Seoul’s up-and-down Romance with China amid US-China Rivalry: A Korean Perspective

China Report ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 309-326
Author(s):  
Seong-Hyon Lee
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Future Outlook ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
South Korean ◽  
High Altitude Area ◽  
The Usa

South Korea’s quest to become a middle power, articulated through autonomy in foreign policy, has been challenged in the ambience of great power competition reality between the USA and China. This article delineates South Korean foreign policy’s complex nature in the evolving East Asian regional context, focusing on Seoul’s relationship with China in particular. Many observers noted that South Korea has in recent years been increasingly leaning towards China, despite the fact that it is a military-pact ally of the USA. It also comes as a bewilderment to outsiders to notice that South Korea has been ‘cold-shouldering’ Japan, the world’s number three economy. It does not necessarily mean that Seoul maintains good relations with China either. The two nations have yet to overcome the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) dispute. This article also scrutinises how the USA plays an important role in South Korea’s relations with its two neighbours. Seoul has been in search of diplomatic autonomy between the world’s two most powerful nations. The process has been tumultuous. The future outlook seems uncertain.

South Korean Politics and Foreign Policy in 2017 and 2018

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 123-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaewoo CHOO
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
High Altitude ◽  
North Korea ◽  
The United States ◽  
Basic Strategy ◽  
South Korean ◽  
The North ◽  
High Altitude Area

The election of Moon Jae-in in South Korea signals a shift to a more conciliatory approach towards North Korea. Moon’s basic strategy towards the North contradicts that of the United States, emphasising a “dual-track” policy of seeking North Korea’s denuclearisation while calling for dialogue to facilitate inter-Korean summit and not North Korea’s denuclearisation. Moon’s acceptance of China’s “Three oppositions” to the deployment of Terminal High Altitude Area Defence is controversial as they are not within Korea’s jurisdiction.

scholarly journals CHINA’S SHIFTING BEHAVIOUR TOWARDS SOUTH KOREA IN THAAD CRISIS RESOLUTION IN KOREAN PENINSULA

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Ganang Wira Pradana
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Pop Culture ◽  
The United States ◽  
Defense System ◽  
The South ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Policy Theory ◽  
High Altitude Area ◽  
Korean State

ABSTRACTThe THAAD crisis between South Korea and China occurred due to the installation of the THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) system by South Korea with the help of the United States which was considered as a threat to China's national security. China strongly opposed the installation of the defense system and imposed unofficial sanctions in a form of a boycott in the field of South Korean tourism, products, and pop culture, which provided significant losses due to China's retaliation. After the South Korean state visit to China which was held in Beijing, China’s boycott was later lifted, but the THAAD installed in South Korea remain stayed and deployed. Thus the question arises about why China chose to soften and not force the South Koreans to withdraw THAAD. This article uses the qualitative research method of literature studies and uses variables of foreign policy theory by Yuen Foon Khong as the theoretical framework in this paper. Therefore, it can be seen that China's softening of the THAAD issue is caused by the influence of China’s "peripheral diplomacy" foreign policy and the shifting of Chinese behavior so that China does not impose its will on the South Korean THAAD system to maintain good relations with South Korea as a peripheral country. Keywords: China, China’s Behavior, Foreign Policy, South Korea, THAAD

scholarly journals Social and Humanitarian Factor in South Korea's External Relations and The Korean Question

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-168
Author(s):  
O. S. Pugacheva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
The United States ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
South Korean ◽  
The Social

The development of the socio-humanitarian dimension of world politics provides new opportunities for enhancing the role and influence of the middle powers in the global affairs. That is why for understanding and assessment of their political opportunities on the international arena, it is necessary to analyze the approaches and policies of such countries on using socio-humanitarian factor to balance in the existing world balance power and ensure their foreign policy interests. The aim of the article is to analyze South Korea’s activities in the social and humanitarian sphere of world politics in the context of its foreign policy interests. The research question is: what is the role of the socio-humanitarian factor, in particular public diplomacy, in the external activities of South Korea with regard to the settlement of the Korean question? The author argues that South Korea sees social and humanitarian sphere as a possibility to strengthen its role and influence on the international arena. While developing the discourse of South Korea as a middle power, the South Korean leadership seeks to take part in creating norms and rules in different fields of global governance. Despite controversies concerning its status and policy as that of a middle power, South Korea advances through public diplomacy the discourse that constructs and enhance its middle power status and can contribute in forming the corresponding national identity. South Korea uses national branding as well to strengthen its political image. Further, the article points out that promoting South Korea’s stance and defending its interests on the Korean Peninsula represent a key task of South Korea’s public diplomacy. In particular, the article examines South Korea’s public diplomacy mechanisms on the Korean track towards the United States and emphasizes that although South Korea has actively engaged in public diplomacy in the USA, it still has a lot to do to explain South Korea's concerns to American political elites and U.S. publics and ensure that the relationship with the United States fully serves South Korean interests. Moreover, it is noted that enhancing South Korea’s role in global governance as well as forming constructive unification discourse (unification as a process now and as a result someday in the future) within the country and abroad are supposed to expand its opportunities to maneuver in the regional politics of East Asia and provide support for the South Korean initiatives on the Korean settlement. In the end, the author turns to the inter-Korean relations. The author states that different South Korean administrations have prioritized different functions of the socio-humanitarian factor. Conservative administrations put an emphasis on information pressure on the DPRK while the development of inter-Korean relations was conditioned by the denuclearization of North Korea. Progressive administrations prefer engaging the DPRK in social, humanitarian and economic interactions. In the first case the result was a rollback in inter-Korean relations with the North Korean leader-ship receiving additional grounds for the development of its military nuclear program. In the second case the social and humanitarian area was and remains a dimension providing promising opportunities for cooperation that is beneficial to the both parties as it is aimed at solving specific and practical problems of common interest. In that sense, the author argues that social and humanitarian factor in inter-Korean relations could serve as a safety cushion during intensification of the inter-Korean conflict and provide a launch pad for finding a way out of the impasses.

Between Balancing and Bandwagoning: South Korea's Response to China

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. Kang
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Economic Opportunity ◽  
Fundamental Change ◽  
Rising Powers ◽  
Policy Orientation ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Military Threat ◽  
China's Rise ◽  
Material Power

Why has South Korea accommodated China, instead of fearing its growth and balancing against it? This article makes two central arguments. First, concepts of balancing and bandwagoning are fundamentally difficult to test, and to the extent that the theory can be tested, it appears to be wrong in the case of South Korea. In fact, we observe many cases in which rising powers are neither balanced nor “bandwagoned” but are simply accommodated with no fundamental change either way in military stance or alignment posture. Second, the factors that explain South Korean foreign policy orientation toward China are as much about interests as they are about material power. South Korea sees substantially more economic opportunity than military threat associated with China's rise; but even more importantly, South Korea evaluates China's goals as not directly threatening.

Gloomy sentiment will spur stimulus in South Korea

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Policy ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Domestic Demand ◽  
The South ◽  
Content Type ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Sustained Growth ◽  
Korean Economy

Significance The recent fall in the price of oil was expected to provide a timely boost to the South Korean economy, but its performance in the first quarter of 2015, though rebounding from the previous quarter, has been below expectations. Beset by slowing exports and weak domestic demand, the mood in both the business and household sectors is downbeat. Impacts Absent a sustained growth rebound (or some kind of foreign policy breakthrough), Park's presidency will be seen as a failure. Deflation could threaten South Korea if there is no adjustment to monetary policy. An FTA with China will boost South Korean exports only in the longer term. The sharp depreciation of the euro will make Europe a challenging market for South Korea for now.

scholarly journals South Korean Teachers’ Perceptions of Integrating Information and Communication Technologies into Literacy Instruction

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sangho Pang ◽  
David Reinking ◽  
Amy Hutchison ◽  
Deanna Ramey
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Information And Communication Technologies ◽  
Literacy Instruction ◽  
Technical Assistance ◽  
National Level ◽  
Communication Technologies ◽  
Technological Support ◽  
Teachers Perceptions ◽  
South Korean ◽  
The Usa

We investigated South Korean literacy and language arts teachers’ perceptions about integrating interactive communication technologies (ICTs) into instruction. The survey addressed their access to various applications and technologies associated with ICTs, access to technological support, frequency and importance of use, and obstacles to and conceptions of integrating ICTs. Descriptive and correlational data are reported suggesting that although classroom use of ICTs is mandated at the national level, South Korean teachers perceive access to some tools and applications, as well as the availability of technical assistance at both the school and district level, to be limited. We compare data from this study to our findings from a similar study conducted in the USA and discuss what the findings reveal about integration of ICTs into literacy instruction in South Korea. The implications for education policy in South Korea and for continued research to clarify findings across national and cultural boundaries are discussed. For example, despite reporting greater impact of obstacles and less technical support than their US counterparts, South Korean teachers reported using ICTs more frequently than teachers from the USA.

South Korea’s middle power diplomacy: A case of growing compatibility between regional and global roles

2016 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 587-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jongryn Mo
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Structural Constraints ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
The North ◽  
International Pressure ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Power Role ◽  
Domestic Support

South Korea has emerged as a new middle power that plays a significant role in a wide range of important global issue areas and supports liberal international order with its leadership diplomacy. Even though regional challenges will continue to demand large foreign policy resources including time, human resources, and budget, the middle power orientation of South Korean foreign policy behaviour and strategy—for example, multilateralism, the rule of law, and promotion of cooperation and compromise—will remain in place even in the conduct of regional foreign policy. This optimism is based on the fact that South Korea is a middle power not only in global governance but also in the East Asian region. Even on the issue of North Korea’s nuclear weapons, the most important foreign policy challenge of the day, the South has accepted the regionalization of the issue and, over time, its middle power role. It has relied on the middle power strategy of mobilizing international pressure on the North rather than deploying and strengthening its unilateral options such as the use of force or massive economic aid. In order to fully realize the promise and potential of middle power diplomacy, however, South Korea must make strong efforts to alleviate structural constraints on a middle power strategy. First, Korean leaders should undertake a full-scale campaign to de-nationalize Korean education and, thus, Korean foreign policy orientations. Second, a strong domestic consensus should emerge giving the national interest precedence over group interests when dealing with foreign policy challenges. Finally, political leaders and diplomats must create new opportunities in global governance and deliver tangible national benefits through middle power diplomacy. Middle power diplomacy, like all foreign policy strategies, will not be sustainable without strong domestic support; and domestic support cannot be built on goodwill and commitment to universal values alone.

Is Australia's Indo-Pacific strategy an illusion?

2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendan Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
East Asian ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Middle Power

Abstract Australia has been among the most prominent advocates of the increasingly popular Indo-Pacific concept. This article argues that Canberra's enthusiasm for the concept stems from its appeal to the two dominant traditions of Australian foreign policy—a ‘dependent ally’ tradition and a ‘middle power’ approach. While these two traditions are typically seen as being in tension, the Indo-Pacific concept provides a rare point of convergence between them. The article begins by outlining the appeal of the Indo-Pacific concept to each of these traditions. Using a case-study of recent Australian policy toward the South China Sea disputes, however, the article then demonstrates that Australia has in practice implemented its stated Indo-Pacific strategy far less consistently than its very vocal support would appear to suggest. This disjuncture is attributed to the growing influence of a third, generally understudied, ‘pragmatic’ Australian foreign policy tradition. Because Australia has been such a prominent champion of the Indo-Pacific concept, the article concludes that this divergence between the rhetoric and the reality of Australia's Indo-Pacific strategy threatens to have a negative impact on the concept's broader international appeal and sustainability, particularly among Australia's south-east Asian neighbours.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document