South Korean Politics………………………………………..…………..……….………9 List of Roles………...…………...………………………………………………………10 2 Committee Chair: Person ‘year Director: Korean PMUNC 2015 Reunification Crisis Chair’s Letter Dear Delegates, Welcome to the Korean Reunification Crisis! My name is Erica Choi, and I am a sophomore majoring in Comparative Literature at Princeton University. I am an active member of the Model United Nations Team here at Princeton; I competed at CMUNNY and NYUMUNC last year, and won best delegate at the latter. I staffed PMUNC as committee director and PICSim, our college MUN conference, as crisis director last year. I spent two weeks this summer teaching Model UN Rules of Procedure to Chinese students in Beijing. At the end of the program, I chaired a MUN conference (Pegasus-NAIMUN) for the students. I will be part of the secretariat for PICSim, serving as the Director of Publications. In my spare time, I like to do what befits someone of my major: vegetate in bed and read obscure texts. I am fluent in both Korean and English, conversational in Spanish, and I am also starting to learn Latin this year. I was born in Seoul, South Korea, where I lived for the first twelve years of my life. I then moved to Bronxville, a small town in Westchester, N.Y., where I have lived for the past seven years.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity of K-Pop: a Focus on Race, Language, and Musical Genre
    DIVERSITY OF K-POP: A FOCUS ON RACE, LANGUAGE, AND MUSICAL GENRE Wonseok Lee A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS August 2018 Committee: Jeremy Wallach, Advisor Esther Clinton Kristen Rudisill © 2018 Wonseok Lee All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Jeremy Wallach, Advisor Since the end of the 1990s, Korean popular culture, known as Hallyu, has spread to the world. As the most significant part of Hallyu, Korean popular music, K-pop, captivates global audiences. From a typical K-pop artist, Psy, to a recent sensation of global popular music, BTS, K-pop enthusiasts all around the world prove that K-pop is an ongoing global cultural flow. Despite the fact that the term K-pop explicitly indicates a certain ethnicity and language, as K- pop expanded and became influential to the world, it developed distinct features that did not exist in it before. This thesis examines these distinct features of K-pop focusing on race, language, and musical genre: it reveals how K-pop groups today consist of non-Korean musicians, what makes K-pop groups consisting of all Korean musicians sing in non-Korean languages, what kind of diverse musical genres exists in the K-pop field with two case studies, and what these features mean in terms of the discourse of K-pop today. By looking at the diversity of K-pop, I emphasize that K-pop is not merely a dance- oriented musical genre sung by Koreans in the Korean language.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative Paths to Korean Unification
    C O R P O R A T I O N Alternative Paths to Korean Unification Bruce W. Bennett For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2808 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0183-0 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2018 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface Korean unification is a major issue in both South Korea (officially the Republic of Korea) and North Korea (officially the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea). Given the substantial uncertainties about Korea’s future, there are a wide variety of paths by which unification might occur, if it occurs.
    [Show full text]