Daniel Caldwell
CTO
Political Science
3-7-06
The export number of North Korea is an important number. If the numbers of
exports go up this will mean that people are finding more jobs to work for, this will mean
more money will be given for the products made, as well as the growth of finances will
occur do to more money having money to put back in the market. In the graph below it is
shown that as of right now the export trade is on the way down, soon will rise and be on a
slow increase. This will help the development of the country and improve the economy.
Another graph to look at and watch the numbers carefully is the graph of the
imports over the next twenty years. It shows that the number of imports will continue to
rise, but at a slower pace than the exports shown above. If this continues the North Korea
population will become wealthier and more independent from other countries.
One of the most important graphs and numbers to look at and may be the most
over looked is the population graph. While the graphs show most everything in North
Korea is climbing in number the population will be falling over the next twenty years.
This is a good number to be falling because there will be less mouth to feed and the
people will prosper more from the rise in money due to the export and import rise.
As long as the population decrease is slow and steady, while the economy increase is also
steady, North Korea should become a more independent and wealthier nation by the year
2020. The graph below shows the population decrease over the next twenty years.
North Korea has many relationships with countries. The relationship between
North and South Korea is like children on a teeter totter; North Korea is the heavier kid
sitting on the ground while the other kid up in the air can’t get down. North Korea has
the fourth largest military in the world at 1.2 million people serviced and out weighs
South Korea three to one in military personnel. Through relationship with South Korea it
would most likely be the best thing to open up communications and trade channels with
the South. The trades between Russia will have to continue and the trades with China as
well.
Emmanuel Cournede
POLS 315
CSO (President of the Central Peoples Committee)
Graph Analysis/Goal Description:
As President of the Central Peoples Committee, my long term vision for our
nation is to advance strategies regarding current economic concerns in terms of how we
are currently perceived in the global industrial community. I contend that a course of
action to enter North Korea into the industrial race is over due given the growing trends
of the global economy. Moreover this notion is clearly illustrated by the consumption
rate of developed and developing countries via their need and dependency on consumer
driven demands. This venture begins with an enhanced effort toward capitalism and a deemphasis on military spending and collectivism as a nation state.
Identifiably, one of my primary objectives as leader of the Central Peoples
Committee (C.P.O.) is to instigate the development of a strong economic base in N.
Korea via industrial development. In order for this to be a successive venture, we must
begin with the opening of our borders and the annexation of the president and his current
warmongering party which have essentially left N Korea in turmoil and its people
resigned to starvation due to famine.
According to statistics that favor a market first economy- as indicated in graph
one; (1) the average consumption growth of the worlds leading economic countries will
continue to increase rapidly within the next ten years. What this represents for N. Korea
is an opportunity to enter the industrial production chase by investing in mass production
factories that would allow N. Korea to compete with current manufacture and industry
power-house’s China and India.
I am convinced that given these anticipated trends we should more than likely
receive the support of other nations such as United States, England, France and Germany;
whom have persistently guaranteed resources such as food, aid, and a surplus of energy,
in the event our nation make the transformation from a militarily controlled and
motivated government to that of an industrially concentrated entity.
Given the anticipated trends in graph (2), I am additionally convinced that now
more that ever we must remain insistent on our search with other leading nations to gain
access to alternative energy resources, both for survival purposes as well as our proposed
drive toward industrial competition.
This conclusion was reached by referencing graph (2) which eludes to the notion
that world energy resources will continue to be in high demand in the next ten years. The
graph clearly shows that crude oil will begin a gradual decline, while gas will witness a
sharp increase along with renewable energy and coal. Further analysis of these projected
trends indicates a looming threat to our countries ability to continue to sustain itself due
to the current state of our economy coupled by a dependency on these finite resources.
This critical forecast is reason enough to consider the above mentioned proposal
and move forward with bilateral negotiations with the United States and Europe; with a
specific emphasis on improving our energy crisis
Moreover this idea has been furthered by investigated research which was
confirmed in a recent report done by BBC. Shockingly the report found that energy
consumption in North Korea is expected to double over 30 years, from almost 48m
tonnes of oil equivalent in 1990 to 96 million tonnes in 2020. In conclusion, North
Korea's use of their major energy resource, coal, is projected to increase five times from
2005 to 2020. (http://news.bbc.co.uk)
According to additional statistics form the U.N. statistics web-cite, North Korea is
36% agricultural and 64% nonagricultural a statistic which is currently being illustrated
by North Korea’s extreme dependency on imported energy. This dependency and lack of
sustainability serves as a clear and present danger to our nation’s stability given that that
we cannot effectively maintain any form of economic and or social prosperity within the
present circumstances.
Currently North Korea's electric generating capacity is split nearly evenly
between coal-fired thermal and hydroelectric plants. N. Korea’s thermal generating
capacity is underutilized due to a lack of fuels which typically results in electricity
shortages and many private citizens often experiences blackouts for extended periods of
time. Industrial power losses due to inadequate amounts of energy resources are also
extremely common and prevent us from maximizing to our full potential.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk)
A Historical Perspective:
Given that North Korea's economy has dramatically stagnated since the 1970s.
The assumption is that publicly owned industry produces nearly all manufactured goods
whole the government continues to focus on heavy military build-up. It has been reported
that as recent as last year, the government is estimated to have spent around 25% of the
nation's GDP on the military (compared with 2.5% for neighboring South Korea) 1
Another aspect of North Korean history that is not often discussed is our policies
and or regard toward human rights Numbers of escaped immigrants to South Korea have
born witness to the existence of detention or concentration camps with an estimated
150,000 to 200,000 inmates.2 Some of these refuges have allegedly reported cruelties by
means of starvation and slave labor camps, although our Nation has vehemently denied
any such claims and notably does not grant entry to independent human rights observers.3
In the early 1990s North Korea witnessed a series of natural catastrophes, political
misconduct as well as multiple fraudulent scandals. This, along with the collapse of the
1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NorthKoreaHistory
Ibid
3
Ibid
2
Soviet bloc, has resulted in significant economic disruption.4 The agricultural outlook is
poor at best, and many food products produced by the private sector are deliberately
diverted away from citizens and into the military.
The combined effects of our current ascetic regime coupled with serious fertilizer
shortages and structural constraints have been highlighted as evidence suggesting serious
food shortages in the near future. Other agricultural troubles such as scarce fertile land
and a short growing season have resulted in a deficit of staple grain output of more than 1
million tons from what the country needs to meet internationally-accepted minimum
requirements.5
In order for North Korea to survive we have been receiving international food
and fuel aid from China, South Korea, and the United States, not in good faith or within
the frame work of trade, but rather in an exchange for promises not to develop nuclear
weapons. This culminated In June 2005 when the U.S. announced that it would give
50,000 metric tons of food aid to us in exchange for compliance to United Nation
Regulations.6
This sort of bartering for the prospect of peace has been our greatest source of
trade with the United States and seems to be our only means of communication with the
west up to this point. However if we agree to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
by guaranteeing to the United States and the developing world that this exchange will
actually occur; the rewards could be just what we need to boost our dying economy.
Plan of Action-Policy and Procedures
4
Ibid
Ibid
6
Ibid
5
Due to the current conditions of our nation and based on our historical record of
economic and social success, I propose the following measures be implemented
immediately. First we as country and a nation must recognize the need to be
competitive through industry with regards to the production of goods and services.
How we go about doing this must be carefully orchestrated and devised so as we
do not in any way receive the short-end of the stick, so to speak. In order that we have
the upper hand throughout our business ventures, I propose we sign the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty, under the condition that the United States, Japan and South
Korea, provide us with the technology in the form of nuclear fuel which will
supplement potentially booming but energy-starved economy.
What the United States and its allies require of us in return will be hinged upon
determining how exactly they plan to go about segregating our nuclear weapons work
from our current commercial nuclear program, and place the latter under international
inspection, in a way that satisfies both sides and in effect ends the conflict once and
for all.
Overall I expect that the consequences of this radical and progressive measure
will be positive. That being said, there is always the possibility as with anything new,
that there will be growing pains in the process which I foresee as a minimal price to
pay in exchange for the economic rewards that are sure to follow.
With the agreement of the United States to promote bilateral trade by opening
out a path from the U.S. market to North Korean made products, I feel the long-term
effects on our country will be phenomenal. The recognition of North Korea by the
U.S. as having the authority to certify industrial products for global trade will bring
an estimated $60 Billion addition to our current economy.
Overall I feel that in the signing of the non-proliferation treaty and the
establishment of an industrial society, both the United States and North Korea will
have made monumental progress by advancing our strategic partnership to meet the
global challenges of the 21st century. Both our countries are linked by a deep
commitment to freedom and democracy; a celebration of national diversity, human
creativity and innovation; a quest to expand prosperity and economic opportunity
worldwide; and a desire to increase mutual security against the common threats posed
by intolerance, terrorism, and the spread of poverty
Furthermore I am convinced that a successful transformation of the U.S.-North
Korea relationship will have a decisive and positive influence on the future
international system as it evolves in this new century.
Sincerely,
Emmanuel Cournede
President of the Central Peoples Committee
(CPO) North Korea
Work Cited
“North Korea." Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 28 February 2006
<http://en.wikipedia.org/=North Korea
Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. 28 Feb. 2006. Wikimedia Foundation. 28 Feb.
2006 <http://en.wikipedia.org>.
Michael Kawada
CIO
3/1/06
POLS 315
GPIR Simulation Essay 1
Section A
This graph shows the percentage of malnourished children in North Korea. As
you can see, whichever scenario North Korea takes, the percentage will ultimately
decrease over the next 14 years. However, going by the security first method, the
percentage drops the least (approx 6 % total). With any other scenario, the percentage
drop is approximately 1-3% greater.
We are concerned about the poor health of our country, and this graph will
support our plans for improving our “inner wealth” (Lasswell). We will attempt to do
this through many decisions, one being to lower military spending from its current and
actual state. Our goal is indeed similar to the drift (working scenario). However, we
may choose to use the markets scenario, since that also provides an even greater drop in
percentage of malnourished children.
According to the first (Base) graph, military spending is going from $575 million
to $605 million from 2005 to 2020. For the Markets graph, it’s $575 million to $640
million for that same year interval. And for the Security graph, it’ll go from $620 million
to $675 million.
I believe it is safe to say that the graphs for these three scenarios - base, markets,
security - show a correlation between the well-being of our people and our country’s
military spending. If we want to improve the current health of our people, we can either
follow our drift (base) or goal (markets) state. All we have to do is avoid the security
scenario (i.e. the scenario with the greatest rise in military spending) to get closer to
accomplishing our task.
So what are the effects of these trends? If we are to go with the base or markets
model, I don’t see it as any threat to our country. We won’t need to allocate as much to
the military, seeing as how we already have one of the world’s largest armed forces. A
small percentage drop should be safe. If anything, this may slightly ease tensions with
the other eight countries in the simulation. This trend could possibly boost international
relations and trade. A decrease in military spending would further ease the South
Koreans along the Demilitarized Zone.
This money will instead be directed towards economy and the people; hence, the
greater drop in malnourished children. Other countries may see this as a step towards a
more democratic nation and want to provide foreign aid.
Section B
As the Chief Intelligence Officer of North Korea, my teammates will expect me to
find out vital information on the countries we will be dealing with in the simulation. I’m
looking forward to communicating with other country’s CIO’s a handful of times.
During these meetings, the other countries will expect me to give them legitimate
information regarding our country’s plans. I don’t foresee too many problems, but
definitely many unanswered questions.
My theory is the other countries will want us to abandon our nuclear program and
will promise us economic aid in return. Because our country lacks resources its only
rational option is to agree to other country’s demands if they will benefit us. If they
threaten us, we could always go to war. We do have one of the world’s largest armed
forces, and at least the second largest unit of Special Forces. The best plan for us is
instead to concentrate on improving our standard of living and pull the country out of its
impoverished state peacefully. Some of the other countries will be most likely willing to
help us with our food and fertilizer shortages. Of course, there are constraints caused by
our focus on firm political control. This is something that we must “loosen up” if any
moving forward will occur.
Out of the other eight countries in the simulation, I only see us being involved
with China, South Korea, Japan, Russia, and the United States. We hold a strategic
location since we share borders with China, South Korea, and Russia. The three of them
could be excellent trade partners if they let be. Japan is not too far away either. South
Korea’s policy will be one of the biggest factors. Does she want to reunite? The United
States will be part of the big picture as well, although last I heard from them they wanted
to conquer North Korea (in the simulation). There’s also China, the country to which
many North Korean citizens are fleeing. Will this illegal emigration continue to be a
problem to China?
To sum it up, my intentions for this simulation are to loosen up our rigid political
system, divert spending from military to other aspects and thus improve economic
conditions of North Korea and the well-being of our people, and work for better relations
with the other countries, especially South Korea and the United States. I am optimistic
that we can reach our goals, peacefully.
North Korea

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/kn.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_korea

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/02/08/koreas.aid.ap/index.html
Section C
Press Release: North Korea’s Foreign Policy
This just in! North Korea’s foreign policy seems to be making a 180. The
country has stated in its new foreign policy that it will strive to be a more peaceful and
economically-oriented nation; this coming from the country currently headed by a oneman dictatorship, leader of the Korean Workers’ Party as well as the Korean People’s
Army.
In its plans for 2006, North Korea pledges that it will turn its attention away from
“firm political control” and direct it towards improving the economy and way of living.
There is no word yet about whether the communist country will be abandoning their
nuclear arms program as other countries such as the United States have demanded. Talks
are to resume later this month. However, North Korea has said it plans to cut military
spending from its current level, which is around 25% of the nation’s GDP. In addition, it
looks to increase trade with China and South Korea. There is no word yet about whether
the economy will move towards capitalism or not.
In its efforts to implement this new foreign policy, North Korea says it will be
open to talks with any country that wants to negotiate any unsettled disputes. Is this new
policy all talk-no action? Only the future holds the answer.
Chip Lollar
CSO
POLS 315
GPIR Simulation
Essay 1 Assignment
Section A
I felt that this graph was important because it focuses on World Energy Sources.
By the interpretation of the graph it is apparent that finding renewable resources in the
near future is very important to the well being of North Korea and any other country for
that matter. It is obvious that there is already a limited supply of other resources such as
gas, oil, coal, etc and that this supply is declining. This graph can be related to Maslow’s
list of “Basic Needs.” Energy is an essential part of any country’s survival. I believe that
it is essential for North Korea to find ways to fulfill their energy needs. Ways in which
this can be accomplished include experimenting and discovering with affordable
renewable resources and by trading with other countries.
I felt that this graph was very important because it depicted the current situation
dealing with poverty and hunger throughout North Korea. This graph can be connected to
conditions of the GDA Model. North Korea currently faces many desperate economic
conditions and poverty and hunger throughout the country are the result of these
conditions. By the interpretation of the graph it is apparent that the percentage of people
whose incomes are less than a dollar a day is very high; this can be referred to as the (A)
or the “actual” or present situation in North Korea. The (D) or “drift” in this case, or
vision of what one might believe if this situation prevails, is starvation throughout North
Korea and a continuous trend towards a greater gap between lower and upper classes
throughout North Korea which could eventually lead to an economic disaster. The (G)
or “goal” in this situation is for the North Korean government to cut back on military
spending and start concentrating on other problems throughout the country such as
poverty and hunger. This can be accomplished by creating for more jobs which will allow
for greater wages. If this is not accomplished North Korea economic situation as well as
the domestic situation will continue to decline.
Section B
Demands that my teammates and members of other countries are likely to make
are simply to just show up and participate in the simulation. Furthermore, they also may
demand that I provide them with adequate information regarding by organization and role
as a CSO. During the course of this simulation I plan to play the role of the president of a
private non-profit organization called the American Friends Service Committee
(AFSC). AFSC has been working continually with North Korea since 1980 and its main
goal is to provide relief work to poverty and famine based on a philosophy of “human
dignity and social justice.” One of the reason I choose to be apart of this organization is
because it has good recognition among the general public in the U.S and has successful in
generating hundreds of thousands of dollars to relief throughout North Korea. Support
that I expect from my team members includes their help working towards a common goal.
This common goal includes more regulation of government spending; this can be
connected to Lasswell’s definition of power and the distinction he makes between politics
and governance. Lasswell states that it is important to maintain a balance between
military preparedness vs. the welfare of one’s country. As the president of my
organization I hope to help assist the North Korean government in maintaining this
balance. In addition, I do not expect funding from any members of my group nor do I
expect them to impose authority on my organization. I am looking forward to the start of
the simulation and I hope that my group members and I can work to improving the
current political and economic situation throughout North Korea.
Section C
As far as policies that I would like to promote I feel that I do not have much say
on this topic because I am a CSO and am apart of a private organization. However, I do
feel that because North Korea is currently facing economic and political instability it
would be in their best interest to maintain a state of neutrality as far as war is concerned;
unless for example we are directly attacked. In addition, I believe that opening up and
maintaining steady trade with other countries such as China, Japan, India, and the US
would also be in our best interest. Moreover, I believe maintaining a good relationship
with China is especially important since the North Korean government is looking to buy
coal from China as main source of cheap and effective energy. I believe much Like
Lasswell Politics “is about the management of coercive relations,” thus it important for
the North Korean government to come up with good policies and maintain good relations
with other countries. In the end, I hope to help my teammates carry out their policies
(assuming I am in agreement with them) and work towards the common goal of
improving North Korea’s economic, domestic, and political situation.
Michael Profetto
CMO
POLS 315
Prof. Chadwick
GPIR Simulation
Essay 1 Assignment
Sections A & B
North Korea stands at a crossroads in history. We have long been taught to
believe that we must reunite with our brethren in the southern part of our beloved
fatherland. Our forbears and supreme leader have prepared for us to take back our
fatherland in all its entirety by force if need be. As a show of our impressive force, we
have assembled the Korean People’s Army, the world’s fifth largest military force.i As
the military commander of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea I am proud to
announce that as of 2003 we control:
… an imposing and formidable force of 1.17 million active personnel with a reserve force
of over 5 million, making [us] the fifth largest military force in the world. The ground
forces are organized into eight infantry corps, four mechanized corps, an armor corps,
and two artillery corps. The KPA air force consists of 92,000 personnel, and is equipped
with some 730 mostly older combat aircraft and 300 helicopters. The 46,000-man KPA
navy is primarily a coastal force.ii Additionally, the KPA maintains the largest special
operations force (SOF) in the world, consisting of approximately 100,000 highly trained,
totally dedicated soldiers.iii
A continued and integral part of our military preparedness includes our
employment of weapons of mass destruction, including chemical weapon stockpiles,
nuclear stockpiles, and both short and medium range missiles.iv We most likely have
intercontinental ballistic missiles, but our supreme leader has not allowed for the official
release of such information as of yet. We are already self-sufficient in the manufacturing
of chemical agents and we may have enough plutonium for at least two atomic weapons. v
We have gotten to this point in our history by preparing for our unavoidable
“supreme national task” since the initial split of our beloved peninsula in 1945. This
supreme national task is for us to reunite our mighty fatherland under our Supreme
Leader’s rule and to then protect the entirety of our peninsula from any and all imperialist
forcesvi. This imaginary split through our fatherland was initially intended to be a
temporary split to facilitate Japanese troop removal from Korea after World War Two in
1945. It quickly became a permanent split in 1948 as the United States and the U.S.S.R.
began the cold war. Our esteemed fatherland had been intact for over a thousand years
before that artificial division was created by the “imperialist aggressors and their lackey
running dogsvii.” With that division, our government laid ties with the U.S.S.R. while the
south laid ties with the United States. The stage for our future was set by our first
illustrious leader, Kim Il Sung. To understand him is to understand the basis for the
Democratic People’s Republic of Koreaviii.
Kim Il Sung was educated and trained as a guerrilla fighter by Chinese
communists in his early years and continued both his military and political training in the
U.S.S.R during World War II. Through these experiences, our premier leader based our
government on the model of the wartime Soviet State. As a result, his base belief was that
the purpose of the state was to wage war effectively. “In his view, economic activity
produced the means to wage war, education produced soldiers to wage war, and ideology
convinced the people the sociological and historical inevitability of warix.” With this
political model in play, our Supreme Leader was able to promote nationalism for North
Korea, foster xenophobia against all foreign nations, and promote his “military-first
policy” to our peoplex.
Despite the fact that we are a strong people led by our current leader Kim Jong Il,
we still face many problems. Our “military-first policy” ensured that we developed an
impressive military, but it did so at the expense of daily public needs. While our people
will always fight and die for our nation, they still lack the simple necessities such as food,
energy, and a stable economy. If we examine our situation utilizing Lasswellian values
we can see that portions of our values are quite lopsided. The wellbeing of our people is
taken care of in the realm of military security, but not in the realm of basic necessities
such as food, shelter, and employment. This is true also within the power aspect of our
country. We have a great wealth of military power, but no other type. The wealth of our
country is spent almost entirely on military requirements, thus leaving our population
extremely poor. Being a communist nation requires that our citizens maintain their belief
as atheists, forcing their rectitude to be twisted into nationalism. Our education system is
wonderful, in terms of training citizens to be special operations military units. Otherwise
there is a bare minimum of education. As far as respect goes, I do believe that our
citizens maintain a high amount of respect due to their patriotic pride in being Korean,
but the impossibility for social mobility, their lack of education, and their lack of basic
goods and services probably diminishes their nationalism. Finally, as far as affection is
concerned, it is widely known that all of our citizens truly love our esteemed leader. Also,
in their personal realms, since there is a lack of energy and thus electricity throughout our
state, their affection for each other must be great as there is little else to do on those cold,
dark Korean nights.
With the basis of our military might explained, and the theory of why our
citizenry is discontent, one might ask why I believe that our great nation is at a crossroads.
The answer is simple. Having built up such a formidable offensive force one might
suggest that we take our military resources and progress them to their natural, inevitable
conclusion. This would be to use our forces to overwhelm South Korea and reunite our
fatherland by force, keeping in line with both our “Supreme National Task” and over fifty
years of preparation for such a task. However, this course of action would potentially lead
to the loss of countless lives, would further strain our economy, and could quickly
escalate to the point of our utilizing weapons of mass destruction; thus rendering our
pristine homeland uninhabitable. We would also run the risk of involving some of our
larger neighbors in our dispute, such as the United States, China, Japan, or the European
Union. Our other option, our fork in the road as it were, would allow us to cease open
hostilities with our neighbor to the south and seek a reunification through more peaceable
means. We could potentially consider increased economic trade, along with increased
food supplies in exchange for disarmament and the possibility of allowing United Nations
weapons inspectors back into our industrial sectors. We could potentially seek to reform
our economic model, much as China has, and open up new avenues of trade to the west.
As the following graph suggests, the chance of war with our neighbor to the south lessens
with each passing year. Despite the fact that we currently have a 70% chance of having a
war with South Korea, there is the implicit fact that we have a 30% chance of not going
to war with South Korea. If certain steps are taken in both states to avoid this situation,
neither of our militaries might ever have to be deployed. Perhaps we could promote a
faster “cooling off” period through these potential reforms.
In seeking to promote a prolonged period of peace between our two countries, it
would be wise to investigate what benefits to gross domestic production a “market first”
environment might offer as opposed to our current “working” model or even a more
militaristic based “security” model. In the following graph we can clearly see that while
the short term differences are negligible, the long term differences between a “security”
and “market first” economy are enormously drastic. It would be a presumption that with a
higher GDP, we would be able to retain more of our population as well as supply them
with more food and basic commodities.
To further examine this concept of supplying more food and basic commodities
for our citizenry, it might be useful to investigate how one of our most basic needs,
mainly food availability, would be affected. In addition to the previous graph, by
investigating the total number of calories available for every member of our population
every day, we can further see the benefits of a market first economy in comparison to a
“security” run economy.
Higher caloric availability would not only aid in worker production and thus aid
to GDP, but together these factors would also theoretically fulfill some of our most basic
needs. Increased food availability would fulfill some of Maslow’s basic needs for
survival, thus allowing the next requirement of security (in this case military security) to
also be fulfilled. For Lasswell, increased food availability would allow for a more
balanced sense of wellbeing and would allow for improvements in wealth, education, and
skills as GDP increased. In the GDA model, the combination of increased food
availability and an increased GDP would reduce the frustration level of the citizenry and
would further us to our main goals of nurturing and improving the quality of life for our
population.
Here we can see that there is a difference of at least 50 available
consumable calories per capita per day between the two systems as early as 2015. This
spread expands to a difference of almost 800 calories per capita per day in the year 2085.
With our current famine situation, a difference of that magnitude can make all the
difference in the word for a population. It would also assist in stopping the problem of
having population shifts into China due to a lack of food and basic commodities.xi
Examining our people’s actions shows the ability we possess to meet our people’s
needs. With a steady flow of comrades out of our country due to famine, economic
privation, and political oppression,xii we can see how we are failing some of our people. It
is these failures that prompts us to stand-up and make a decision. According to the GDA
model, the more frustration, disempowerment, and alienation there is of the citizenry, the
further away from our goal we’ll be. Inaction will only lead to destitution of our proud
fatherland and the legacy we have built for Koreans everywhere. Inaction will only allow
the international community more time to nip at our heels, forcing us to falter and
become subservient to their will.
At this juncture in time we have to weigh our options carefully. Our military
might is strong and able but our people vie for food and basic necessities. We can grab
what we want now and risk an escalation in war with states such as the United States, the
European Union, China, or Japan; or we can all come to the bargaining table and broker a
peace between these two lands. The division created by the imperialists between the great
fatherland that is Korea will be sewn whole again; but will it be forged by the clash of
steel and fire or painstakingly mended by the tailors of diplomacy? Only time and the
leaders of our great nations will decide.
i Hodge, Homer T. (2003) North Korea’s Military Strategy p. 73
ii US Department of Defense. (August 2000).Country Handbook: North Korea.
Washington: DOD.
iii Bermudez, Joseph S. Jr. (1998). North Korean Special Forces, Second Edition (p. 1).
Annapolis, Md.: Naval
Institute Press.
iv US Department of Defense. (August 2000).Country Handbook: North Korea.
Washington: DOD.
v ibid
1998 Socialist Constitution of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. (p. 2)
Hodge, Homer T. (2003) North Korea’s Military Strategy p. 69
viii
Hodge, Homer T. (2003) North Korea’s Military Strategy p. 71
ix
Hodge, Homer T. (2003) North Korea’s Military Strategy p. 73
x
ibid
vi
vii
xi US Central Intelligence Agency. (2006, January 10). CIA: The World Factbook: North
Korea. From
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/kn.html
xii ibid
Michael Profetto
POLS 315
Prof. Chadwick
GPIR Simulation
Essay 1 Assignment
Section C
This is an updated press release from the military advisor of the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea. Based upon previous cabinet-level meetings of our
government, it has been decided that we may be willing to allow weapon inspectors back
into our fatherland and may potentially even begin to disarm portions of our military in
exchange for international support for the following needs:
First, we would like to consider opening up trade with local partners such as
South Korea, China, and possibly even Japan and the United States. This trade
would hopefully stimulate industrial growth in our state around the borders of
China and South Korea.
Second, to fuel these economy-stimulating industries we need energy, and we
would like to propose a round of talks with all willing nations to consider
assistance for building power plants which run off of coal, hydro-electric, or
potentially even nuclear power.
Third, for the sake of our citizenry, we need more food supplies. Geography has
not helped our hand in growing crops and many of our citizens need at least
subsistence levels of food to prevent further famine and potential population
decreases.
We understand that in order to receive this much-needed international assistance
we will need to make some concessions in our national transparency, military research,
military development, and economic regulations. This is why we are encouraging a round
table discussion to come to some form of agreement that is mutually beneficial for all
parties involved. Without any international aid our only alternative option will be to
continue our current plans of developing further nuclear capabilities to provide power and
protection for our people. Such research could of course lead to our continued
manufacturing of fissile materials which could be used to protect our fatherland from any
form of imperial invasions. Other developing nations may be interested in purchasing our
research and materials in order to provide energy for their citizens as well and without
international aid, we would have no other viable economic choice but to seriously
consider such options.
In the long term, if we can diplomatically come to a solution aiding the citizens of
the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with food, economic prospects, and energy
now, then we will eliminate the chance of any form of aggression emanating from our
fatherland. With the elimination of stress on our citizenry in the forms of frustration,
alienation, and disempowerment, we will be better suited to achieving our goal of
potential global market integration. However, these stresses can only be relieved with
foreign assistance. We look forward to meeting with you all.
Matthew Wolfe
CFO—North Korea
02/21/05
POLS 315
Section A: The following are several graphs forecasted on the International Futures of
North Korea:
Gross Domestic Product at PPP
Agricultural Production
Exports
Power
There are several major threats to North Korea that can be identified by these
graphs. North Korea has an extremely low GDP, agricultural production, and few
exports. Even its power index is low in comparison to other countries in the simulation,
and that number is forecasted to decline considerably over the next 50 years. These
graphs point out different scenarios in which these trends can continue, and it is
important to distinguish under which conditions the optimal results occur in order to
make policies concerning these trends. In almost all the graphs (excluding the Power
Index graph) what Barry Hughes titles the “security first” scenario has the least beneficial
effects on the growth of GDP, agricultural production, and total exports. This leads me to
believe that severe conflict, self-protectionist policies, and increased military spending
would be harmful to the growth of North Korea. On the other hand, what Hughes titles
the “markets first” scenario has very significant advantages to the GDP and number of
exports. Following “market firsts” sort of policies would increase the GDP considerably,
make available many resources which North Korea is lacking, and also make available
many more resources for export.
Interestingly, the “markets first” scenario does little along the lines of agricultural
production in comparison to the “policy first” and “sustainability first” scenarios, and
mass starvation has been a major issue in the history of North Korea. If the well-being of
North Korea is as important as its wealth and power, then separate policies will have to
be made to focus on these different issues. The “market first” scenario also does very
little to decrease the decline in North Korea’s power index. What we, the members of
North Korea, will have to do is analyze the threats to our country and decide whether we
can live with the decrease in the power index, and if not, what kind of policies we should
design to confront the issue.
I believe we would owe it to North Korea and its people to make the best
decisions for the wealth and well-being of the country. Various graphs that I have looked
at seem to show that policies based on conflict, self-protection, and military might will
have a significantly harmful effect on the country in the long run. I believe the highly
centralized system of North Korea has detrimental effects on the economy and the quality
of life of North Koreans. Establishing and focusing on a more market based economy
will greatly increase the wealth of North Korea. Also, creating policies strongly aimed at
decreasing poverty and the number of malnourished people in the country will transform
North Korea into a country that is ready for the future, while current policies will
certainly leave North Korea in the dust of the developed world.
Section B:
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the end of several trade relations,
North Korea’s economy is in poor condition. Its agricultural production is low due to
lack of arable land, lack of supplies such as fertilizer and tractors, and poor farming
practices, and mass starvation is commonplace (World Factbook). North Korea suffers
from a lack of fuel and spare parts, blackouts occur frequently, and they rely on foreign
support from countries like China, South Korea, and the United States for assistance with
food, fertilizers, parts, and energy (U.S. Department of State). I imagine a major goal of
my group will be to obtain the resources needed to increase the quality of life and
maintain a successful infrastructure in our country. My group will want me, as the CFO,
to work with trade partners like China, South Korea, and Japan to work toward a more
stable economy in our country. I imagine my group will want to move away from a more
centralized government, as the graphs above show the exponential growth of wealth that
can occur with the establishment of a more market based economy. I also imagine,
should conflict not arise, that military funding will be cut. A significant reason for our
faltering economy is that close to 25% of our GNP is used for military (U.S Department
of State).
Other countries in the simulation, in particular the U.S., will want us to abandon
our nuclear weapons and work on bettering the rights of the people in our country in
exchange for the kind of aid we will need. The United States, China, and South Korea
have pushed strongly for the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, and in JulySeptember 2005, North Korea committed to abandoning its nuclear program to the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and allowing International Atomic Energy Agency to
make inspections (U.S. Department of State). Countries will push us to move quickly,
and I believe this can be used as a bargaining tool to provide food and developmental aid
from these countries. The United States and other human rights organizations declare
that human rights of North Korea to be among the worst in the world. Our government’s
tight control over any action taken in the country severely limits the civil liberties of the
people of North Korea. There are severe restrictions on the freedom speech, movement,
press, and religion, and there is some evidence of prison camps where non-supporters are
detained and torture is commonly used (Wikipedia). These sorts of actions will more than
likely come into question, and working to better the human rights of our country,
including mass starvation, will earn North Korea much more respect from countries like
the United States and South Korea.
If our goal in the simulation is to reunite with South Korea, as has been the goal
for almost the last 40 years, there are a couple different ways we could try and achieve
this goal. First, we could attempt to use our military strength to invade South Korea
aggressively. North Korea has the fourth-largest army in the world, with around 1.2
million armed troops, the second-largest special operations force, and a numerical
advantage over South Korea (2 or 3:1) (U.S. Department of State). However, if
aggression is sought, it will most certainly bring the United States to use military force to
protect its interests in the area. If conflict should arise, my group will need me to work
with countries, particularly China, to ally with us and provide support. The graphs shown
above, however, show that long-term conflict oriented policies will take its toll on the
North Korean economy, which at the moment can hardly support itself.
The second approach to reunification would be a more diplomatic approach.
Several committees were formed in December 1991—on South-North reconciliation,
South-North military affairs, South-North economic exchanges and cooperation, and
South-North social and cultural exchange—to work toward reunification, but most action
was stopped in 1992 when North Korea failed to follow the other part of the agreement,
which “forbade both sides to test, manufacture, produce, receive, possess, store, deploy,
or use nuclear weapons and forbade the possession of nuclear reprocessing and uranium
enrichment facilities” (U.S. Department of State). The North Korean government has
been stubborn to fully denuclearize until it recently announced, in 2003, that it would
abandon its nuclear programs. The best way to move toward reunification diplomatically
would be to do this as quickly and safely as possible. Another good approach is to focus
investing and building a larger industrial region to experiment with capitalism while
creating the infrastructure between North and South Korea and strengthening trade
relations. My group will need me to work with China, South Korea, the U.S., and Japan
to ensure diplomacy and make strong ties with countries that can assist us in our
reunification effort.
I feel strongly that if we really try to diplomatically and peacefully ensure the
wealth and well-being of North Korea, the response from other countries will be a
positive one. North Korea may not be in good shape at the moment, but trends show that
the right policies could certainly correct its faltering economy and shaky history.
Section C:
North Korea has been in bad condition for a long time. Its highly centralized
government maintains firm control on almost all actions, including outlawing cellular
phones, and rationing food, seizing most of it for the military (World Factbook). North
Korea lacks resources and remains one of the most isolated economies in the world; mass
starvation occurs almost every year; non-governmental organizations are outlawed;
foreign food aid has been turned down; and, perhaps not so surprisingly, the government
spends too much on military spending to use for investment or civilian consumption
(World Factbook). North Korea has an abhorrent human rights record and very few, if
any, civil liberties. Another major threat to the country is the skyrocketing cost of oil.
North Korea creates no oil, and estimates placed consumption at around 25,000 bbl/day
in 2003 (World Factbook). North Korea has a severe fuel shortage and blackouts occur
frequently. Major changes need to take place to reform the condition and stagnating
policies currently in use.
It seems as though the only major focus of the government has been establishing a
strong, and expensive, military, but to what end? While our military may come in handy
in the defense of our country, using it abroad—at least in the simulation—seems like a
bad move. As we have seen in class, military strength is only part of a country’s power.
If we were to, let’s say, invade South Korea in an effort to reunify aggressively, I feel
confident that our military would succeed. However, our country is not prepared for long
term conflict with a country like the United States, which would most certainly happen.
We also have very little to offer other countries for their assistance, and it is most
certainly not in the interest of any other country, I’m speaking in particular about China,
to assist us. It is for these particular reasons that I suggest using military force abroad
unless absolutely necessary.
Still, I do strongly believe that moving quickly and diplomatically toward a
reunified Korea would be in the best interests of the people of both nations. As an initial
step, I suggest that we uphold our agreement to abandon our nuclear weapons programs
and work with the NPT and IAEA to denuclearize the Korean peninsula as quickly and as
safely as possible. These efforts would certainly gain the respect of the United States,
China, and South Korea. With some work to improve human rights, our country would
certainly ease rising tensions with the United States. Putting this nuclear weapons
problem behind us will give us the chance to continue work through reunification
committees. It also promises to provide a great deal of aid from other countries, and I
would suggest pushing to have the United States help us with food aid and development
aid, creating light-water nuclear power plants to support our energy crisis and provide us
with cheaper renewable energy.
Another set of strong reform policies need to be taken to stimulate our economy
and improve our trade relations with surrounding countries. I suggest expanding our
industrial area in the south, near Kaesŏng, along the entire Demarcation Line and also
along the Chinese border. Policies would be aimed at experimenting with capitalism
while improving infrastructure and trade relations with our major partners. The food
rationing system will be ceased in these areas, open-air markets will be allowed to buy
and sell goods freely, investment in small businesses will increase, and the construction
roads and railways across the Demarcation Line will also increase. I believe strongly that
if we greatly reduce our military spending and use it to strengthen our economy and
infrastructure, we can expect support—possibly even the energy—to accomplish our
goals from China, South Korea, Japan, and even the United States.
Sources:
“North Korea”. U.S. Department of State. Nov. 2005. 19 Feb. 2006. Can be found at:
<http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2792.htm>
“North Korea”. Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 23 Feb. 2006. 19 Feb. 2006. Can
be found at: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea>
“North Korea” World Factbook. 10 Jan. 2006. 19 Feb. 2006. Can be found at:
<http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/kn.html>