9:59 "President drump warned that his North Korean counterpart" Lmao well written. I am glad that you dont let yourself be intimidated by the far right vocal minority and call trump what he is: A narcissistic wannabe dictator.
The timing of this video is rather interesting given the Sri Lankan Minister of Finance admit just this week to having purchased weapons from NK using black market dollars
The North Korea problem is meant to be not resolved. It keeps a legitimate reason for U.S. to keep a strong military presence at China/Russia's doorsteps. And China wants the buffer to exist indefinitely. Unification of the Korean peninsula will inevitably disrupt the current power equilibrium and destabilize the region. When all six parties of the nuclear talks benefit from maintaining the status quo, there is no incentive to make any meaningful progress.
A simpler answer, and more likely to be correct, North Korea doesn't want to give up their nukes because they can use it as as blackmail, that's it, nothing more, nothing less. Same reason why Iran also want them.
I just wanted to say that the fact that you include your sources is extremely appreciated. Even if I don't read them, it's still important that you do that because for me it still increases your credibility, and it gives the more curious viewer extra material.
Its good to have. If you want to cite info (for an argument or paper) from this video, having the source of that info is immensely helpful. I wish that would become the format for channels like this.
THIS WHY IM VERY LUCKY TO LIVE IN INDIA 🤗🇮🇳 THE SUPERPOWER RICHEST AND CLEANEST COUNTRY, I CAN'T IMAGINE IF I WAS NOT BORN IN INDIA , WE ALWAYS RESPECT FOR WOMEN AND WE HAVE TOILETS ANYWHERE , INDIA IS ROLE MODEL COUNTRY TRUST ME 🤗🇮🇳 I KNOW MANY PEOPLE JEALOUS CANT LIVE IN INDIA 🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳
15:08 It's not much, but "no economy" is a caricature. And I don't know about you, but given the choice between North Korea or Cuba and some nominally post-colonial nation with comparable GDP like Mozambique or Sierra Leone, I might be inclined to choose one that has managed to survive decades resisting global imperialism. It's still a garbage option, but imagine if there weren't all the failed sanctions designed to create a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure.
As a Korean, who've had to go through loads of people asking questions about North Korea, I cannot describe how accurate this video is, and how much I appreciate PolyMatter for covering this. 1. North Korea isn't acting irrationally - in fact, it's acting perfectly rationally. People who don't understand context ask me why North Korea is crazy / weird / so barbaric etc. They never want to understand North Korea as is, and neither do I have the knowledge as well prepared as PolyMatter to present. 2. I personally consider North Korea to be highly strategic. No other country in my opinion has got away with keeping a successful authoritarian government with that much mistreatment and poverty impacting directly its citizens. 3. The fact that good part of the responsibility lies in America's inability to gain trust. Not a lot of people know about the agreements made in Clinton era, how Bush 180'ed on this. At the time, South Korea had its first democratic president (Kim Dae Jung) and who fought for democracy for the past 30 years (some even say he's Korea's Nelson Mandela) and his pledge was to repair relations with North Korea, and they were making progress. We were talking about reunification 10 years after (I remember this because I was in primary school at the time) but it all broke down. To be clear, I don't blame the US for this (it's not like it was intentional) but if you think North Korea's seemingly crazy behaviour is self-made, and rest of the world had nothing to do with it, that's simply not true. They are rational (and in fact too rational and strategic) solutions to the problem they were given. Also, this doesn't in any way excuse N.K.'s treatment of its citizens or their behaviour. I'm simply explaining that we are up against an enemy who knows what they are doing. Rather like an ingenious chess engine AI that makes a weird queen sacrifice move to win the game (look that up! by GothamChess) just because we can't understand the move or the context does not mean the move itself was irrational.
Big thanks mate. I think it also shows the differences of a democratic (a less continuous, more prone to change) foreign policy with the ROK, US, and Japan, and a more authoritarian (a singular interests, but all the similar deniability) in dealing with DPRK.
As a fellow countryman, you definitely hit it on all points. The west sees the North as irrational but they have rationality if you understand the context and how the US scewed over the peninsula after WW2. We wouldnt have been a divided country if it wasnt for the proxy war US and USSR played with our politicians. Also the US should have truly carried out its promises with the more sensible and diplomatic grandfather, Kim Il Sung. But the time has passed and i doubt Korea will ever truly be reunified.
I think people struggle a lot to understand high level politics, tbh. It's much easier to have the simplistic idea that "weird country is crazy" than to understand the complexities of politics in general and international diplomacy in particular. In situations like NK (or any hard dictatorship), sanctions are little more than spiteful punishment for an already powerless population, causing immense, inhumane harm to innocent people while accomplishing absolutely nothing of use.
Th issue is that's what the North Koreans want you to belive in reality they do have Revel, peopl are leaving and any one who has wrong think is gulaged... Those are signs of failure not success.
Depends on what you mean by 'works'. While sanctions are billed as being about regime change, really that is not their point. Sanctions are all about scoring domestic political points and demonstrating your power to allies to impact their industries. They do not 'work' for the same reason foreign aid does not 'work'... the publicly framed goals and the actual policy objectives are not the same, thus they DO work for doing what the are supposed to do.
Sanctions work more to deter OTHERS from doing the same. The country being sanctioned likely won’t change much since they already started down this path but those sanctions help deter others from starting down the same path.
Sanctions can work. There are a range of sanctions and who and what to target anyway. You don't have to do full economic sanctions, you can target individuals. Full economic sanctions pressure the government to act for fear of uprising or overthrow. If a country is powerful enough(economically or militarily), it's a bit pointless. A lot of autocratic countries and puppet democracies have their military around not for defending the country, but to keep it's citizens in check. It also doesn't help that other countries help them out, or worse, corporations feed them money so business stays on track.
In other words, they don't actually work in honest transparency. They only work to score political points back home, at the expense of human livelihood and human lives.
@agapp11able omg, the CCP shill / Wumao is here. Still defending China over its concentration camps of Muslims in Xinjiang? To answer your question of “deter who”, well that would be anyone else other than North Korea. Countries / governments tend to act on what is in their best interests and a more prosperous economy is better for the leader. I’ll use your china as an example - why hasn’t china just invaded and taken over Taiwan? China now has the 2nd or 3rd strongest military in the world. The reason they don’t is because even if they successfully take Taiwan, their would be huge economic action against China that Chinas economy would suffer. It’s the potential of those economic sanctions why China is deterred from invading Taiwan.
@agapp11able I’ll repost the question. If you don’t think sanctions deter others from going down this path, why hasn’t China just invaded Taiwan considering China now has the 2nd strongest military and could take Taiwan. The answer is that China knows it will come with major sanctions against them and their economy will suffer. Same reason russia hasn’t just invaded Ukraine yet - they are looking for (manufactured) justification first so they could ignore some of the sanctions.
Having nuclear weapons is the only way to make sure no one dares to attack your country or yourself as a leader. Furthermore, it is hard to explain why certain countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons and others are not. I don’t like the idea, but we will have to accept that North Korea and Iran are Nuclear Powers.
It's like ticketing a homeless guy. What's he gonna do, scrounge up the couple hundred to pay you? No! He literally is too poor to be impacted by that shit.
Great video but you only mentioned one very important player in this geopolitical game briefly; China. China is the biggest reason for North Korea's continued existence today. North Korea trades mostly with China, and this is why western sanctions don't work because China will simply refuse to comply and keep trading with North Korea. China wants North Korea to exist as a buffer against South Korea, a US ally. Finally, any peace negotiation must also include China, because the Korean War armistice signed also includes them. Since relations between China and the US is getting colder now, it's even more unlikely for any peace deal with North Korea to be reached.
there is no peace because no one wants it. the us wants troops on chinese door steps and russia sure isn't going to allow us troops, so the only area is the koreas which has a mostly flat path to beijing if the us can make it to the chinese border. other regions like Afghanistan southeast asia and india cannot support a army going in china because of terrain, only from russia and the Koreas can you have a large army march on china(or the ocean i guess, but an amphibious assault is one of the hardest things to do, and this isn't a china of the 1890s). but for this exactly reason, china will never allow a pro-us united korea. china since ancient times knows damn well that the koreas are the path into china for a external, non-steppe enemy. this is why for hundreds of years it has sent tens to hundreds of thousands of troops to defend korea from the Japanese when the koreans were peaceful towards china and why it has sent invading armies to remove anti-chinese local korean kingdoms and either install or help a existing friendly korean kingdom take power. this is how Silla, the smallest of the korean kingdoms took control of all korea, as the Tang dynasty killed of the largest korean kingdom that was antagonistic toward the Tang. What the south and north Koreans want is, unfortunately, un-important . they are minnows in a shark tank. but it helps the great powers that what they want is unification but under their own government thereby making it easy for the great powers to say they are just there to help their allies. there really is only two ways that the koreas unite. either china and/or the us collapses and thus can no longer affect the politics and the military of the koreas(unlikely) . or SK demands and removes the us from the peninsula and works out a deal with china where it will remain at least neutral (even more unlikely, SK doesn't even have war time command of its own troops per its own constitution so the us will never allow this to get even close to happening).
@@mxn1948 the US would gladly trade removing all troops from South Korea in exchange for a peaceful North Korea. It’s actually very dumb comment with your suggestion that the US would be a threat to invade China from North Korea. Remind me again of when the US last fought a nuclear power? Remind me again how the US has invaded Russia while nato borders Russia? It’s typical of CCP trolls to argue that the US would potentially invade China. That’s makes it easy for you people to justify any action china does anywhere as it attempts to expand by either invading Taiwan or taking the South China Sea with its military as it builds fake islands.
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson Your statement doesn't make sense. No nuclear country has ever fought against another nuclear country in human history. And I'm pretty sure neither China or Russia started any war in 21th century. You seem to ignore how many wars US was involved: Iraq, Afgananstan, Syria, Libya and etc.
@@IAmSwatchingYou As long as Russia doesn't wage a real modern warfare against Ukraine, all statements stating Russia is aggressive are just hypothesis. Plus, they are only moving their armies in their own border. But we do know the one country has started several wars against weak nations in 21th century, and has not been entitled as aggresor by any of the "free" press.
I mean, sanctions "work" in the sense that they prevent it from becoming economically and militarily competitive as quickly as it would with free trade between it's state entities and the private and state entities of other countries. That is, the sanctions are effective militarily even if not so much diplomatically. Which is probably the real reason that the US continues to push for them so hard. DPRK with a per Capita GDP similar to the RoK would be quite a bit scarier for the US and it's allies.
Yeah, I guess. That's definitely the closest thing to an achievable goal the sanctions will produce. In the long term, what if other countries could offer the "carrot" approach (trade) without reprisal from the US financial system? If they are reintroduced into the global economy, slowly, then they will have internal pressure to adapt. It's a tough one though.
Economically and militarily competative with WHO? You think lifting the sanctions will make Korea competative globally? Next to China and Russia and USA and EU? Or do you think they will achieve military and economic level of its neighbors, such as Japan, S. Korea, China, and other Oceanic countries? Both of those notions are nothing more than Kim's wishful thinking
I mean there's also the wartime advantage sanctions provide, which unfortunately is for the exact same reason you provided, they primarily hit the populace, who are decreasingly able to act as a tax base to field an effective millitary It's why the US is considering "the mother of all sanctions" as an initial salvo against Russian invasion of Ukraine, and why the supposed war plan against China is to effectively create the economic effects of a sanction by just cutting them off from oceanic trade. The US, wartime doctrine has developed into something along the lines of "can't use that big strong millitary of yours if they all starve before we're even in range for you to shoot at!"
You do realize that Taiwan is the only real roadblock to oceanic trade though, right? That's why the media has suddenly started picking up State Department language- '1st island chain' to 'keep China boxed in'. It's all about controlling other countries, not freedom and democracy. If China takes Taiwan, it will be too late. Senkaku won't be enough to hold the Chinese Navy, and it will have unblockable access to the Pacific. There are no other staging grounds beyond Taiwan that the US can ally with or take over.
The paradox is that the weaker an economy, the less expensive it is to pay soldiers. In the US, the average salary of a soldier is 53k. In russia and china its 30k. For North Koreans, its less than than $100 per year. Sure, North Korea cant afford modern tanks or airplanes, but Russia and China send it a ton of Ak-47's and obsolete weapons so all it really needs to do is pay those soldiers chump change.
it works too. Japan knew prior to Pearl Harbor they had 6 months before America would strangle their trade and shipping and they'd run out of key materials to a point they could no longer mount a serious offense. Germany knew the same, they had more time thanks to overland routes and more local resources but they also knew a blockade and bombings would starve them out. This knowledge of American and British blockade and sanction efficiency is why both nations pursued similar offensive strategies and surprise attacks, they knew they needed to lunge for resources before the blockades could take affect. A land war with China would end in mass causalities on both sides with America eventually losing but thanks to China's reliance on oceanic shipping and trade sanctions would cripple their economy and a blockade would result in strict rationing and no fuel in no time, and America would simply have to wait for China to get desperate enough to strike first or give in. A first strike by China would allow America to call in allies and simply carry out a bombing campaign to cripple the country and soon without fertilizers, fuel, and food imports China's massive population would become a massive liability as food reserves run dry and mass starvation sets in. China weathered the Great Leap Forward's starvation thanks to fanatical devotion, complete lack of communication within China, insane censorship, and massive Soviet backing but without that the regime would crumble.
@@internetguy7870 if there were actual military deaths it would be an incredibly intense and semi-sporadic event. The us has two options if its attacked (there's more but for this context there's two) Sit back and consider it an international incident (as long as some deal is made) or in the case of a war with China its an immediate response with short range ballistic missles and fortifying key bases like those in Guam, Hawaii, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines. Any style attack would require a Peral Harbor sized attack on the us. With the exception of their population and modern technology modern China isn't in any more favorable positioning than the axis in ww2.
Sanctions do elevate the sense of patriotism among the sanctioned nation's populace, and hate towards the sanctionees' govmnt. "Patriotic feelings" of this nature among the sanctioned people tend to linger, even across generations. It's just a good way to plant seeds of hate for future generations to deal with and score some short term domestic political goals.
yeah it happened to vietnam but we hate China more than the US, the CCP is much much nastier for us so instead of hating the US we often find it satisfying witnessing the trade wars. China enemies = Vietnam's friends XD
@@lenguyenngoc479 Consider too that there are a lot of Vietnamese people that fled Saigon and came to America, invariably leaving lots of family connections behind. Vietnamese-Americans are some of the most hardworking folks out there, and we're quite happy to have them as part of our country. That cultural exchange went a long way towards mending relations I imagine.
@@Elendrian yeah my grandfather actually tried to flee but he got caught. Back then the VCP was absolutely brutal, they took many escapees like my grandfather to the middle of the village, letting the villagers decided their fates death or release. He's a well-known person and kinda kind so they chanted "free him he's good". Back then escapees were labeled as traitors but now if they send money back or invest in vietnam they are called patriotic viets bruh 🤧
@@lenguyenngoc479 USA literally dropped more bombs on Vietnam than the total amount of bombs dropped in World war 2 combined. They also committed mass crimes against humanity with "Agent orange" when they were literally throwing chemical weapons out their planes unto the Vietnam land and people making multiple million people suffer from cancer, leukemia and other disease caused by these chemical agents. And don't get me started on the "Phoenix program". I'm neither American, Chinese, Russian or Vietnamese but how brainwashed do you have to be to think the "CCP was far more nastier to you". It's like anti-China rhetoric can literally overwrite people's brains. Your country was literally razed to the ground, people mass slaughtered and had chemical agents sprayed on you and you STILL somehow believe the Chinese elites are worse than the USA ones. I just can't imagine how your people's(the ones who think like this) brains even work, it's amazing that we're the same species.
Holy shit man, I have a presentation on deterrence policies and authoritarian states next week and I had zero inspiration on where to start, this video is the best thing that happened to me today hahaha Thank you!!
@@R202X A "right" is just a synonym for an "option" (which is legally recognized by the state). The state determines the rights of its citizens as part of a social contract. Rights come at a price, since one man's right is another man's obligation. E.g. a right to healthcare means the state guarantees my option to consume healthcare, which taxpayers are obliged to pay for. The West doesn't seem to understand this tradeoff. "But who grants rights to a state?" A sovereign state, by definition, decides for itself what it can and can't do. It has the power to decide its own fate because power always flows from the barrel of a gun. Ergo, asking where a sovereign state receives its rights from, is akin to asking where a baker buys his bread from. A baker bakes his own bread, else he's not a baker but rather a merchant. Likewise, a sovereign state mints its own rights. Else the state isn't actually a sovereign state, but rather a protectorate. The short, glib answer is that might makes right, and U.S. hegemony has all the might.
Dear PolyMatter, Thank you for another well researched and developed video. The larger issue has never been whether sanctions will work, or not work. When the American pubic ( which is the driving force of this On Again / Off Again Negotiations ) becomes concerned about the DPRK, whatever President in office must appear, well "Presidential" in the sense that it is important to create policy towards the DPRK. The Reality has a larger picture, and that is that neither the US, nor China, Japan, and especially South Korea have any real intention to alter the status quo. China for the very reasons you named, they do not wish to have a pro US state on their border ( and with time a powerful one ), Japan does not wish to destabilize the region, and South Korea has no desire to absorb tens of millions of refugees, an issue that China fears almost as much as a Pro US State, they have no desire to create another large minority population that can unsettle the politics of that region. The ruling elite of the DPRK have no doubts about who would win in a conflict between the West and the DPRK, their goal is to make the image of such a conflict so horrible that they will be left alone and in control. The greatest threat to the DPRK is not sanctions, or war with the West, but is revolt of their own people, and they are slowly losing this battle.
1) It's commonly asserted that China just sustains the DPRK to prevent the formation of a unified ROK that is allied with the US from forming on its border. But a United ROK would not be allied with the US for long, as the only reason South Korea keeps US troops around is to defend them from North Korea. Without North Korea, the core justification for the ROK-US Alliance disappears (and US troops leave Korea soon afterward.) However, a United ROK is not the only type of unified Korea that can come about. North Korea has repeatedly asserted that the whole purpose of its nuclear weapons program is to achieve "Final Victory" in the Korean War and conquest over South Korea. Not through outright war or nuclear attack; NK wants to use the THREAT of war and nuclear attack to bully and intimidate SK into merging with NK into a one-country/two-system regime, but with NK as the dominant power in the union (and SK as its subservient vassal/tributary/puppet state). By supporting the DPRK, China seriously risks forming another Vietnam. After North Vietnam successfully drove out the US and conquered South Vietnam, Vietnam had no more use for China and told them to take a hike. Then China fought a war with Vietnam, lost and now Vietnam is allied to the US against China. Believe me; China does not want another Vietnam on their border. If China is upholding the DPRK to prevent a US-aligned unified Korea from forming on their doorstep, then that has the potential to backfire spectacularly on them in the future.
2) I agree that NK does not want war with the West, but it doesn't want peace either, precisely because, as you said, NK is afraid of a domestic revolt by its own people. The regime needs a powerful EXTERNAL enemy to rally and unite their people against, and to serve as a scapegoat for their citizens' poverty and deprivation. (Most economic researchers of NK, including those that oppose sanctions, agree that corruption and economic mismanagement are the primary reason for NK's poverty. Even if all sanctions against NK were lifted, average North Koreans' lives might improve a little bit, but they would still be desperately poor and repressed in comparison to all of their neighbors. If NK is at peace with the US, who else would average North Koreans have to blame besides their own leaders.) The nukes and the missiles may deter an invasion or war, but they also have the advantage of inviting _just enough_ international condemnation and threat of attack needed to make their domestic siege narrative credible enough so that people willingly fall in line.
North Korea would have never given up Nuclear Arms development no matter what the US did. Furthermore, there is no reason why the US needs to be the one negotiating Nuclear talks. In fact China, South Korea, and Japan should be the ones most concerned since those areas are of most benefit to North Korea in terms of proximity. America chose the route of sanction to punish the North Korean people, slow its population growth, GDP, and manpower for military in hopes of some internal collapse within North Korea. Honestly, while I liked your nuanced perspective, I would have to disagree with how you framed the subject.
I disagree with that sentiment not because its a bad take that does not make sense but merely because your argument although has some truth to it is heavily misguided. I absolutely believe the US should be the one negotiating nuclear talks mainly because the US itself is a nuclear power and if you really think about it, its quite hypocritical that a country that has over 5 thousand nukes is ignoring a nation that doesn't have the best track record for stability, is building nukes. Not that I'm saying what North Korea is doing is justified, its not, however it does make sense that a nuclear armed country engages in talks with another nuclear armed country. It really doesn't make sense for South Korea and Japan to negotiate with the North on nuclear weapons when they themselves have none. There is really nothing for South Korea and Japan can really offer to the North without bringing in the US. For example you could say that North Korea can demand South Korea and Japan to have all of American soldiers and their bases to vacant immediately since that is one of their motives as well. In exchange for North Korea their nuclear producstions. However, that demand is impractical because for one the US must be included in that talk because it does relate to them as well. North Korea doesn't really gain anything economically so their still in the same place as they were before. If anything South Korea and Japan doesn't really gain anything from it. Also it really doesn't really make sense for China to get involved considering the fact that a nuclear armed North Korea is in favor of China. They act as a buffer zone between themselves and the west (US). Considering the fact that South Korea and Japan is an ally of the US and the long term goal of North Korea is to establish a nuclear weapon that can target anywhere in the world which they have been succeeding in recently. It 100 percent makes sense that the US should be the one negotiating nuclear talks if they don't take the matter seriously then that shows to their allies that the US are not willingly ready or have any intentions of honoring their alliance with their allies. That is a huge no no for the US because economically east/southeast asia is a huge deal for the US as well as strategice in containing China. If they lose their foothold their that means their rival (China) will take that opportunity and try to input their sphere of influence. Further diminishing the US influence around the world affairs.
@@Trico450 What you say makes sense from a political alliance standpoint, however I don't agree that just because America has nukes, that they should be the defacto lead negotiator. Instead they should take a more peripheral role in the negotiation. The countries I mentioned above have the most leverage and greatest interest in getting NK to denuclearize, because that would mean greater trade, prosperity, and a new market for modernization for the involved parties, (something the US cannot provide on its own, and therefore NK would never denuclearize). Moreover those countries are better positioned geographically to provide humanitarian aid and building of infrastructure. This should not be a US spearheaded negotiation, because, from the standpoint of NK, the US doesn't care about helping them after they denuclearize. It's basically a Mexican standoff with an endless loop of "you put your weapon down, no you." By the same border buffer argument, China should be at the table to reassure NK that any offensive attack into their country will seen as an invasion of China, which is a stance they already take anyways as shown in their involvement of the Korean war. This would put NK in a similar position as Japan and SK in that they have no nukes but a powerful ally willing to defend them (China and US respectively). Moreover it is also in China's best interest to denuclearize NK, because having their wily neighbor with even the potential to poison the surrounding natural resource/environment with radiation for thousands of years is a great liability to the future of China. Hence why I say the surrounding regions should have a more vested interest in spearheading this negotiation.
@@YESHTOFU I think your misunderstanding something here. This whole debacle has everything to do with politics what it seems to me is that you think this situation is divided into many different sections with politics being one of them. That is not true at all. Whether we look at it from an economic standpoint or a militaristic standpoint it all ties into politics. We cannot ignore and downplay one aspect and think that one is more important than the other. Another thing before I get into this Both South Korea, Japan, and China all take this matter seriously in fact more seriously than the US currently did. Especially starting from the Obama administration which they prompted to do strategically nothing. You state that the countries surrounding North Korea has a far better leverage than the US but what I think you don't understand is that a country that is under the US sphere of influence doesn't always get to trade with anyone in the world. Especially if the US puts sanctions on that said country then it becomes difficult for countries under the US sphere of influence to trade with them. Not impossible but very difficult especially for foreign companies and depending on who is in office. As a country that is a nuclear armed country and has knowledge and firsthand witness of such destructive capabilities these weapons possess. It is their duty to make sure as well as other globally nuclear armed nations to keep the balance of the world. It is not fair for countries that don't even want nor have nuclear weapons to try and negotiate with the DPRK by themselves when the US is responsible for having their own troops and civilians living in both Japan and South Korea. If the US doesn't take a big stance on this issue it will look bad from their allies. I also don't agree with the notion of NK thinking the US won't help them after denuclearization because thats not true. What they are afraid of like what the video has stated is the lack of consistency even though they themselves are guilty of this as well. China and North Korea has agreed on a defense treaty but that does not necessarily mean that they are "allies" in fact like the video states China tolerates North Korea. Also reassuring both sides has happened and its one of the reasons to why we have such high tensions on both sides. I would not say its in the best interest of China for the denuclearization of North Korea but simply as long as there is a Korea free from western influences. As long there is something like that then no matter what the DPRK does China will support it. Of course as long as they don't start the war which the DPRK knows and will never be the one to instigate the war. Reassuring the DPRK could even encourage the North's behaviour even more. After all why should China have the DPRK open up to the west when there can be a potential opportunity for North Korea to become similar to the South after they opened up? Again there are vested interest on all sides as we have seen with recent events that occured and that talks can work if executed correctly.
@@Trico450 In my opinion, China probably has a better chance to bring NK under their sphere of influence should they open up and denuclearize. Moreover, it's not like the surrounding countries don't have experience in nuclear affairs either. While the surrounding countries have less experience dealing with nuclear weapons, they do have expertise in nuclear infrastructure i.e. for electrical power. Also the sanctions are in place because they are not denuclearized, but if the Asian countries can get them to denuclearize by being more involved, with the leverage I mentioned above, then the sanctions would not be in place. I'm not saying the US needs to pull out and let Asia deal with it, I'm saying the it's a mistake to have the US as the lead negotiator. Of course it's probably more complicated politically, but through this discussion, it's even more clear to me that China should be the one negotiating the denuclearization, because China doesn't give a crap about US sanctions on other countries and trades with them anyways lmao.
@@YESHTOFU I do agree that US should not lead the Sanctions and give Country such as South Korea to lead it considering how much the US has ignored a lot of the South's plan to deal with the North. As with recent events it was golden opportunity that the US again missed by not giving following South Korea doctrine in which Trump for example wanted the same thing previous presidents wanted at the end of the day. In which North Korea has stated several times that they will not follow through. Maybe we will see this plan under Biden's administration but I also highly doubt this. Considering how he was under Obama's administration. Personally I think it is more so that China doesn't want to nor cares about opening talks for negotatiion mainly because again they do not have much to lose/gain. Not to mention economically North Korea can end become a thorn to the Chinese considering the North will be competing with them in low skilled cheap labor. Deterring US/Western spheres of influences is their #1 goal rn considering how bad US/China relations are. So its probably going to be like this with the Chinese holding onto the North as long as possible.
I highly respect you for making these videos despite the cost. People like you are the reason there is still faith in humanity. I wish I could become a member of the channel, however at the moment I am not in the financial situation to do so. I hope knowing that you have my support as well as many others will help you find motivation to continue making this great content!
Thanks for the upload! And, also, please don’t give up on your second channel, a hill to die on! It’s great and shows a different side of you, and I know a lot of others felt the same way.
In other countries, sanctions may inspire the population to rise up against their leaders for making such bad choices. North Koreans have been in isolation so long they don't even know what they missing out on. If they knew, what was was going on south of their border, and knew they could gift that future generations they would stand up to their oppressors.
I don't think it's a stretch to say that the North Korean population is an extremely conservative population relative to South Korea. I don't think that most North Koreans would be eager to enjoy South Korean culture, but definitely they would like to enjoy the abundance of food and other material gains which transcend cultural differences. While it definitely would be better to live in South Korea than North Korea, I believe the magnitude of that difference is overstated. South Korea is a hyper competitive country where families have very few children and pressure those few children to compete on everything. The demographic problems of South Korea run as deep as many of the problems of North Korea.
There’s no reason for them to give up their only chip that can be used for negotiation and hedge against a foreign attack. They are well aware to what happened to countries like Libya and Iraq when they gave up nuclear weapons. They were attacked and destroyed/ruined. They just see no benefit from their perspective while possession of such weapons allow them to get more aid despite sanctions.
@Ethan_miaomiao lol, i 100% doubt that. China already intervened in the Korean War when they felt North Korea was on the verge of collapse China will NEVER let North Korea fall into the hands of U.S or their allies. They will do everything they could to not let that happen. And they have the power and resources to do that, no matter how you underestimate them If don't want to publicly intervene, they will secretly supply the dying North Korea regime with a lot (and i mean, A LOT) of resources to fight the uprising resistance.
Important that you noted Afghanistan, because U.S. sanctions are causing the “world’s largest humanitarian catastrophe” with 23 million people starving and possibly 1 million children dying this winter. It’s incredibly serious, and if you are an American, drop what you’re doing and call your reps about this. The State Department froze $9.4 billion dollars in Afghan assets, and now Afghanistan’s entire economy could collapse within the next year causing a world historic famine. Serious shit. Call your reps.
Maybe they should have used that 2 trillion dollars of funds and 20 years of US protection wisely . Its not the US problem anymore, its the Afghans who brought that to themselves and should either do something about it or suck it up. Legitimizing and giving aid to a hostile regime isn't gonna help them anyway. Besides the Taliban can always ask help from their overlords in Pakistan and China. That 9 Billion dollar assets should be reimbursed to every US and allied servicemember as compensation.
@@AureliusLaurentius1099 It is our problem. We occupied their country for 20 years and left their country mostly dependent on foreign aid, and we cut that off overnight. The entire economy is being held hostage. If you don’t care, then fine.
@Rohan Krishna I'll answer you with an analogy. North Korea is like a rebellious, disobedient child and China is the parent that always there to bail them out when the bills are due. North Korea also takes American heat off China, so it's in China's best interest to help North Korea out.
@agapp11able socialist North Korea economy was based almost entirely on aid from USSR and China. When USSR (russia at that point) stopped giving North Korea aid, North Korea economy tanked and millions starved to death. South Korea began making market reforms in the 80’s and by 2000’s, became a wealthy country.
In as much as I like polymatter's content, there should have been a disclaimer at the start that an important section is only available on nebula. Feels like a clickbait on getting to the end. Awesome content either way
If you check the actual text of the treaties, instead of the 'spirit' of the treaties, you'll find that the USA along with the ROK and the DPRK agreed to a nuclear disarmament of the Korean peninsula. Since the USA and the ROK clearly never even intended to honor their part of the agreement, the DPRK, despite having waited a few years every single time, chooses to pursue their initial path. Also, don't forget what happened during the fighting and that currently there is merely a truce. Now, I'm not talking about how horrible it is to live in an authoritarian dictatorship and whatnot. I'm looking at this from a realpolitik angle and why the DPRK seems so recalcitrant. It's quite tiring to read and hear about the 'evil' behavior of this 'irrational' regime and whatnot. That's just PR and good ol' fashioned demonizing the enemy in order to give 'em the shaft.
@@thefance4708 Yeah the broken agreement being if you're not going to follow the US down into hell you don't get too trade with them. I'm for one glad that North Korea got nukes, shows how's the US has too act if developing nations can actually defend themselves.
@Pinko Cowpoke It might enable them further though. China will just use NK as its pawn to stop America from interfering with its goals if NK ever becomes an actual functioning country. If that doesn’t happen then Kim will just get assassinated and there’ll be a civil war or something in the country
This is an excellent video! I’m continuously impressed with Polymatter, gradually becoming my favorite channel due to these in-depth and well balanced reports.
Summary: Major factor is China and Russia helping North Korea. US changing presidents and thus changing plans on North Korea is also a contributing factor.
@jack to add one more thing, Americans tend to believe they are a force for good and that any opposition to their effort is seen as evil. They truly do not believe that they will (and have for multiple times) use their proximity to their enemy to exert military threat. And when push come to shove, the Americans will believe that violence is justified because the opposition is being 'unreasonable' for not allowing the benevolent state to do its good on the world. Most Americans are blind to the atrocities they have committed in the name of freedom and national security (which is really just a disguise to cover their self-serving tendency), and as such cannot understand why they are such a 'persona non grata' in many places.
@@jack99889988 A unified Korea allied with US would just be a bigger a South Korea. It is only a problem to China if China has bad intentions. Maybe you can explain how South Korea is the bad guy in the SK-China relationship.
@@lhcphysicfreak True, but that also applies to China, Russia, and every other major power. Heck, it applies to every other country in the world. We're right, you're wrong and we're good, you're bad.
@@ianhomerpura8937 yes, Russia wants to control Ukraine because Russia has bad intentions everywhere. They have different values than the rest of Europe - well, similar to Belarus. Ukraine not being a puppet of Russia is a problem for Russia.
Unfortunately as a South Korean who wants peace, I can say that neutralising the North Korean threat benefits almost no one. US needs an anti-China military presence in the Far East. China and Russia needs a buffer zone against their "imperialist enemy". Japan needs the NK card as an excuse for "national security" and to retain its global relevance. North Korean government wants to retain their luxury status and not get shot. South Korea can't afford to sacrifice a big chunk of their income to the North for a next few decades to stabilize the Korean economy. The safest way to not complicate the neo-Cold War is to keep the stalemate the way it is, even if it means making actions which means nothing in the long run.
And also, US should lift all embargos and sanctions against North Korea. The stalemate would continue unchanged, but North Korean people will eat and live better.
@@LastBastion Or, do this - Lift sanctions - Make international trade possible in the DPRK - Stop the military war games - Give them 5 years to "modernize"
A good article I came across for info on sanctions was by Esfandyar Batmanghelidj (Foreign Affairs), and he was on American Prestige podcast. I commented before watching, lol, but just providing my view below. The problem with sanctions, including on Iran, are the fact that they are done to appear like something is "being done" and that they don't allow a proportional response in negotiations. There's nothing the sanctioned country can do in response economically, and to just give in will make the leader look incredibly weak. Instead, sanctions will build more solidarity within a country, as the main option is to just suffer through them and get back at the sanctioning country some other way. There are studies that show sanctions cause some pretty bad inflation, and that they do very little to influence the government. The inflation happens because many banks don't want to deal with trade to a sanctioned country, even if basic necessities are "allowed".
Simply because, China alone is able keep North Korea alive as it is for sure that China bypasses sanctions imposed and there is nothing much in this world which can be done against China🙂..
China doesn't want hordes of North Koreans streaming across it's border if NK fails. It's cheaper to send back those who escape and give crumbs to NK to stay functional.
Don't forget that NK is literally next to China. More important is that Beijing isn't that far away. You would never know what Kim could do if china refused to help NK.
@@keithsj10 imagine Spain or Italy sending refugees back to another country knowing it was certain that refugee would be put to death or tortured at the very least China could ask for international support to help house the North Koreans but Chinas government has never cared about human rights. They don’t take any refugees from any country.
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson The EU already pays traffickers [with a reputation of sever human rights abuses] to prevent migrants and refugees from reaching Europe
Yep, I don't support NK but the leader of that country have a very strong point, never give up your power if you want to survive. Also, any country that has nuclear weapons don't give them up, keep them (I know nuclear war I super bad) look what's going on with Ukraine dealing with Russia. Ukraine don't have anything to fight them off because they gave up their nuclear weapons. If they still have them we would't be talking about Russia invading Ukraine.
@Mars actually you can just make another rocket really,the enriched materials were there so it was a bomb without a rocket VERY GOOD against an invasion
@@mariuscatalin5982 that's what I was thinking too. You can always deconstructed and rebuild your own version because you have all materials in front of you.
Exports declined by 90% in 2018 and you say sanctions don't work??? That is a massive blow to any country. They may not work 100% of the time, but that isn't the point. We place sanctions to weaken a threatening country....Furthermore, North Korea is unique in that its whole existence depends on Nuclear defense without it the USA, South Korea, China, Russia would simply take over and Korea would have no recorse.
Nice presentation 👍 This is obviously a complex topic but you've left out an important fact that America is still technically at war with N. Korea. An armistice was signed in 1953 that agreed to cease hostilities between the two countries but there was no winner, loser or peace agreement. That's a main reason America won't compromise on their demands that NK completely stop with the nuclear option. Plus, NK has a loaded gun pointed at Seoul and has threatened to destroy it if NK is ever attacked. The mountain range in NK facing SK is filled with miles of caverns full of conventional canons that can't be obliterated all at once by any conventional means. Nukes won't work and neither will bombs. Orders are in place to immediately start firing at Seoul if NK is ever attacked and America won't be able to stop them.
@agapp11able I don't know what kool-aide you've been drinking but you're brainwashed if you believe that BS. The US ceased all hostilities against NK with the North Korean Armistice Agreement signed by both sides in 1953. The US and NK are still technically at war... which part of that don't you understand? NK was aligned with communist China back then. It still is. The US didn't kill off the north Koreans, kim jong sun and il and un did and continue to do that to it's people, mainly through reeducation camps and starvation. It's very effective, leading to millions of North Korean lives lost over the decades. Their propaganda tells their people how great their country is and how good they have it and how badly the rest of the world fares, flat lying to their own people about reality. People there don't know any better or any different because freedom of thought, freedom of speech and freedom of association is all banned there by penalty of death. They are all as brainwashed as you are. You should go there, you'd probably like it.
@@keithsj10 "The US ceased all hostilities against NK with the North Korean Armistice Agreement signed by both sides in 1953." An agreement doesn't mean much when they can be broken easily . NK clearly doesn't trust USA.
@@testacals Yeah and because of that in 1968, the North Koreans sent 31 armed men to try and kill the South Korean president. And again in 1980 they tried to kill the Korean president by car bombing. Good job North Korea, good fucking job.
There is a saying in the field of Security Studies, IR, and Conflict Resolution: "Sanctions don't work until they do." They are often used as a blunt tool but are more effective when applied in a surgical and escalating manner. It can be important to provide the target with off-ramps or a 'golden bridge to retreat across'. They should also be paired with a concerted and constant diplomatic effort (pressure). If the threat of sanctions does not work and they are imposed, it will require patience, unity, and a comprehensive plan involving all participating states. Regardless, they should not ignore or prove detrimental to humanitarian efforts. Remember, sanctions are not always aimed at changing the position held by the leader of a country; rather, they can also target the stance of other stakeholders or the larger populace. There have been many arguments to pair international sanctions against the DPRK with an information campaign - obviously, these have not yet proved fruitful. I truly did enjoy the video; however, I feel like you are painting with too broad a brush and your focus is far too narrow. A different approach may prove more fruitful with North Korea. The problem is, they work a lot like sleep; slowly, and then all at once.
I think it would be best if North Korea chooses to become a mini-China at least, opening up to capitalism while keeping its authoritarian rule in place. China would definitely help them out, they needn't worry about regime change that much, and the people in NK can at least lead better lives.
They will never open up because they're scared of their citizens finding out entire propaganda they've been fed for the last 80 years have all been lies.
In the last decades, South Korea has become increasingly stronger. In its economy, cultural power, technology and even military. Maybe this will lead to a solution where the South promises to kick off the US and Japan if the North does the same with China and Russia. This is the only way I can see. And I know this will be unbelievable hard, as the North's Juche communist authoritarian regime is the complete opposite of the South's liberal capitalist democracy.
But they don't realize WHY sanctions were put in the first place, so they are wrong. Also, this statement is not entirely true. Many defectors testified that not everyone in NK have faith in Kim dynasty, but they have no power and ability to organize due to how the state is ruled.
lol the "we give you nuclear stuff you sign this treaty" is awful like the allies in ww2 pulling appeasement like "we give you [country] you sign treaty"
The amount of research done is unparalleled to productions from big studios with massive budgets. Even then, a lot of the facts here must have taken some serious digging from you and your team. In an age of fake news and misconception, it's great to see that somebody is fighting through the noise and working to get us the most honest and truthful information on the open web.
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson america is the one starving NK's population, not china. but go off about how china is apparently worse than history's literal biggest war machine.
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson america is the one starving NK's population, not china. but go off about how china is apparently worse than history's literal biggest war machine.
Take a deep research. During the famine in 90s, much part of the foreign aid didn't even went to those who needed it, but to Kim's regime's pocket as it was partially resold on the black market. Also DPRK rarely lets people from foreign aid into the country to check if the parcels arrive at their destination at all. They can't be trusted with anything. Also it was their call to close borders with China due to Coronvirus Pandemic, so it was their choice. So no, sanctions don't equal to immediate higher living standards for Koreans in the countryside. I think that people who blame sanctions don't get that Korea wouldn't starve if their own goverment would invest in food and help to the people instead of luxuries and military. It's not our fault that their goverment wants nukes instead of food. The only hope for them is the regime's collapse. Also, we can't lift sanctions, because it is basically doing what Kim wants because he has 22 million hostages. I feel deeply sorry for DPRK's people. I watch their interviews and everything for like 10 years now and I would honestly give anything to help them, but the long-term solution would be only to find a way for disassembling the regime. Otherwise no foreign aid will help them forever. Imagine seeing a guy begging on the street for food, because his kid is hungry, while the money he gets always goes on vodka. Even if you buy them a meal - would you trust such a parent that he wouldn't eat it himself? :/
I have to disagree with one point: that only the elite can bring about change. The middle class can often affect real change (I.e. South Africa), but often the sanctions decimate the middle class (i.e. Iraq), or prevent one from forming (see Myanmar). I’m glad that since the coup the talk has been about targeted sanctions on Myanmar, rather than the total sanctions of past years.
Nothing happened, Russia still own most of the Europe gas and oil supply, cut that pipeline and Europe freeze to death, and as long as there is China, Russia will be safe. Maybe sanctions will hurt the Russian economy, but not destroy it.
To be fair US also broke several promises to North korea.. It is known to everybody that US makes a deal and the next president abolish it ( Iran Agreement as an example) Sanctions only hurts regular People ( only ). I lived in two sanctioned Countries and can tell u , only people suffer, Army, Regime, Police wont face fuel and Money shortages, it would be even harder to make any change in the country when it's isolated..
A simpler answer, and more likely to be correct, North Korea doesn't want to give up their nukes because they can use it as as blackmail, that's it, nothing more, nothing less. Same reason why Iran also want them.
9:00 north korea made a proposition to the US that they would remove all nuclear programs and all nuclear bombs if the US removed their military influense in south korea. The US declined.
Unpopular opinion - Let them have nukes. No leader has been crazy enough to use them in the slightest and it would allow for a balance in militaristic power. After they have what they wanted - they would probably end up opening back up to the world and Korea could reunify and this could end all of the problems - but sadly, war is a very profitable business for many powerful stakeholders, such as governments, defence contractors and companies which produce weapons.
So by saying this you also meant that we should just sanction and forget about the problem as if the problem would just disappear? you do know that North korea is constantly attempting to undermine the American security economy and media right? including hacking their financial system. this problem will continue to affect America as long as North Korea problem is just simply ignored with Sanctioned. It is America fault too for Utilising North korea for the political score. rather than actually solving the problem. Problem such as this would not disappear it will expanded and transform.
@@r3dpowel796 they wouldn’t be doing it if they weren’t sanctioned imo. I think we should just remove sanctions from them, allow them to open up to the rest of the world and just accept them as a nuclear power. Life would become much better for the common person who really suffers a lot from sanctions instead of the higher ups
What pisses me off is these guy’s are supposed to be one country like Japan. Imagine a south and north Japan today it wouldn’t even make sense. I truly believe the leaders on both sides are not working for the interest of the populations on both sides of the border. Why would you refuse to being a stronger country?
Economic sanctions would only work on democracies, but democracies aren't the targets of those, typically. For the sake of humane treatment, sanctions regarding food should be dropped, but perhaps...North Korea should be ignored? No military exercises, no aggressive words, no diplomacy...just pretend like there's a sea between South Korea and China.
The leaders don't have any say either. The US is known for sanctioning republics who dare oppose their interests (Venezuela, Cuba and NK). Thankfully they have other countries to trade with, but with some drawbacks (limited supplies etc)
Here is a solution. Ask for denuclearization but offer lots of economic benefits in exchange. Offer favorable trade deals to china, offer to cover the cost for modernizing and building new infrastructure and industry in the country. In short, take away their 30 investment and replace it with something of equal value that can pay off in a few years
American politicians are greedy and will never agree to that. @@irispark1381 they didn't offer them infrastructure they offered them fast food chains that are owned by Americans so they could change prices or close them anytime they wish to.
Nuclear missile is the only deterrant weaponry that can avoid Evasion/colonialism and create a Stable gouvernement system that can turn into a republican one in long term. USA distabilise country for selling weapon, destabilized to reign better. and put more USA puppet everywhere and sell American culture. USA is a nation of war. the majority of the GDP is literaly weaponry and Military services.
Yeah, leaving out or briefly glossing over how U.S sanctions are killing thousands seems unfair in these discussions. Would highly recommend everyone to read a paper called "The Human Costs and Gendered Impact of Sanctions on North Korea." Regardless of anyone's opinion of the North Korean government, killing civilians who aren't directly involved while threatening to invade the country can only scare North Koreans into supporting a dictatorship, as that seems to be their only protection.
@@Ryan-lw6qw America is still at war with North Korea. An armistice was signed to cease hostilities but it's never ended. America has a policy to deal with NK because of that and the threat they pose to the rest of the world.
@@Ryan-lw6qw The leadership of NK has degenerated to a point where they simply do not care. If 90% of the NK population dies, it is considered satisfactory...
My question is... why not just leave North Korea alone? Its tragic how they oppress their own people, but if you ignore them, they don't really have any reason to attack. The problem in my mind is that N. Korea isn't just unhappy with status quo, it wants to extort the western world for aid. "Look we spent all our money on nukes, our people are starving please help or we might use those nukes." "Why didn't you spend your money on helping your own people?" "How would we extort the world for money if we did that? Our government plan to keep 90% of any foreign aid that does end up heading our way, so start paying please."
A group of bullies with collection of guns in their basement are asking the small guys not to have a gun of their own, they scratched their heads and said: why didn’t they listen?
I still really couldn't grasp why the US is still pursuing this sanctions on north Korea even though it would only make the people suffers and hate the US. Anyway, this is an interesting topic to discuss
because sponsoring a dictatorial regime that enslaves and abuses its own people is bad. The US is not the only country that sanctions NK, it is joined by many other nations across the planet. The sad reality of those North Koreans is that they will hate the US no matter what happens, because they have been brainwashed since birth to loathe the US for its participation in the Korean War. Sanctions reflect an ever-changing approach to global diplomacy in the 21st century- responding with indirect economic action instead of direct military action is the preferred course of action for all countries in the world because of how much nuclear weaponry has proliferated and made war unstable.
@@Lightningflamingice So by saying this you also meant that we should just sanction and forget about the problem as if the problem would just dissappear? you do know that North korea is constantly attempting to undermine American security economy and media right? including hacking their financial system. this problem will continue to affect america as long as North korea problem is just simply ignored. and eventaully destroy USA North korea might be small but it could become an existential threat.
@@Lightningflamingice but what you're doing is bad, and only adds to the total badness. there's literally no point to it other than making those people's lives even worse.
@@JewTube001 What are you talking about? Every country reserves the right to pick and choose who it trades with. If NK wants to rejoin the global forum, they need to stop abusing their people and become a democracy. I suppose you wouldn't want to sanction Nazi Germany either because in your flawed methodology, sponsoring a global aggressor is worse than actively refusing them. The onus is on NK, not the rest of the world, for this tragedy as they are its perpetuators.
Very informative video.😊👍 I am just wondering, why the west fond of sanctioning countries unfriendly to them, while the west have also commited atrocites in several countries. Example the alleged WMD in Iraq which is not really there and it cost death of many people when NATO bombed and inaved Iraq. And yet there is no sanction being implented to all NATO countries involved.🤔
Because the NATO countries are amongst the richest most powerful countries in the world? How on earth would you go about sanctioning the US and Europe? Sanctioning the US and Europe would bring your country back to the middle ages, obviously nobody in their right mind would do that and that's why it hasn't been done.
@@zjeee I will teach them the lesson, and this is how the world will be healed. By the way, look at how many NATO are part of colonisation before claiming that they have the best "human rights"? Or more example like the late Michael Jackson sexual scandal, how many NATO or human rights offices actually stands up for Michael Jackson innocence??? None, my friend, the whole world is chaotic thanks to the sabotaging and the evilness of human nature. If there are human rights, why not defend MJ that heals the world, warn us about climate change before huge protests, he even warns about police brutality, go and check that out. If any human rights were to defend MJ innocent, I am glad they did the right thing but too bad, not only the "Human Right" fellows are ignored, but some even throw dirt on him, calling freak or weird man where he is actually saving the world!!!!!!
"sanctions brought Iran to the negotiations table" what?! Iran played the same game as North Korea: freezing and restarting and freezing again... Capturing "Pueblo" an "assault" is a kind of exaggeration.
North Korea did offer to give the US what it wants with respect to nuclear weapons but the US didn't want to give North Korea what it wanted in addition to the sanctions being lifted. Besides the sanctions, North Korea wanted assurances by all major powers that they would not invade and that the US give up control over South Korea and allow Korea to reunite under North Korean rule. Giving up South Korea is a major sticking point and something the US won't give up without a major war like South Vietnam and so the deadlock. It's not that sanctions have no effect, its just that NK wants more than just sanctions to go if it gives up its nukes.
I think the US should just take the L, lift the sanctions, and ignore the DPRK, not necessarily friendly but just have a neutral diplomatic relationship like any other country. What happens in the DPRK is the business of its people, not the US.
It is (not without reason) alleged that sanctions towards elites didn't help Ukraine avoid futher military confrontation with russia (as is seen now with its brinkmanship)
@agapp11able But Ukraine wants U.S. troops in their country to protect themselves from Russia, Ukraine is a sovereign nation, it can do whatever it wants and Russia has no other choice than to respect that decision.
@agapp11able The majority of Ukrainians were not happy with the pro Russian government so they overthrew the corrupt government who didn't want Ukraine to join the EU. The people in the East are a part of Ukraine and Ukraine only, but they do not make up the majority, the majority wanted to move away from Russia and to be Western, because being Western is better than being Russian.
@agapp11able grown artificially? Source? So your argument is that Ukraine shouldn’t be concern about Russia having so many troops on their border but Russia should be concerned of Ukraine might some day in the future want to have troops in their country to defend them against Russia? Lol
@agapp11able the last time you said “literally a two second google search shows China holds the most US debt” the result was they Japan holds the most US debt. Why are you CCP shills such liars? Give a source that the US installed the Ukraine president.
The sanctions work in the sense that if they were not in place, NK would have more nuclear weapons by now. By limiting their funds to produce nuclear missiles, the chance of US and SK missile defense systems being able to intercept NK's nuclear missiles will be higher.
"blaming higher prices and lower quality of life on the enemy" Y-yes. That's what sanctions do. DPRK authorities are right to blame the countries which imposed sanctions on DPRK because that's what preventing goods from reaching DPRK.
@@sinoroman south korea will not want the us to withdraw with China and NK on the border. In fact, the Korean government wanted to pay the US to keep its bases on the peninsula.
@@NewsGuyFred eh, about 44% of South Koreans think reunification is "necessary" and the president Lee Myung-Bak proposed a 'reunification tax' back in 2010. I think they want reunification as long as it can be done in a way that doesn't collapse their economy
This is not true. NK says it is willing to denuclearize if the entire peninsular denuclearize, effectively meaning the US withdrawal from SK and end its military umbrella of SK. Which is going to be very hard to swallow for the US. So yes, NK is willing to do it, it isn't impossible, but the cost is practically impossible.
I realized that the secret to making a million is saving for a better investment. I always tell myself you don't need that new Maserati or that vacation just yet. That mindset helped me make more money investing. For example last year I invested 80k in stocks (with the help of my Financial Advisor of course) and made about 246k, but guess what? I put it all back and traded with her again and now I'm rounding up close to a million.
The pandemic came and taught everyone the importance of having multiple stream of income, unfortunately having a nice paying job doesn't mean you are financial secured anymore. So we all need to put in an extra-income earning chance, like investments.
Investment is that tiny line that separates the RICH from the POOR. The foolish from wise sorry to say. I can proudly say I am wise today because I can provide for my family through my investments.
@David Peters Be careful not to jump into trading without any proper training because it can be very detrimental. Many folks jump into trading only to suffer great loss at the very beginning. Do not try to imitate a professional traders, better still ask questions. Get the services of a professional stock expert or a licensed broker.
Expert Mrs Dawn Fitzpatrick . She is famous and a registered broker I will recommend her trading service for you. her strategies is amazing and is working perfectly well for me at the moment.
I feel the 2 choices outlined toward the video's conclusion are a false dichotomy. Why not secretly pay another, less scary, nation to negotiate for us? Someone often overlooked gets help they badly need (hopefully), and maybe NK will listen to someone that doesn't look, act, or speak like an American. I have no suggestions as to nominees. The basis of my suggestion is the under-the-counter arms sales, where America arms the enemies of her enemies. Maybe she can win over someone on the fence, privately. I understand that enforcement of any agreement is a different matter. However, getting Kim Jong Un to trust "not-us" would be a big step in the right direction. It's worth a thought.
@@brianjones7660 I meant one not obviously aligned with America. Maybe more like a Niger, Cameroon, or Tasmania. Somewhere no one ever thinks about. I'm sure an influx of dollars (or Euros for that matter) could be very convincing.
@@santhoshsridhar5887 Maybe not. If the aid, or straight cash, was laundered correctly, it wouldn't be worked out right away by NK. It's not as if they're top dogs in the intelligence community, and very few nations have embassies there.
@@MomMom4Cubs what would those countries be offering NK in the negotiations? It would also have to be a country with pre-existing relations with NK otherwise someone just popping up to try to strike a deal will look very suspicious.
Hey - after watching, don't forget to watch the bonus video on Nebula, which is just $15/year with CuriosityStream: curiositystream.com/polymatter
Okay PolyMatter
Why more subscriptions bruh?
How long is the coupon availible for because I would like to get that sub on my next paycheck
Your vid’s always attract the CCP shill network
9:59 "President drump warned that his North Korean counterpart"
Lmao well written. I am glad that you dont let yourself be intimidated by the far right vocal minority and call trump what he is: A narcissistic wannabe dictator.
The timing of this video is rather interesting given the Sri Lankan Minister of Finance admit just this week to having purchased weapons from NK using black market dollars
What they purchased ?
lol wut, why did he admit that? Or what is the context?
I read some articles saying they didn't bought any and too ignore previous comments so i doubt we will know full story now
The said purchase is supposed to have happened in 2008.
Sri Lanka at it again
The North Korea problem is meant to be not resolved. It keeps a legitimate reason for U.S. to keep a strong military presence at China/Russia's doorsteps. And China wants the buffer to exist indefinitely. Unification of the Korean peninsula will inevitably disrupt the current power equilibrium and destabilize the region. When all six parties of the nuclear talks benefit from maintaining the status quo, there is no incentive to make any meaningful progress.
I've Never heard wiser words, I'm from Syria and we have a similar situation here, very similar it's Erie 🤣
Truly eye-opener insight! thanks NOS!
leaders when they meet at the table:
"same protocol as usual?"
- "yes, same protocol as usual."
they are actor playing their own drama
@@ibrahimx9560 was that a pun or a typo?
A simpler answer, and more likely to be correct, North Korea doesn't want to give up their nukes because they can use it as as blackmail, that's it, nothing more, nothing less. Same reason why Iran also want them.
I just wanted to say that the fact that you include your sources is extremely appreciated. Even if I don't read them, it's still important that you do that because for me it still increases your credibility, and it gives the more curious viewer extra material.
Its good to have. If you want to cite info (for an argument or paper) from this video, having the source of that info is immensely helpful. I wish that would become the format for channels like this.
But some of his sources are indeed newspapers with a bias.
@@theophrastusvonhoenheim4022 Found someone who doesnt cite his sources ;p
It should be the bare minimum
THIS WHY IM VERY LUCKY TO LIVE IN INDIA 🤗🇮🇳 THE SUPERPOWER RICHEST AND CLEANEST COUNTRY, I CAN'T IMAGINE IF I WAS NOT BORN IN INDIA , WE ALWAYS RESPECT FOR WOMEN AND WE HAVE TOILETS ANYWHERE , INDIA IS ROLE MODEL COUNTRY TRUST ME 🤗🇮🇳 I KNOW MANY PEOPLE JEALOUS CANT LIVE IN INDIA 🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳🤗🇮🇳
"You can't wreck the economy when there is no economy."
And you can't make them revolt when the government will kill everyone in the family for having a Black Pink album.
That's exactly the idea. NK is a socialist state, GDP is supposed to be small, and a very inadequate measure of economic activity in such system.
15:08 It's not much, but "no economy" is a caricature.
And I don't know about you, but given the choice between North Korea or Cuba and some nominally post-colonial nation with comparable GDP like Mozambique or Sierra Leone, I might be inclined to choose one that has managed to survive decades resisting global imperialism. It's still a garbage option, but imagine if there weren't all the failed sanctions designed to create a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure.
“You can’t wreck economy when there is a China”
As a Korean, who've had to go through loads of people asking questions about North Korea, I cannot describe how accurate this video is, and how much I appreciate PolyMatter for covering this.
1. North Korea isn't acting irrationally - in fact, it's acting perfectly rationally. People who don't understand context ask me why North Korea is crazy / weird / so barbaric etc. They never want to understand North Korea as is, and neither do I have the knowledge as well prepared as PolyMatter to present.
2. I personally consider North Korea to be highly strategic. No other country in my opinion has got away with keeping a successful authoritarian government with that much mistreatment and poverty impacting directly its citizens.
3. The fact that good part of the responsibility lies in America's inability to gain trust. Not a lot of people know about the agreements made in Clinton era, how Bush 180'ed on this. At the time, South Korea had its first democratic president (Kim Dae Jung) and who fought for democracy for the past 30 years (some even say he's Korea's Nelson Mandela) and his pledge was to repair relations with North Korea, and they were making progress. We were talking about reunification 10 years after (I remember this because I was in primary school at the time) but it all broke down.
To be clear, I don't blame the US for this (it's not like it was intentional) but if you think North Korea's seemingly crazy behaviour is self-made, and rest of the world had nothing to do with it, that's simply not true. They are rational (and in fact too rational and strategic) solutions to the problem they were given.
Also, this doesn't in any way excuse N.K.'s treatment of its citizens or their behaviour. I'm simply explaining that we are up against an enemy who knows what they are doing. Rather like an ingenious chess engine AI that makes a weird queen sacrifice move to win the game (look that up! by GothamChess) just because we can't understand the move or the context does not mean the move itself was irrational.
North Korea is rational. KJU is obviously capable having outmaneuvered his uncle JST.
Big thanks mate. I think it also shows the differences of a democratic (a less continuous, more prone to change) foreign policy with the ROK, US, and Japan, and a more authoritarian (a singular interests, but all the similar deniability) in dealing with DPRK.
As a fellow countryman, you definitely hit it on all points. The west sees the North as irrational but they have rationality if you understand the context and how the US scewed over the peninsula after WW2. We wouldnt have been a divided country if it wasnt for the proxy war US and USSR played with our politicians. Also the US should have truly carried out its promises with the more sensible and diplomatic grandfather, Kim Il Sung. But the time has passed and i doubt Korea will ever truly be reunified.
I think people struggle a lot to understand high level politics, tbh. It's much easier to have the simplistic idea that "weird country is crazy" than to understand the complexities of politics in general and international diplomacy in particular.
In situations like NK (or any hard dictatorship), sanctions are little more than spiteful punishment for an already powerless population, causing immense, inhumane harm to innocent people while accomplishing absolutely nothing of use.
Th issue is that's what the North Koreans want you to belive in reality they do have Revel, peopl are leaving and any one who has wrong think is gulaged... Those are signs of failure not success.
Depends on what you mean by 'works'. While sanctions are billed as being about regime change, really that is not their point. Sanctions are all about scoring domestic political points and demonstrating your power to allies to impact their industries. They do not 'work' for the same reason foreign aid does not 'work'... the publicly framed goals and the actual policy objectives are not the same, thus they DO work for doing what the are supposed to do.
Sanctions work more to deter OTHERS from doing the same. The country being sanctioned likely won’t change much since they already started down this path but those sanctions help deter others from starting down the same path.
Sanctions can work. There are a range of sanctions and who and what to target anyway. You don't have to do full economic sanctions, you can target individuals. Full economic sanctions pressure the government to act for fear of uprising or overthrow. If a country is powerful enough(economically or militarily), it's a bit pointless. A lot of autocratic countries and puppet democracies have their military around not for defending the country, but to keep it's citizens in check. It also doesn't help that other countries help them out, or worse, corporations feed them money so business stays on track.
In other words, they don't actually work in honest transparency. They only work to score political points back home, at the expense of human livelihood and human lives.
@agapp11able omg, the CCP shill / Wumao is here. Still defending China over its concentration camps of Muslims in Xinjiang? To answer your question of “deter who”, well that would be anyone else other than North Korea. Countries / governments tend to act on what is in their best interests and a more prosperous economy is better for the leader. I’ll use your china as an example - why hasn’t china just invaded and taken over Taiwan? China now has the 2nd or 3rd strongest military in the world. The reason they don’t is because even if they successfully take Taiwan, their would be huge economic action against China that Chinas economy would suffer. It’s the potential of those economic sanctions why China is deterred from invading Taiwan.
@agapp11able I’ll repost the question. If you don’t think sanctions deter others from going down this path, why hasn’t China just invaded Taiwan considering China now has the 2nd strongest military and could take Taiwan. The answer is that China knows it will come with major sanctions against them and their economy will suffer. Same reason russia hasn’t just invaded Ukraine yet - they are looking for (manufactured) justification first so they could ignore some of the sanctions.
Having nuclear weapons is the only way to make sure no one dares to attack your country or yourself as a leader. Furthermore, it is hard to explain why certain countries are allowed to have nuclear weapons and others are not. I don’t like the idea, but we will have to accept that North Korea and Iran are Nuclear Powers.
Look what happened to Iraq and Libya.
@@spaghettimon3851 Or Ukraine.
@agapp11able ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons and now it's getting fucked
@@kakun63 No one is that stupid.
The more countries with nuclear weapons the more chances of a madman using it. I cannot imagine 194 countries with nukes.
It's like ticketing a homeless guy. What's he gonna do, scrounge up the couple hundred to pay you? No! He literally is too poor to be impacted by that shit.
Great video but you only mentioned one very important player in this geopolitical game briefly; China. China is the biggest reason for North Korea's continued existence today. North Korea trades mostly with China, and this is why western sanctions don't work because China will simply refuse to comply and keep trading with North Korea. China wants North Korea to exist as a buffer against South Korea, a US ally. Finally, any peace negotiation must also include China, because the Korean War armistice signed also includes them. Since relations between China and the US is getting colder now, it's even more unlikely for any peace deal with North Korea to be reached.
there is no peace because no one wants it.
the us wants troops on chinese door steps and russia sure isn't going to allow us troops, so the only area is the koreas which has a mostly flat path to beijing if the us can make it to the chinese border. other regions like Afghanistan southeast asia and india cannot support a army going in china because of terrain, only from russia and the Koreas can you have a large army march on china(or the ocean i guess, but an amphibious assault is one of the hardest things to do, and this isn't a china of the 1890s).
but for this exactly reason, china will never allow a pro-us united korea. china since ancient times knows damn well that the koreas are the path into china for a external, non-steppe enemy. this is why for hundreds of years it has sent tens to hundreds of thousands of troops to defend korea from the Japanese when the koreans were peaceful towards china and why it has sent invading armies to remove anti-chinese local korean kingdoms and either install or help a existing friendly korean kingdom take power. this is how Silla, the smallest of the korean kingdoms took control of all korea, as the Tang dynasty killed of the largest korean kingdom that was antagonistic toward the Tang.
What the south and north Koreans want is, unfortunately, un-important . they are minnows in a shark tank. but it helps the great powers that what they want is unification but under their own government thereby making it easy for the great powers to say they are just there to help their allies. there really is only two ways that the koreas unite. either china and/or the us collapses and thus can no longer affect the politics and the military of the koreas(unlikely) . or SK demands and removes the us from the peninsula and works out a deal with china where it will remain at least neutral (even more unlikely, SK doesn't even have war time command of its own troops per its own constitution so the us will never allow this to get even close to happening).
@@mxn1948 the US would gladly trade removing all troops from South Korea in exchange for a peaceful North Korea.
It’s actually very dumb comment with your suggestion that the US would be a threat to invade China from North Korea. Remind me again of when the US last fought a nuclear power? Remind me again how the US has invaded Russia while nato borders Russia?
It’s typical of CCP trolls to argue that the US would potentially invade China. That’s makes it easy for you people to justify any action china does anywhere as it attempts to expand by either invading Taiwan or taking the South China Sea with its military as it builds fake islands.
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson Your statement doesn't make sense. No nuclear country has ever fought against another nuclear country in human history. And I'm pretty sure neither China or Russia started any war in 21th century. You seem to ignore how many wars US was involved: Iraq, Afgananstan, Syria, Libya and etc.
@@dgcu-t96 Have you forgotten about Ukraine?
@@IAmSwatchingYou As long as Russia doesn't wage a real modern warfare against Ukraine, all statements stating Russia is aggressive are just hypothesis. Plus, they are only moving their armies in their own border.
But we do know the one country has started several wars against weak nations in 21th century, and has not been entitled as aggresor by any of the "free" press.
I mean, sanctions "work" in the sense that they prevent it from becoming economically and militarily competitive as quickly as it would with free trade between it's state entities and the private and state entities of other countries. That is, the sanctions are effective militarily even if not so much diplomatically. Which is probably the real reason that the US continues to push for them so hard. DPRK with a per Capita GDP similar to the RoK would be quite a bit scarier for the US and it's allies.
Agree, china is the perfect example of a hostile regime that was given tons of benefits to grow its economy
Hear hear!
Neat and tidy solutions don't always exist in the real world. Sometimes you have to choose between the lesser of two bad choices.
Yeah, I guess. That's definitely the closest thing to an achievable goal the sanctions will produce.
In the long term, what if other countries could offer the "carrot" approach (trade) without reprisal from the US financial system? If they are reintroduced into the global economy, slowly, then they will have internal pressure to adapt. It's a tough one though.
Economically and militarily competative with WHO? You think lifting the sanctions will make Korea competative globally? Next to China and Russia and USA and EU? Or do you think they will achieve military and economic level of its neighbors, such as Japan, S. Korea, China, and other Oceanic countries? Both of those notions are nothing more than Kim's wishful thinking
@@ziglaus maybe not as competitive as China but they would definitely be more of a threat than they already are.
I mean there's also the wartime advantage sanctions provide, which unfortunately is for the exact same reason you provided, they primarily hit the populace, who are decreasingly able to act as a tax base to field an effective millitary
It's why the US is considering "the mother of all sanctions" as an initial salvo against Russian invasion of Ukraine, and why the supposed war plan against China is to effectively create the economic effects of a sanction by just cutting them off from oceanic trade. The US, wartime doctrine has developed into something along the lines of "can't use that big strong millitary of yours if they all starve before we're even in range for you to shoot at!"
You do realize that Taiwan is the only real roadblock to oceanic trade though, right? That's why the media has suddenly started picking up State Department language- '1st island chain' to 'keep China boxed in'.
It's all about controlling other countries, not freedom and democracy. If China takes Taiwan, it will be too late. Senkaku won't be enough to hold the Chinese Navy, and it will have unblockable access to the Pacific. There are no other staging grounds beyond Taiwan that the US can ally with or take over.
The paradox is that the weaker an economy, the less expensive it is to pay soldiers. In the US, the average salary of a soldier is 53k. In russia and china its 30k. For North Koreans, its less than than $100 per year. Sure, North Korea cant afford modern tanks or airplanes, but Russia and China send it a ton of Ak-47's and obsolete weapons so all it really needs to do is pay those soldiers chump change.
@老劉的哲學空間 China and US both have nukes, only a dumbass would be unafraid.
it works too. Japan knew prior to Pearl Harbor they had 6 months before America would strangle their trade and shipping and they'd run out of key materials to a point they could no longer mount a serious offense. Germany knew the same, they had more time thanks to overland routes and more local resources but they also knew a blockade and bombings would starve them out. This knowledge of American and British blockade and sanction efficiency is why both nations pursued similar offensive strategies and surprise attacks, they knew they needed to lunge for resources before the blockades could take affect.
A land war with China would end in mass causalities on both sides with America eventually losing but thanks to China's reliance on oceanic shipping and trade sanctions would cripple their economy and a blockade would result in strict rationing and no fuel in no time, and America would simply have to wait for China to get desperate enough to strike first or give in. A first strike by China would allow America to call in allies and simply carry out a bombing campaign to cripple the country and soon without fertilizers, fuel, and food imports China's massive population would become a massive liability as food reserves run dry and mass starvation sets in. China weathered the Great Leap Forward's starvation thanks to fanatical devotion, complete lack of communication within China, insane censorship, and massive Soviet backing but without that the regime would crumble.
@@internetguy7870 if there were actual military deaths it would be an incredibly intense and semi-sporadic event. The us has two options if its attacked (there's more but for this context there's two)
Sit back and consider it an international incident (as long as some deal is made) or in the case of a war with China its an immediate response with short range ballistic missles and fortifying key bases like those in Guam, Hawaii, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines.
Any style attack would require a Peral Harbor sized attack on the us. With the exception of their population and modern technology modern China isn't in any more favorable positioning than the axis in ww2.
Sanctions do elevate the sense of patriotism among the sanctioned nation's populace, and hate towards the sanctionees' govmnt. "Patriotic feelings" of this nature among the sanctioned people tend to linger, even across generations. It's just a good way to plant seeds of hate for future generations to deal with and score some short term domestic political goals.
yeah it happened to vietnam but we hate China more than the US, the CCP is much much nastier for us so instead of hating the US we often find it satisfying witnessing the trade wars.
China enemies = Vietnam's friends XD
"Siege mentality" is the word, I believe
@@lenguyenngoc479 Consider too that there are a lot of Vietnamese people that fled Saigon and came to America, invariably leaving lots of family connections behind. Vietnamese-Americans are some of the most hardworking folks out there, and we're quite happy to have them as part of our country. That cultural exchange went a long way towards mending relations I imagine.
@@Elendrian yeah my grandfather actually tried to flee but he got caught. Back then the VCP was absolutely brutal, they took many escapees like my grandfather to the middle of the village, letting the villagers decided their fates death or release. He's a well-known person and kinda kind so they chanted "free him he's good". Back then escapees were labeled as traitors but now if they send money back or invest in vietnam they are called patriotic viets bruh 🤧
@@lenguyenngoc479 USA literally dropped more bombs on Vietnam than the total amount of bombs dropped in World war 2 combined. They also committed mass crimes against humanity with "Agent orange" when they were literally throwing chemical weapons out their planes unto the Vietnam land and people making multiple million people suffer from cancer, leukemia and other disease caused by these chemical agents. And don't get me started on the "Phoenix program".
I'm neither American, Chinese, Russian or Vietnamese but how brainwashed do you have to be to think the "CCP was far more nastier to you". It's like anti-China rhetoric can literally overwrite people's brains. Your country was literally razed to the ground, people mass slaughtered and had chemical agents sprayed on you and you STILL somehow believe the Chinese elites are worse than the USA ones. I just can't imagine how your people's(the ones who think like this) brains even work, it's amazing that we're the same species.
Holy shit man, I have a presentation on deterrence policies and authoritarian states next week and I had zero inspiration on where to start, this video is the best thing that happened to me today hahaha Thank you!!
Good luck
howd it go homie
It's actually today in like 8 hours, the PowerPoint is looking crisp ngl 👌
@@fabianomenezes5892 ayyyy letsgoo
hope u ace it 🤲
"complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization"
DPRK: "u first."
Exactly. What determines if a country has the rights to nuclear weapons or not?
@@R202X A "right" is just a synonym for an "option" (which is legally recognized by the state). The state determines the rights of its citizens as part of a social contract. Rights come at a price, since one man's right is another man's obligation. E.g. a right to healthcare means the state guarantees my option to consume healthcare, which taxpayers are obliged to pay for. The West doesn't seem to understand this tradeoff.
"But who grants rights to a state?" A sovereign state, by definition, decides for itself what it can and can't do. It has the power to decide its own fate because power always flows from the barrel of a gun. Ergo, asking where a sovereign state receives its rights from, is akin to asking where a baker buys his bread from. A baker bakes his own bread, else he's not a baker but rather a merchant. Likewise, a sovereign state mints its own rights. Else the state isn't actually a sovereign state, but rather a protectorate.
The short, glib answer is that might makes right, and U.S. hegemony has all the might.
Uno reverse kim style
@@thefance4708Not for long.
Dear PolyMatter, Thank you for another well researched and developed video. The larger issue has never been whether sanctions will work, or not work. When the American pubic ( which is the driving force of this On Again / Off Again Negotiations ) becomes concerned about the DPRK, whatever President in office must appear, well "Presidential" in the sense that it is important to create policy towards the DPRK.
The Reality has a larger picture, and that is that neither the US, nor China, Japan, and especially South Korea have any real intention to alter the status quo. China for the very reasons you named, they do not wish to have a pro US state on their border ( and with time a powerful one ), Japan does not wish to destabilize the region, and South Korea has no desire to absorb tens of millions of refugees, an issue that China fears almost as much as a Pro US State, they have no desire to create another large minority population that can unsettle the politics of that region.
The ruling elite of the DPRK have no doubts about who would win in a conflict between the West and the DPRK, their goal is to make the image of such a conflict so horrible that they will be left alone and in control. The greatest threat to the DPRK is not sanctions, or war with the West, but is revolt of their own people, and they are slowly losing this battle.
1) It's commonly asserted that China just sustains the DPRK to prevent the formation of a unified ROK that is allied with the US from forming on its border.
But a United ROK would not be allied with the US for long, as the only reason South Korea keeps US troops around is to defend them from North Korea. Without North Korea, the core justification for the ROK-US Alliance disappears (and US troops leave Korea soon afterward.)
However, a United ROK is not the only type of unified Korea that can come about. North Korea has repeatedly asserted that the whole purpose of its nuclear weapons program is to achieve "Final Victory" in the Korean War and conquest over South Korea.
Not through outright war or nuclear attack; NK wants to use the THREAT of war and nuclear attack to bully and intimidate SK into merging with NK into a one-country/two-system regime, but with NK as the dominant power in the union (and SK as its subservient vassal/tributary/puppet state).
By supporting the DPRK, China seriously risks forming another Vietnam. After North Vietnam successfully drove out the US and conquered South Vietnam, Vietnam had no more use for China and told them to take a hike. Then China fought a war with Vietnam, lost and now Vietnam is allied to the US against China.
Believe me; China does not want another Vietnam on their border.
If China is upholding the DPRK to prevent a US-aligned unified Korea from forming on their doorstep, then that has the potential to backfire spectacularly on them in the future.
2) I agree that NK does not want war with the West, but it doesn't want peace either, precisely because, as you said, NK is afraid of a domestic revolt by its own people.
The regime needs a powerful EXTERNAL enemy to rally and unite their people against, and to serve as a scapegoat for their citizens' poverty and deprivation.
(Most economic researchers of NK, including those that oppose sanctions, agree that corruption and economic mismanagement are the primary reason for NK's poverty. Even if all sanctions against NK were lifted, average North Koreans' lives might improve a little bit, but they would still be desperately poor and repressed in comparison to all of their neighbors. If NK is at peace with the US, who else would average North Koreans have to blame besides their own leaders.)
The nukes and the missiles may deter an invasion or war, but they also have the advantage of inviting _just enough_ international condemnation and threat of attack needed to make their domestic siege narrative credible enough so that people willingly fall in line.
North Korea would have never given up Nuclear Arms development no matter what the US did. Furthermore, there is no reason why the US needs to be the one negotiating Nuclear talks. In fact China, South Korea, and Japan should be the ones most concerned since those areas are of most benefit to North Korea in terms of proximity. America chose the route of sanction to punish the North Korean people, slow its population growth, GDP, and manpower for military in hopes of some internal collapse within North Korea.
Honestly, while I liked your nuanced perspective, I would have to disagree with how you framed the subject.
I disagree with that sentiment not because its a bad take that does not make sense but merely because your argument although has some truth to it is heavily misguided. I absolutely believe the US should be the one negotiating nuclear talks mainly because the US itself is a nuclear power and if you really think about it, its quite hypocritical that a country that has over 5 thousand nukes is ignoring a nation that doesn't have the best track record for stability, is building nukes. Not that I'm saying what North Korea is doing is justified, its not, however it does make sense that a nuclear armed country engages in talks with another nuclear armed country. It really doesn't make sense for South Korea and Japan to negotiate with the North on nuclear weapons when they themselves have none. There is really nothing for South Korea and Japan can really offer to the North without bringing in the US. For example you could say that North Korea can demand South Korea and Japan to have all of American soldiers and their bases to vacant immediately since that is one of their motives as well. In exchange for North Korea their nuclear producstions. However, that demand is impractical because for one the US must be included in that talk because it does relate to them as well. North Korea doesn't really gain anything economically so their still in the same place as they were before. If anything South Korea and Japan doesn't really gain anything from it. Also it really doesn't really make sense for China to get involved considering the fact that a nuclear armed North Korea is in favor of China. They act as a buffer zone between themselves and the west (US). Considering the fact that South Korea and Japan is an ally of the US and the long term goal of North Korea is to establish a nuclear weapon that can target anywhere in the world which they have been succeeding in recently. It 100 percent makes sense that the US should be the one negotiating nuclear talks if they don't take the matter seriously then that shows to their allies that the US are not willingly ready or have any intentions of honoring their alliance with their allies. That is a huge no no for the US because economically east/southeast asia is a huge deal for the US as well as strategice in containing China. If they lose their foothold their that means their rival (China) will take that opportunity and try to input their sphere of influence. Further diminishing the US influence around the world affairs.
@@Trico450 What you say makes sense from a political alliance standpoint, however I don't agree that just because America has nukes, that they should be the defacto lead negotiator. Instead they should take a more peripheral role in the negotiation. The countries I mentioned above have the most leverage and greatest interest in getting NK to denuclearize, because that would mean greater trade, prosperity, and a new market for modernization for the involved parties, (something the US cannot provide on its own, and therefore NK would never denuclearize). Moreover those countries are better positioned geographically to provide humanitarian aid and building of infrastructure. This should not be a US spearheaded negotiation, because, from the standpoint of NK, the US doesn't care about helping them after they denuclearize. It's basically a Mexican standoff with an endless loop of "you put your weapon down, no you."
By the same border buffer argument, China should be at the table to reassure NK that any offensive attack into their country will seen as an invasion of China, which is a stance they already take anyways as shown in their involvement of the Korean war. This would put NK in a similar position as Japan and SK in that they have no nukes but a powerful ally willing to defend them (China and US respectively). Moreover it is also in China's best interest to denuclearize NK, because having their wily neighbor with even the potential to poison the surrounding natural resource/environment with radiation for thousands of years is a great liability to the future of China. Hence why I say the surrounding regions should have a more vested interest in spearheading this negotiation.
@@YESHTOFU I think your misunderstanding something here. This whole debacle has everything to do with politics what it seems to me is that you think this situation is divided into many different sections with politics being one of them. That is not true at all. Whether we look at it from an economic standpoint or a militaristic standpoint it all ties into politics. We cannot ignore and downplay one aspect and think that one is more important than the other. Another thing before I get into this Both South Korea, Japan, and China all take this matter seriously in fact more seriously than the US currently did. Especially starting from the Obama administration which they prompted to do strategically nothing. You state that the countries surrounding North Korea has a far better leverage than the US but what I think you don't understand is that a country that is under the US sphere of influence doesn't always get to trade with anyone in the world. Especially if the US puts sanctions on that said country then it becomes difficult for countries under the US sphere of influence to trade with them. Not impossible but very difficult especially for foreign companies and depending on who is in office. As a country that is a nuclear armed country and has knowledge and firsthand witness of such destructive capabilities these weapons possess. It is their duty to make sure as well as other globally nuclear armed nations to keep the balance of the world. It is not fair for countries that don't even want nor have nuclear weapons to try and negotiate with the DPRK by themselves when the US is responsible for having their own troops and civilians living in both Japan and South Korea. If the US doesn't take a big stance on this issue it will look bad from their allies.
I also don't agree with the notion of NK thinking the US won't help them after denuclearization because thats not true. What they are afraid of like what the video has stated is the lack of consistency even though they themselves are guilty of this as well. China and North Korea has agreed on a defense treaty but that does not necessarily mean that they are "allies" in fact like the video states China tolerates North Korea. Also reassuring both sides has happened and its one of the reasons to why we have such high tensions on both sides. I would not say its in the best interest of China for the denuclearization of North Korea but simply as long as there is a Korea free from western influences. As long there is something like that then no matter what the DPRK does China will support it. Of course as long as they don't start the war which the DPRK knows and will never be the one to instigate the war. Reassuring the DPRK could even encourage the North's behaviour even more. After all why should China have the DPRK open up to the west when there can be a potential opportunity for North Korea to become similar to the South after they opened up? Again there are vested interest on all sides as we have seen with recent events that occured and that talks can work if executed correctly.
@@Trico450 In my opinion, China probably has a better chance to bring NK under their sphere of influence should they open up and denuclearize. Moreover, it's not like the surrounding countries don't have experience in nuclear affairs either. While the surrounding countries have less experience dealing with nuclear weapons, they do have expertise in nuclear infrastructure i.e. for electrical power. Also the sanctions are in place because they are not denuclearized, but if the Asian countries can get them to denuclearize by being more involved, with the leverage I mentioned above, then the sanctions would not be in place. I'm not saying the US needs to pull out and let Asia deal with it, I'm saying the it's a mistake to have the US as the lead negotiator.
Of course it's probably more complicated politically, but through this discussion, it's even more clear to me that China should be the one negotiating the denuclearization, because China doesn't give a crap about US sanctions on other countries and trades with them anyways lmao.
@@YESHTOFU I do agree that US should not lead the Sanctions and give Country such as South Korea to lead it considering how much the US has ignored a lot of the South's plan to deal with the North. As with recent events it was golden opportunity that the US again missed by not giving following South Korea doctrine in which Trump for example wanted the same thing previous presidents wanted at the end of the day. In which North Korea has stated several times that they will not follow through. Maybe we will see this plan under Biden's administration but I also highly doubt this. Considering how he was under Obama's administration.
Personally I think it is more so that China doesn't want to nor cares about opening talks for negotatiion mainly because again they do not have much to lose/gain. Not to mention economically North Korea can end become a thorn to the Chinese considering the North will be competing with them in low skilled cheap labor. Deterring US/Western spheres of influences is their #1 goal rn considering how bad US/China relations are. So its probably going to be like this with the Chinese holding onto the North as long as possible.
I highly respect you for making these videos despite the cost. People like you are the reason there is still faith in humanity. I wish I could become a member of the channel, however at the moment I am not in the financial situation to do so. I hope knowing that you have my support as well as many others will help you find motivation to continue making this great content!
Your participation on human rights channels is also appreciated.
It is nice to meet you, Mr. Bin chilling.
I love your participation in Peacemaker.
My dear fellow sanatani...Algorithm unites us again
🍦💯
Thanks for the upload! And, also, please don’t give up on your second channel, a hill to die on! It’s great and shows a different side of you, and I know a lot of others felt the same way.
What's the name of the second channel?
@@JatPhenshllem A hill to die on
@@Jack-496 Oh, I thought that was a figure of speech 😂
In other countries, sanctions may inspire the population to rise up against their leaders for making such bad choices. North Koreans have been in isolation so long they don't even know what they missing out on. If they knew, what was was going on south of their border, and knew they could gift that future generations they would stand up to their oppressors.
🤡🤡🤡
No one's "missing out" on anything though, everyone has their way of life
And what if they respect the views of their leaders and stand by it
what they missing 🤔🤔
BTS , black pink ??🤣🤣🤣🤣
I don't think it's a stretch to say that the North Korean population is an extremely conservative population relative to South Korea. I don't think that most North Koreans would be eager to enjoy South Korean culture, but definitely they would like to enjoy the abundance of food and other material gains which transcend cultural differences. While it definitely would be better to live in South Korea than North Korea, I believe the magnitude of that difference is overstated. South Korea is a hyper competitive country where families have very few children and pressure those few children to compete on everything. The demographic problems of South Korea run as deep as many of the problems of North Korea.
There’s no reason for them to give up their only chip that can be used for negotiation and hedge against a foreign attack. They are well aware to what happened to countries like Libya and Iraq when they gave up nuclear weapons. They were attacked and destroyed/ruined. They just see no benefit from their perspective while possession of such weapons allow them to get more aid despite sanctions.
I never saw the issue like this before. thank you so much for this amazing and enlightening video!
"The oppressed peoples can liberate themselves only through struggle. This is a simple and clear truth confirmed by history." - Kim Il-sung
Says a person who has subjugated millions of his own people to oppression
So basically the North Koreans need another revolution, ideally without foreign intervention.
This is basically saying "they'll be free when they die"
@@MelGibsonFan China will intervene and end the revolution right away...After that, they will reinstall another regime
@Ethan_miaomiao lol, i 100% doubt that. China already intervened in the Korean War when they felt North Korea was on the verge of collapse
China will NEVER let North Korea fall into the hands of U.S or their allies. They will do everything they could to not let that happen. And they have the power and resources to do that, no matter how you underestimate them
If don't want to publicly intervene, they will secretly supply the dying North Korea regime with a lot (and i mean, A LOT) of resources to fight the uprising resistance.
The quality of videos this channel publishes for just being a youtube channel is mind boggling.
Important that you noted Afghanistan, because U.S. sanctions are causing the “world’s largest humanitarian catastrophe” with 23 million people starving and possibly 1 million children dying this winter. It’s incredibly serious, and if you are an American, drop what you’re doing and call your reps about this. The State Department froze $9.4 billion dollars in Afghan assets, and now Afghanistan’s entire economy could collapse within the next year causing a world historic famine. Serious shit. Call your reps.
Maybe they should have used that 2 trillion dollars of funds and 20 years of US protection wisely . Its not the US problem anymore, its the Afghans who brought that to themselves and should either do something about it or suck it up. Legitimizing and giving aid to a hostile regime isn't gonna help them anyway.
Besides the Taliban can always ask help from their overlords in Pakistan and China. That 9 Billion dollar assets should be reimbursed to every US and allied servicemember as compensation.
cuz allowing a state that kidnapps girls as young as 9 to marry them to 50 yo is FINE and should NOT be ignored
@@mariuscatalin5982 If the US didn’t want this then they shouldn’t have backed them during the soviet afghan war
@@AureliusLaurentius1099 It is our problem. We occupied their country for 20 years and left their country mostly dependent on foreign aid, and we cut that off overnight. The entire economy is being held hostage. If you don’t care, then fine.
@@donkthedankee8595 the soviets INVADED Afghanistan and killed MILLIONS in bombardaments
Waiting out the current American leadership isn't always for the best; you never know who the American public will put in power.
As an American, +1.
like trumpler (mix of trump and hitler)
The answer is China, I saved you guys 16 minutes. It's still a great video though!
@Ruben Schilling I mean it’s largely true here too
@Rohan Krishna I'll answer you with an analogy. North Korea is like a rebellious, disobedient child and China is the parent that always there to bail them out when the bills are due. North Korea also takes American heat off China, so it's in China's best interest to help North Korea out.
Russia is another answer because the USSR founded the country
Your thumbnails always confuse me for a moment. The land is always blue and the sea is always darker. Anyway, keep up the great work!
Looks more appealing
yeah same, straight up misleading design
Last time I was this early, North Korea was the second largest Asian economy and richer than South Korea.
@agapp11able socialism madam.
remove sanctions on NK
@agapp11able socialist North Korea economy was based almost entirely on aid from USSR and China. When USSR (russia at that point) stopped giving North Korea aid, North Korea economy tanked and millions starved to death. South Korea began making market reforms in the 80’s and by 2000’s, became a wealthy country.
Short after WW II, North Korea was a stronger economy than Japan
@agapp11able USSR didn’t let it open up? That suggest North Korea was highly reliant on USSR for its economy.
In as much as I like polymatter's content, there should have been a disclaimer at the start that an important section is only available on nebula. Feels like a clickbait on getting to the end.
Awesome content either way
Would be nice if on diagrams, like on at 13:23, you show measurements in meters as well when possible. There is a space for it.
And the source of diagrams and charts would be nice too.
@@phungquyen3511 I know this is a year long but the sources are cited in the description
If you check the actual text of the treaties, instead of the 'spirit' of the treaties, you'll find that the USA along with the ROK and the DPRK agreed to a nuclear disarmament of the Korean peninsula. Since the USA and the ROK clearly never even intended to honor their part of the agreement, the DPRK, despite having waited a few years every single time, chooses to pursue their initial path.
Also, don't forget what happened during the fighting and that currently there is merely a truce.
Now, I'm not talking about how horrible it is to live in an authoritarian dictatorship and whatnot. I'm looking at this from a realpolitik angle and why the DPRK seems so recalcitrant. It's quite tiring to read and hear about the 'evil' behavior of this 'irrational' regime and whatnot. That's just PR and good ol' fashioned demonizing the enemy in order to give 'em the shaft.
You did a great presentation of this very complex subject. Thank you for making it so easy to understand and entertaining at the same time.
"Know your enemy" is the step the world never take with NK
Do a video about the Cuba US relation next! It's also interesting enough
"Lying by saying it's the enemies fault for higher prices" isn't it? How is this a lie?
blame/fault only exists in the context of a broken agreement. proximate cause != distal cause.
@@thefance4708 Yeah the broken agreement being if you're not going to follow the US down into hell you don't get too trade with them. I'm for one glad that North Korea got nukes, shows how's the US has too act if developing nations can actually defend themselves.
A video that I would love to see, is on "how to modernize north korea". I think that would be a very interesting subject.
"Democracy"
@Pinko Cowpoke It might enable them further though. China will just use NK as its pawn to stop America from interfering with its goals if NK ever becomes an actual functioning country. If that doesn’t happen then Kim will just get assassinated and there’ll be a civil war or something in the country
@Pinko Cowpoke North Korea is an authoritarian regime who enslaves it own people it's good North Korea hasn't developed don't blame the US thank them.
@Pinko Cowpoke No but I'd rather be under the USA's fake democracy, than be enslaved by a North Korean Monarch. What about you?
@Pinko Cowpoke your funny but power has been handed from father to son that's a monarchy. Where are the elections?
This is an excellent video! I’m continuously impressed with Polymatter, gradually becoming my favorite channel due to these in-depth and well balanced reports.
Summary: Major factor is China and Russia helping North Korea. US changing presidents and thus changing plans on North Korea is also a contributing factor.
@@jack99889988 which also explains why Russia is doing everything to keep Ukraine and other Eastern European countries from joining NATO.
@jack to add one more thing, Americans tend to believe they are a force for good and that any opposition to their effort is seen as evil. They truly do not believe that they will (and have for multiple times) use their proximity to their enemy to exert military threat. And when push come to shove, the Americans will believe that violence is justified because the opposition is being 'unreasonable' for not allowing the benevolent state to do its good on the world. Most Americans are blind to the atrocities they have committed in the name of freedom and national security (which is really just a disguise to cover their self-serving tendency), and as such cannot understand why they are such a 'persona non grata' in many places.
@@jack99889988 A unified Korea allied with US would just be a bigger a South Korea. It is only a problem to China if China has bad intentions. Maybe you can explain how South Korea is the bad guy in the SK-China relationship.
@@lhcphysicfreak True, but that also applies to China, Russia, and every other major power. Heck, it applies to every other country in the world. We're right, you're wrong and we're good, you're bad.
@@ianhomerpura8937 yes, Russia wants to control Ukraine because Russia has bad intentions everywhere. They have different values than the rest of Europe - well, similar to Belarus. Ukraine not being a puppet of Russia is a problem for Russia.
Unfortunately as a South Korean who wants peace, I can say that neutralising the North Korean threat benefits almost no one.
US needs an anti-China military presence in the Far East.
China and Russia needs a buffer zone against their "imperialist enemy".
Japan needs the NK card as an excuse for "national security" and to retain its global relevance.
North Korean government wants to retain their luxury status and not get shot.
South Korea can't afford to sacrifice a big chunk of their income to the North for a next few decades to stabilize the Korean economy.
The safest way to not complicate the neo-Cold War is to keep the stalemate the way it is, even if it means making actions which means nothing in the long run.
And also, US should lift all embargos and sanctions against North Korea. The stalemate would continue unchanged, but North Korean people will eat and live better.
@@davidias9020 do you think th NK Gov can't do that? They need to be starved enough not to rebel
@@LastBastion
You say that people who don’t obey you need to be starved?
@@LastBastion
Or, do this
- Lift sanctions
- Make international trade possible in the DPRK
- Stop the military war games
- Give them 5 years to "modernize"
A good article I came across for info on sanctions was by Esfandyar Batmanghelidj (Foreign Affairs), and he was on American Prestige podcast. I commented before watching, lol, but just providing my view below.
The problem with sanctions, including on Iran, are the fact that they are done to appear like something is "being done" and that they don't allow a proportional response in negotiations.
There's nothing the sanctioned country can do in response economically, and to just give in will make the leader look incredibly weak. Instead, sanctions will build more solidarity within a country, as the main option is to just suffer through them and get back at the sanctioning country some other way.
There are studies that show sanctions cause some pretty bad inflation, and that they do very little to influence the government. The inflation happens because many banks don't want to deal with trade to a sanctioned country, even if basic necessities are "allowed".
Simply because, China alone is able keep North Korea alive as it is for sure that China bypasses sanctions imposed and there is nothing much in this world which can be done against China🙂..
China doesn't want hordes of North Koreans streaming across it's border if NK fails. It's cheaper to send back those who escape and give crumbs to NK to stay functional.
Don't forget that NK is literally next to China. More important is that Beijing isn't that far away. You would never know what Kim could do if china refused to help NK.
@@keithsj10 imagine Spain or Italy sending refugees back to another country knowing it was certain that refugee would be put to death or tortured at the very least
China could ask for international support to help house the North Koreans but Chinas government has never cared about human rights. They don’t take any refugees from any country.
@@JR-vc4gm Kim would never nuke China. That would cause extinction of the whole DPRK since China is infinitely more powerful.
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson The EU already pays traffickers [with a reputation of sever human rights abuses] to prevent migrants and refugees from reaching Europe
9:50 After Gaddafi was killed, US Secretary of State: “We came, we saw, he died. *supervillain laughter*”
It's both so interesting and sad what goes on in North Korea.. thank you for telling their stories!!
The combination of nuclear weapons and adjacency to China makes North Korea difficult to change
Yep, I don't support NK but the leader of that country have a very strong point, never give up your power if you want to survive. Also, any country that has nuclear weapons don't give them up, keep them (I know nuclear war I super bad) look what's going on with Ukraine dealing with Russia. Ukraine don't have anything to fight them off because they gave up their nuclear weapons. If they still have them we would't be talking about Russia invading Ukraine.
Saddam and Gaddafi gave up their nuclear programs both got invaded and kiled. If theres something Kim could learn is, to never give his nuke up.
@Mars actually you can just make another rocket really,the enriched materials were there so it was a bomb without a rocket VERY GOOD against an invasion
@@mariuscatalin5982 that's what I was thinking too. You can always deconstructed and rebuild your own version because you have all materials in front of you.
@@tottyRICE the real reason they gave them up was because they simply didn't have the economy to do otherwise
@@tottyRICE they didn't have the sites to handle nuclear weapons, and if they didn't gave them up, they would have been hated by both US and Russia
Exports declined by 90% in 2018 and you say sanctions don't work??? That is a massive blow to any country. They may not work 100% of the time, but that isn't the point. We place sanctions to weaken a threatening country....Furthermore, North Korea is unique in that its whole existence depends on Nuclear defense without it the USA, South Korea, China, Russia would simply take over and Korea would have no recorse.
Nice presentation 👍
This is obviously a complex topic but you've left out an important fact that America is still technically at war with N. Korea. An armistice was signed in 1953 that agreed to cease hostilities between the two countries but there was no winner, loser or peace agreement.
That's a main reason America won't compromise on their demands that NK completely stop with the nuclear option.
Plus, NK has a loaded gun pointed at Seoul and has threatened to destroy it if NK is ever attacked. The mountain range in NK facing SK is filled with miles of caverns full of conventional canons that can't be obliterated all at once by any conventional means. Nukes won't work and neither will bombs.
Orders are in place to immediately start firing at Seoul if NK is ever attacked and America won't be able to stop them.
@agapp11able I don't know what kool-aide you've been drinking but you're brainwashed if you believe that BS.
The US ceased all hostilities against NK with the North Korean Armistice Agreement signed by both sides in 1953. The US and NK are still technically at war... which part of that don't you understand? NK was aligned with communist China back then. It still is.
The US didn't kill off the north Koreans, kim jong sun and il and un did and continue to do that to it's people, mainly through reeducation camps and starvation. It's very effective, leading to millions of North Korean lives lost over the decades.
Their propaganda tells their people how great their country is and how good they have it and how badly the rest of the world fares, flat lying to their own people about reality. People there don't know any better or any different because freedom of thought, freedom of speech and freedom of association is all banned there by penalty of death.
They are all as brainwashed as you are. You should go there, you'd probably like it.
@@keithsj10 "The US ceased all hostilities against NK with the North Korean Armistice Agreement signed by both sides in 1953."
An agreement doesn't mean much when they can be broken easily . NK clearly doesn't trust USA.
@@testacals Yeah and because of that in 1968, the North Koreans sent 31 armed men to try and kill the South Korean president. And again in 1980 they tried to kill the Korean president by car bombing.
Good job North Korea, good fucking job.
"Blaming higher prices and lower quality of life on the enemy."
I mean.. they're not completely wrong there.
There is a saying in the field of Security Studies, IR, and Conflict Resolution: "Sanctions don't work until they do."
They are often used as a blunt tool but are more effective when applied in a surgical and escalating manner. It can be important to provide the target with off-ramps or a 'golden bridge to retreat across'. They should also be paired with a concerted and constant diplomatic effort (pressure).
If the threat of sanctions does not work and they are imposed, it will require patience, unity, and a comprehensive plan involving all participating states. Regardless, they should not ignore or prove detrimental to humanitarian efforts. Remember, sanctions are not always aimed at changing the position held by the leader of a country; rather, they can also target the stance of other stakeholders or the larger populace. There have been many arguments to pair international sanctions against the DPRK with an information campaign - obviously, these have not yet proved fruitful.
I truly did enjoy the video; however, I feel like you are painting with too broad a brush and your focus is far too narrow. A different approach may prove more fruitful with North Korea. The problem is, they work a lot like sleep; slowly, and then all at once.
I actually just researched this this morning (especially the Diamond 8 thing). Funny to see you post this video now.
I think it would be best if North Korea chooses to become a mini-China at least, opening up to capitalism while keeping its authoritarian rule in place. China would definitely help them out, they needn't worry about regime change that much, and the people in NK can at least lead better lives.
North korea have MOney They Pour all of them on Nuclear program.
chian already tried to convince them of a gradual opening up. but the NK leadership dont want to do it.
They will never open up because they're scared of their citizens finding out entire propaganda they've been fed for the last 80 years have all been lies.
In the last decades, South Korea has become increasingly stronger. In its economy, cultural power, technology and even military.
Maybe this will lead to a solution where the South promises to kick off the US and Japan if the North does the same with China and Russia. This is the only way I can see.
And I know this will be unbelievable hard, as the North's Juche communist authoritarian regime is the complete opposite of the South's liberal capitalist democracy.
South Korea is a monopolist corporatist hyper capitalism
Western bourgeois democracy is fake illusion
,,They simply blame increased prices on the enemy" - Well, they aren't wrong! You don't sanction your allies!
ask Ukraine and how many US sanction imposed on them or Germany and you see US even sanctioned it's poppet states
But they don't realize WHY sanctions were put in the first place, so they are wrong. Also, this statement is not entirely true. Many defectors testified that not everyone in NK have faith in Kim dynasty, but they have no power and ability to organize due to how the state is ruled.
lol the "we give you nuclear stuff you sign this treaty" is awful like the allies in ww2 pulling appeasement like "we give you [country] you sign treaty"
The amount of research done is unparalleled to productions from big studios with massive budgets. Even then, a lot of the facts here must have taken some serious digging from you and your team. In an age of fake news and misconception, it's great to see that somebody is fighting through the noise and working to get us the most honest and truthful information on the open web.
Let me guess, China is their biggest trade partner and they don’t trade much internationally in the first place.
Here’s a hint: the video is more in depth than that
Yes but more to it. But China is indeed biggest reason. No surprise, China doesn’t care about human rights.
@@TheZachary86 What China is the answer to question, whatever North Korea needs, they can get it from China or Russia
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson america is the one starving NK's population, not china.
but go off about how china is apparently worse than history's literal biggest war machine.
@@Homer-OJ-Simpson america is the one starving NK's population, not china.
but go off about how china is apparently worse than history's literal biggest war machine.
Literally who gives a shit if North Korea goes nuclear?
the US has them, why can't anyone else?
Like, the US needs to grow up already
"Sanctions covered even food"
I think North Koreans would be better off if we didn't try to starve them...
Yes. Agreed
Eh, let them starve.
@@stevencooper4422
USA and Israel are the only 2 countries that don’t view food as basic human right
@@stevencooper4422 .
Take a deep research. During the famine in 90s, much part of the foreign aid didn't even went to those who needed it, but to Kim's regime's pocket as it was partially resold on the black market. Also DPRK rarely lets people from foreign aid into the country to check if the parcels arrive at their destination at all.
They can't be trusted with anything. Also it was their call to close borders with China due to Coronvirus Pandemic, so it was their choice.
So no, sanctions don't equal to immediate higher living standards for Koreans in the countryside.
I think that people who blame sanctions don't get that Korea wouldn't starve if their own goverment would invest in food and help to the people instead of luxuries and military. It's not our fault that their goverment wants nukes instead of food.
The only hope for them is the regime's collapse.
Also, we can't lift sanctions, because it is basically doing what Kim wants because he has 22 million hostages.
I feel deeply sorry for DPRK's people. I watch their interviews and everything for like 10 years now and I would honestly give anything to help them, but the long-term solution would be only to find a way for disassembling the regime. Otherwise no foreign aid will help them forever.
Imagine seeing a guy begging on the street for food, because his kid is hungry, while the money he gets always goes on vodka. Even if you buy them a meal - would you trust such a parent that he wouldn't eat it himself? :/
You've been pumping out videos like crazy!
2:34 AM (yep!)
2/5/2022
I have to disagree with one point: that only the elite can bring about change. The middle class can often affect real change (I.e. South Africa), but often the sanctions decimate the middle class (i.e. Iraq), or prevent one from forming (see Myanmar). I’m glad that since the coup the talk has been about targeted sanctions on Myanmar, rather than the total sanctions of past years.
I highly doubt that anyone will say sanctions don't work after looking at the Russian economy
Nothing happened, Russia still own most of the Europe gas and oil supply, cut that pipeline and Europe freeze to death, and as long as there is China, Russia will be safe. Maybe sanctions will hurt the Russian economy, but not destroy it.
Watch the video
Look at the ruble to usd
15:29 "so what's the solution?"
Answer: Stop killing the leaders of other nations when they disagree with you
To be fair US also broke several promises to North korea..
It is known to everybody that US makes a deal and the next president abolish it ( Iran Agreement as an example)
Sanctions only hurts regular People ( only ).
I lived in two sanctioned Countries and can tell u , only people suffer, Army, Regime, Police wont face fuel and Money shortages, it would be even harder to make any change in the country when it's isolated..
A simpler answer, and more likely to be correct, North Korea doesn't want to give up their nukes because they can use it as as blackmail, that's it, nothing more, nothing less. Same reason why Iran also want them.
9:00 north korea made a proposition to the US that they would remove all nuclear programs and all nuclear bombs if the US removed their military influense in south korea. The US declined.
Congratz,
a whole video about sanctions without naming or describing one
Unpopular opinion - Let them have nukes. No leader has been crazy enough to use them in the slightest and it would allow for a balance in militaristic power. After they have what they wanted - they would probably end up opening back up to the world and Korea could reunify and this could end all of the problems - but sadly, war is a very profitable business for many powerful stakeholders, such as governments, defence contractors and companies which produce weapons.
So by saying this you also meant that we should just sanction and forget about the problem as if the problem would just disappear? you do know that North korea is constantly attempting to undermine the American security economy and media right? including hacking their financial system. this problem will continue to affect America as long as North Korea problem is just simply ignored with Sanctioned. It is America fault too for Utilising North korea for the political score. rather than actually solving the problem. Problem such as this would not disappear it will expanded and transform.
@@r3dpowel796 they wouldn’t be doing it if they weren’t sanctioned imo. I think we should just remove sanctions from them, allow them to open up to the rest of the world and just accept them as a nuclear power. Life would become much better for the common person who really suffers a lot from sanctions instead of the higher ups
What pisses me off is these guy’s are supposed to be one country like Japan. Imagine a south and north Japan today it wouldn’t even make sense. I truly believe the leaders on both sides are not working for the interest of the populations on both sides of the border. Why would you refuse to being a stronger country?
You lied about NK leaving the US deal first! It's the US always going back to their word just like the Iran deal!
My main takeaway here is that Vermont could finance a nuclear weapons program.
N.Korea : "Workout for you is warm up for me ."
Economic sanctions would only work on democracies, but democracies aren't the targets of those, typically. For the sake of humane treatment, sanctions regarding food should be dropped, but perhaps...North Korea should be ignored? No military exercises, no aggressive words, no diplomacy...just pretend like there's a sea between South Korea and China.
Average Nk ppl suffer a lot because of sanctions, but they won't say anything because they don't want to be executed by their leaders
not really. As the video has said,average NK people believe that ALL their suffering came from the US, which is partly true
The leaders don't have any say either. The US is known for sanctioning republics who dare oppose their interests (Venezuela, Cuba and NK). Thankfully they have other countries to trade with, but with some drawbacks (limited supplies etc)
@@huyduong2242 The US is a rouge state and a sponsor of terrorism.
Here is a solution. Ask for denuclearization but offer lots of economic benefits in exchange. Offer favorable trade deals to china, offer to cover the cost for modernizing and building new infrastructure and industry in the country.
In short, take away their 30 investment and replace it with something of equal value that can pay off in a few years
So in conclusion sunshine policy. We tried that. They blew up the communication building.
American politicians are greedy and will never agree to that.
@@irispark1381 they didn't offer them infrastructure they offered them fast food chains that are owned by Americans so they could change prices or close them anytime they wish to.
Nuclear missile is the only deterrant weaponry that can avoid Evasion/colonialism and create a Stable gouvernement system that can turn into a republican one in long term.
USA distabilise country for selling weapon, destabilized to reign better. and put more USA puppet everywhere and sell American culture.
USA is a nation of war. the majority of the GDP is literaly weaponry and Military services.
@@user-Cata7sti7ma7 Wrong. The majority of the Budget & GDP are Social Security.
@@Cybernaut551 Social Security is Selling Weapon and Military Services to other * allied* country. Hello.
I've seen a few of your videos and your definitely much stronger when talking about Asian infrastructure and politics. This video was very interesting
9:35 That's because he decided to sell oil in a currency other than USD. Not because he co-operated.
Soon we will have "why sanctions never worked in Russias"
They work. Now even more Russians believe that Putin is doing the right thing, that the war was inevitable and that the West is the enemy.
Sanctions and embargoes are pretty shit and don’t really do a whole lot besides hurt the people in those countries
Yeah, leaving out or briefly glossing over how U.S sanctions are killing thousands seems unfair in these discussions. Would highly recommend everyone to read a paper called "The Human Costs and Gendered Impact of Sanctions on North Korea." Regardless of anyone's opinion of the North Korean government, killing civilians who aren't directly involved while threatening to invade the country can only scare North Koreans into supporting a dictatorship, as that seems to be their only protection.
@@Ryan-lw6qw America is still at war with North Korea. An armistice was signed to cease hostilities but it's never ended. America has a policy to deal with NK because of that and the threat they pose to the rest of the world.
@@Ryan-lw6qw any other options? One idea is to flood their economy with fake currency and cause crisis of confidence
@Rooper K I think there's one really good option: leave them alone. Koreans can fix their own problems and don't need America's "help"
@@Ryan-lw6qw The leadership of NK has degenerated to a point where they simply do not care. If 90% of the NK population dies, it is considered satisfactory...
My question is... why not just leave North Korea alone? Its tragic how they oppress their own people, but if you ignore them, they don't really have any reason to attack. The problem in my mind is that N. Korea isn't just unhappy with status quo, it wants to extort the western world for aid.
"Look we spent all our money on nukes, our people are starving please help or we might use those nukes."
"Why didn't you spend your money on helping your own people?"
"How would we extort the world for money if we did that? Our government plan to keep 90% of any foreign aid that does end up heading our way, so start paying please."
It just works. NK would not have been sanctioned if people left it alone.
Sanctions actually start conflicts: Peal Harbour was the result of sections against Japan.
A group of bullies with collection of guns in their basement are asking the small guys not to have a gun of their own, they scratched their heads and said: why didn’t they listen?
I still really couldn't grasp why the US is still pursuing this sanctions on north Korea even though it would only make the people suffers and hate the US. Anyway, this is an interesting topic to discuss
because sponsoring a dictatorial regime that enslaves and abuses its own people is bad. The US is not the only country that sanctions NK, it is joined by many other nations across the planet. The sad reality of those North Koreans is that they will hate the US no matter what happens, because they have been brainwashed since birth to loathe the US for its participation in the Korean War. Sanctions reflect an ever-changing approach to global diplomacy in the 21st century- responding with indirect economic action instead of direct military action is the preferred course of action for all countries in the world because of how much nuclear weaponry has proliferated and made war unstable.
@@Lightningflamingice So by saying this you also meant that we should just sanction and forget about the problem as if the problem would just dissappear? you do know that North korea is constantly attempting to undermine American security economy and media right? including hacking their financial system. this problem will continue to affect america as long as North korea problem is just simply ignored. and eventaully destroy USA North korea might be small but it could become an existential threat.
@@Lightningflamingice but what you're doing is bad, and only adds to the total badness. there's literally no point to it other than making those people's lives even worse.
@@r3dpowel796 And what would you like to do? Invade North Korea? Any attack on NK will result in nuclear hellfire pouring down on Seoul.
@@JewTube001 What are you talking about? Every country reserves the right to pick and choose who it trades with. If NK wants to rejoin the global forum, they need to stop abusing their people and become a democracy. I suppose you wouldn't want to sanction Nazi Germany either because in your flawed methodology, sponsoring a global aggressor is worse than actively refusing them. The onus is on NK, not the rest of the world, for this tragedy as they are its perpetuators.
6:55 97% of Afghanistan will fall under the poverty line
*Title says North Korea*
Thought more people would notice, although I wouldn't be surprised if that statement was true
Can't exactly get demographic stats of NK. They are "hermit kingdom". Their gov prob claims 100% prosperity rate. His point was country is piss poor
That might be true for afghanistan too.Its way worse than any 3rd world country,lets call it 4th or 5th world.
@@mernok2001 Atleast taliban won.
Joke peoples, joke.
Very informative video.😊👍 I am just wondering, why the west fond of sanctioning countries unfriendly to them, while the west have also commited atrocites in several countries. Example the alleged WMD in Iraq which is not really there and it cost death of many people when NATO bombed and inaved Iraq. And yet there is no sanction being implented to all NATO countries involved.🤔
Because the NATO countries are amongst the richest most powerful countries in the world? How on earth would you go about sanctioning the US and Europe? Sanctioning the US and Europe would bring your country back to the middle ages, obviously nobody in their right mind would do that and that's why it hasn't been done.
@@zjeee I will teach them the lesson, and this is how the world will be healed. By the way, look at how many NATO are part of colonisation before claiming that they have the best "human rights"? Or more example like the late Michael Jackson sexual scandal, how many NATO or human rights offices actually stands up for Michael Jackson innocence??? None, my friend, the whole world is chaotic thanks to the sabotaging and the evilness of human nature. If there are human rights, why not defend MJ that heals the world, warn us about climate change before huge protests, he even warns about police brutality, go and check that out. If any human rights were to defend MJ innocent, I am glad they did the right thing but too bad, not only the "Human Right" fellows are ignored, but some even throw dirt on him, calling freak or weird man where he is actually saving the world!!!!!!
I wonder why someone would sanction fucking North Korea
"sanctions brought Iran to the negotiations table" what?! Iran played the same game as North Korea: freezing and restarting and freezing again...
Capturing "Pueblo" an "assault" is a kind of exaggeration.
North Korea did offer to give the US what it wants with respect to nuclear weapons but the US didn't want to give North Korea what it wanted in addition to the sanctions being lifted. Besides the sanctions, North Korea wanted assurances by all major powers that they would not invade and that the US give up control over South Korea and allow Korea to reunite under North Korean rule. Giving up South Korea is a major sticking point and something the US won't give up without a major war like South Vietnam and so the deadlock. It's not that sanctions have no effect, its just that NK wants more than just sanctions to go if it gives up its nukes.
I think the US should just take the L, lift the sanctions, and ignore the DPRK, not necessarily friendly but just have a neutral diplomatic relationship like any other country. What happens in the DPRK is the business of its people, not the US.
That won't happen, because US will lose face.
And China would think that it won and probably try to challenge America in other places too
@@papaicebreakerii8180 it doesn't matter if anyone thinks they won or not. this shouldn't be some petty game.
@@JewTube001 Fully agree, these are people's lives we are talking about at the end of the day.
Hell yeah, I still blame the UN for the sanctions in the nineties.
It is (not without reason) alleged that sanctions towards elites didn't help Ukraine avoid futher military confrontation with russia (as is seen now with its brinkmanship)
@agapp11able But Ukraine wants U.S. troops in their country to protect themselves from Russia, Ukraine is a sovereign nation, it can do whatever it wants and Russia has no other choice than to respect that decision.
@agapp11able The majority of Ukrainians were not happy with the pro Russian government so they overthrew the corrupt government who didn't want Ukraine to join the EU.
The people in the East are a part of Ukraine and Ukraine only, but they do not make up the majority, the majority wanted to move away from Russia and to be Western, because being Western is better than being Russian.
@agapp11able that pro rusian candidate wanted to integrate with the European Union. lol its after he changed his mind that people start revolting
@agapp11able grown artificially? Source?
So your argument is that Ukraine shouldn’t be concern about Russia having so many troops on their border but Russia should be concerned of Ukraine might some day in the future want to have troops in their country to defend them against Russia? Lol
@agapp11able the last time you said “literally a two second google search shows China holds the most US debt” the result was they Japan holds the most US debt. Why are you CCP shills such liars? Give a source that the US installed the Ukraine president.
The sanctions work in the sense that if they were not in place, NK would have more nuclear weapons by now. By limiting their funds to produce nuclear missiles, the chance of US and SK missile defense systems being able to intercept NK's nuclear missiles will be higher.
Can’t believe you don’t have more subs. Nice work
What does the US think it is to sanction countries as it pleases? The great world dictator and the world judge at the same time?
"blaming higher prices and lower quality of life on the enemy"
Y-yes. That's what sanctions do. DPRK authorities are right to blame the countries which imposed sanctions on DPRK because that's what preventing goods from reaching DPRK.
I wish the people of DPRK prosperity and reunification of the peninsula
when will USA withdraw from Korea?
@@sinoroman south korea will not want the us to withdraw with China and NK on the border. In fact, the Korean government wanted to pay the US to keep its bases on the peninsula.
South Korea doesn’t want to reunify with the much poorer north.
@agapp11able that isn’t the same as unification.
@@NewsGuyFred eh, about 44% of South Koreans think reunification is "necessary" and the president Lee Myung-Bak proposed a 'reunification tax' back in 2010. I think they want reunification as long as it can be done in a way that doesn't collapse their economy
Semi Short answer: They have been cut off from the rest of the world for decades that sanctions have no effect on them.
This is not true. NK says it is willing to denuclearize if the entire peninsular denuclearize, effectively meaning the US withdrawal from SK and end its military umbrella of SK. Which is going to be very hard to swallow for the US. So yes, NK is willing to do it, it isn't impossible, but the cost is practically impossible.
I realized that the secret to making a million is saving for a better investment. I always tell myself you don't need that new Maserati or that vacation just yet. That mindset helped me make more money investing. For example last year I invested 80k in stocks (with the help of my Financial Advisor of course) and made about 246k, but guess what? I put it all back and traded with her again and now I'm rounding up close to a million.
The pandemic came and taught everyone the importance of having multiple stream of income, unfortunately having a nice paying job doesn't mean you are financial secured anymore. So we all need to put in an extra-income earning chance, like investments.
Investment is that tiny line that separates the RICH from the POOR. The foolish from wise sorry to say. I can proudly say I am wise today because I can provide for my family through my investments.
@David Peters
Be careful not to jump into trading without any proper training because it can be very detrimental. Many folks jump into trading only to suffer great loss at the very beginning. Do not try to imitate a professional traders, better still ask questions. Get the services of a professional stock expert or a licensed broker.
Expert Mrs Dawn Fitzpatrick . She is famous and a registered broker I will recommend her trading service for you. her strategies is amazing and is working perfectly well for me at the moment.
You I'll have to reach out to her,. Her availability is on Whats@App 👇.... 👇
I feel the 2 choices outlined toward the video's conclusion are a false dichotomy. Why not secretly pay another, less scary, nation to negotiate for us? Someone often overlooked gets help they badly need (hopefully), and maybe NK will listen to someone that doesn't look, act, or speak like an American.
I have no suggestions as to nominees. The basis of my suggestion is the under-the-counter arms sales, where America arms the enemies of her enemies. Maybe she can win over someone on the fence, privately. I understand that enforcement of any agreement is a different matter. However, getting Kim Jong Un to trust "not-us" would be a big step in the right direction.
It's worth a thought.
Australia or India..
@@brianjones7660 I meant one not obviously aligned with America. Maybe more like a Niger, Cameroon, or Tasmania. Somewhere no one ever thinks about. I'm sure an influx of dollars (or Euros for that matter) could be very convincing.
I feel like they would catch wind of it pretty soon tho that the US is paying said country to negotiate
@@santhoshsridhar5887 Maybe not. If the aid, or straight cash, was laundered correctly, it wouldn't be worked out right away by NK. It's not as if they're top dogs in the intelligence community, and very few nations have embassies there.
@@MomMom4Cubs what would those countries be offering NK in the negotiations? It would also have to be a country with pre-existing relations with NK otherwise someone just popping up to try to strike a deal will look very suspicious.
A nation or group of nations can only sanction a target country up to a point. Afterward, any new sanction becomes less effective.
Very good and rather even handed coverage, good stuff!