The Maoist view of international trade

Maoist view on North Korea: Book review
Dialogue with North Korea: Report on a Seminar on "Tension Reduction in Korea"
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC, 1989, 76pp. free
Review written in early 1991.
This is a collection of documents on the issue of Korean reunification. Most of the pages are selected transcription of a dialogue of Amerikan imperialists with officials from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).
The Amerikan side is represented by the State Department, the CIA, military officers, some scholars, bourgeois think tank representatives and other intelligence officers. During the dialogue, the Amerikan liberals contradict the Amerikan conservatives on finer points of how to oppress Korea best.
The situation in Korea today is hard for Amerikans to relate to. Korea is still fighting off colonial rule, Amerikan rule that is.
If the Amerikan South had had a civil war with the North and the British landed troops to "protect" the South, that would be analogous to what is happening in Korea to this day. As one might expect, some U.S. citizens would oppose the regime in the South for upholding slavery. Others would be outraged by the Southern regime's traitorous relations with the British.
In Korea there is a communist movement dating back to at least the 1920s. There is also a strong movement opposing Japanese and then U.S. colonialism.
The United States has 30,000 troops and thousands of nuclear weapons stationed in southern Korea.
Still DPRK officials take a very moderate stance in regard to the U.S. occupation. They report they are willing to reposition their troops away from the southern part of Korea and cut the number of troops in tandem with the fascist regime in the South, so that the two sides end up with 100,000 troops or fewer.
What is interesting about the dialogue is that the U.S. imperialists had used the Cold War as an excuse for 40 years to push for a divided Korea. Now the imperialists use the end of the Cold War as an excuse to dominate Korea. "AMERICAN: In view of your confidence in early reunification I wonder how you account for the success of the Republic of Korea in improving its relations with your traditional allies -- not only the Soviet Union, where there have been very important steps in economic cooperation, but also Czechoslovakia and Hungary--the establishment of diplomatic relations--political relations--even with the PRC. Don't you find your country runs the risk of being outflanked by the South through its own initiatives...?" (p. 25)
The DPRK retort is as revealing: "Our socialist neighbors have had the opportunity to make clear to us. . . that they have supported and will support the reunification of our country continuously. We trust them. We trust their words." (Ibid.)
The DPRK is too kind to the Deng Xiaoping fascists and Gorbachev capitalists.
The Amerikan side replied by implying the danger of Japan without mentioning Japan. Amerika wants it to appear that the United States is Korea's friend while Japan wants to keep its competitor Korea divided. (p. 25-6)
In another exchange, the Amerikans laid it on thick with capitalist triumph dogma: "It's pretty much conceded that the socialist economies are in a state of collapse--that socialism doesn't work. The Soviet Union, most of eastern Europe and China illustrate the essential bankruptcy of socialist systems. . . . The real example for your country is to be seen in the neighboring countries of the Pacific Basin--Taiwan, Hong Kong, though special circumstances prevail there, the ASEAN countries, notably Thailand, Indonesia, even to a limited extent the Philippines and of course the ROK itself, which offers great promise. . . . How do you conceive of succeeding by maintaining what you call national independence while others around you are abandoning a system that is essentially bankrupt?" (p. 31)
This is a very popular argument not just among Amerikans in Korea. It carries heavy weight with the Chinese masses, intellectuals in particular. MIM will address the argument above in future essays.
In conclusion, one gathers from this book that the DPRK says, "'if we are all going in the same direction, toward confederation, rather than toward legitimizing two Koreas,'" "'you will find us very flexible.'" (p. 66) The DPRK has also given up on seeing students and labor launch a revolution in the southern region. They say the economic development of the southern region makes revolution impossible. (Ibid.)
--mc5