Canuck: "If you "poured development aid" into NK, how would you ensure that the money is not diverted into increasing it's 1.2 million man army? Or expanding it's nuclear weapons program? Or expanding their 13000 pieces of artillery that they have aimed at Seoul?"
It would have to be ensured. Aid doesn't have to be unconditional and, maybe, the greater its scale, the greater the prospect of complicity. Reliance upon a massive aid input could be a real deterent against its abuse and consequent cessation. The state of NK is associated with "internalities", as you say. Internal pressures and activities could also bring about a change for the better, given enough motivation. I know it's arguable, but it's 'right', it's humane, it's ethical, and it's what the religious people have been rightly preaching about for thousands of years. I can almost guarantee that it will never happen - it's not a 'bloody' and malicious solution. It's too 'naive'. It's not evil, and where would we be without that?
