Q: There was no real peace treaty following the Korean War, yet South Korea managed to prosper. What do you think of this example?
Zelensky: South Korea has a major ally: the United States of America, which will not let North Korea take control of it. So, everything is relative: the South Koreans still face risks. Their economy is prosperous, and they are protected by an alliance, but as long as North Korea remains what it is, as long as the nature of their leadership remains the same, South Korea will not be completely safe. And, believe me, they have numerous air defense systems that guarantee their security.
To be honest, Ukraine is determined to obtain solid security guarantees, for example, Patriot systems, which South Korea has. However, the comparison with South Korea has its limits: North Korea's population is just over 20 million, while Russia's has over 140 million. The scale of these threats cannot be compared. The threats from Russia are five, six, or even ten times greater. A one-to-one replication of the South Korean model would probably not be suitable for Ukraine in terms of security.
Posted by Themetalin
1 Comment
Fun fact: [South Korea refused to sign the armistice agreement](https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/article/3423473/long-diplomatic-wrangling-finally-led-to-korean-armistice-70-years-ago/). Syngman Rhee was adamant about regaining territory he didn’t control. To this day, they have not signed it—and the territory is still out of their control.
> On Jan. 20, 1953, Dwight D. Eisenhower was sworn in as U.S. president. Like Truman, he hoped for a diplomatic solution, and, once again, armistice talks began on April 26, 1953.
> Three months later, all sides — except for South Korea — agreed to the armistice.
On second thought, maybe not so fun.