scholarly journals Sustainable Development in Middle Powers’ Governance Arrangements

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 49-74
Author(s):  
Camila Saute Torresini
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Functional Specialization ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
Middle Powers ◽  
Power Arrangements ◽  
Governance Arrangements

Considering middle powers’ potential to address new demands worldwide and their propensity to contribute to new forms of institution-building in global governance, arrangements between them consist of interesting opportunities to promote sustainable development. However, some have shown to be more effective than others in this regard. When observing two of these partnerships’ outcomes between 2015 and 2018, India, Brazil, and South Africa (IBSA) Trilateral Forum has demonstrated more effectiveness than Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, and Australia (MIKTA) New Innovative Partnership. To understand why, this study analyses specialized literature, with special attention to Koenig-Archibugi’s (2002) framework on global governance arrangements’ effectiveness. Arguing that middle power arrangements that address sustainable development are more effective when benefiting from greater functional specialization and that diversified power access also plays a role, this study raises awareness about middle powers’ relevance in addressing new global demands. The study points out the nascent research on these informal partnerships and the causal relations between these arrangements’ structures and effectiveness.

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.

scholarly journals Sustainable Global Governance? Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle Institutions

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihaela Papa
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
Future Research ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Current Growth ◽  
Institutional Strategies ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Development Paradigm ◽  
Governance Arrangements

The growth of global governance—in terms of the proliferation of rules, laws, and institutional forms as well as their interactions—is an increasingly debated issue. Scholars are raising concerns about some of its negative impacts, but they are divided on the extent of these impacts and on the needed solutions. While some question the viability of international institutions and argue for embracing complexity, others see current growth concerns as a call for more order and a turn to constitutionalism. This article argues for a turn to sustainable development instead. This approach addresses the system’s underlying problem: its unsustainable development, which threatens to produce more rather than better governance arrangements and to enhance existing participation inequalities. The article uses the sustainable development paradigm to envision how to prevent rather than respond to growth concerns, and to integrate equity considerations into institutional strategies. A discussion of reducing, reusing, and recycling international institutions illustrates how to implement this approach and suggests areas for future research.

scholarly journals Curb your enthusiasm: Middle-power liberal internationalism and the future of the United Nations

2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Riis Andersen
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Past History ◽  
Western World ◽  
Liberal Internationalism ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
The Future ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Middle Powers

The future looks post-Western. But will it also be post-liberal? To gauge how and by whom liberal internationalism may be sustained in the coming order, the article provides a critical and historically grounded analysis of the role of the United Nations in the fading US-led order and the ordering potential and role of middle powers. The article suggests that in the current interregnum of global governance the conventional distinction between traditional and emerging middle powers is increasingly unhelpful. What matters is not their past history, but their present proclivity for seeking multilateral, negotiated solutions. It is this pragmatic version of liberal internationalism that may have a future in a post-Western world, and open up a more pluralist, inclusive approach to global governance.

Between a Rock and a Hard Place: The Dilemmas of Middle Powers

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (02) ◽  
pp. 2040008 ◽  
Author(s):  
BRIAN L. JOB
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
The Us ◽  
Middle Powers ◽  
Security Guarantees ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Hard Place

“Middle powers,” variously defined, have served relevant and significant roles in the post-WWII regional and global orders, facilitated by structural conditions of “long peace” among great powers and proactive leadership by and among creative middle powers. Within the complex Asia-Pacific security order, “middle powers” such as Australia, Canada, and South Korea have had the “space” to engage the non-like minded and advance multilateralism with security guarantees from the US. However, Beijing and Washington today are eliminating this space and its associated choices for middle-power diplomacy by increasingly characterizing their rivalry as a confrontation of “existential threats” between incompatible “civilizations” and securitizing trade and technology. China and the US are each selectively ignoring or purposely eroding key aspects of a rules-based international order. This paper highlights the dilemmas of South Korea, Australia, and Canada, middle powers who have found themselves individually and collectively “stuck” facing contradictory global and regional policy choices.

Middle Powers and the Rise of China: ‘Identity Norms’ of Dependency and Activism and the Outlook for Japan–South Korea Relations vis-à-vis the Great Powers

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
KEY-YOUNG SON
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
Rise Of China ◽  
Bona Fide ◽  
Relative Decline ◽  
Middle Powers ◽  
The Rise Of China

AbstractHow do state identities and their accompanying norms affect security behaviour especially when states consider forming alliances or alignments? Are middle powers different from great powers in their security norms and preferences? This article identifies dependency and activism as two ‘identity norms’ that constitute and reproduce medium-sized states as bona fide middle powers. This article argues that, due to the identity norms of a middle power, Japan and South Korea are reluctant to form a bilateral alliance between themselves and their efforts to socialize with China do not necessarily contradict their security relationships with the United States. The first section focuses on the norm of dependency to illustrate whether Japan and South Korea sought to strengthen bilateral alignment in the event of major security crises, provoked by China and North Korea. It argues that a middle power is not disposed to strengthen alignment with another middle power in the event of a national security crisis because of its entrenched norm of dependency on a great power. The second section elaborates the norm of middle power activism. Both Japan and South Korea have engaged in diplomatic efforts to enmesh China in a number of multilateral security mechanisms in order to hedge against the relative decline of US influences in East Asia.

Testing middle power’s collective action in a world of diffuse power

2016 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 529-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew F. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
First Century ◽  
Normative Values ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
Stage Of Development ◽  
New Type ◽  
Middle Powers

Middle power conceptualization has been reinvented over the years as the structural weight of this cluster of countries changes. Moreover, the means by which middle powers project normative values and operational diplomatic approaches has morphed with the evolution of the global order. A constant, however, has been the unwillingness of middle powers to embrace some form of institutionalization. The focus has been multilateralism and/or specific functional issue areas or niches. This article argues that the combination of a world of diffuse power and a new type of informalism opens the possibility of collective action. Although MIKTA (Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey and Australia) is in an early stage of development, this formation provides a significant test of the meaning and modalities of middle power diplomacy in the twenty-first century.

Class Compromise as Middle Power Activism? Comparing Brazil and South Africa

2012 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 80-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janis van der Westhuizen
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
Societal Values ◽  
Income Inequalities ◽  
Conflicting Demands ◽  
The One ◽  
Power Role ◽  
Middle Powers ◽  
Emerging Powers

One of the most glaring differences between traditional and emerging middle powers relates to their projection of societal values abroad. Since most emerging powers are essentially fragmented multiclass states, class compromise often emerges to intermediate contradictory demands emanating from fragile political coalitions. Against the backdrop of vast income inequalities, and facing some domestic constituencies favouring liberalization on the one hand against pro-redistributive groups on the other, adopting a middle power role, in the cases of South Africa and Brazil, emerges in order to ameliorate these conflicting demands. Two dimensions are examined very briefly, namely recent mediation efforts in Iran and Libya and attempts to effect redistribution by reforming processes of global governance.

Assessing Turkey’s middle power foreign policy in MIKTA: Goals, means, and impact

2016 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 608-629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emel Parlar Dal ◽  
Ali Murat Kurşun
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South Korea ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Power Network ◽  
Power Capacity ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
The Third ◽  
Middle Powers

This study attempts to identify possible new roles for intermediary actors in the changing global architecture by focusing on Turkey’s middle power capacity in the nascent middle power network of Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, Australia (MIKTA). It looks at an overarching embedded analytical triad of goals, means, and impact, superimposed over positional, behavioural, and ideational sublayers. It tests the assumption that the more a state holds together its middle power goals, means, and impact in a combined way, the more leverage it can have as a middle power in the changing international political economy. After reviewing the existing literature on middle powers, the first part of this paper outlines this embedded analytical framework. The second and the third parts seek to operationalize this framework, in particular at institutional and state levels in the example of MIKTA and Turkey. The fourth part delves into the opportunities and challenges that Turkey faces in its MIKTA trajectory (in the light of the conclusions drawn from the second and third parts). The study concludes that while Turkey possesses fairly compatible goals and impact with those of MIKTA, it is still far from channelling all of its capabilities to this new network due mainly to the domestic and regional impediments it faces—as well as the lack of a comprehensive roadmap in relation to MIKTA.

Empirical categorization of middle powers and how different middle powers are treated in international organizations: The case of India and South Korea

2021 ◽  
pp. 223386592110248
Author(s):  
Byungwon Woo
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
International Monetary Fund ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Political Representation ◽  
Steady Increase ◽  
Middle Power ◽  
Unbiased Manner ◽  
Middle Powers ◽  
To Receive ◽  
The International Monetary Fund

Which countries are middle powers in international relations? While the term “middle powers” has witnessed a steady increase in its use in the past two decades, answers to the question are likely to be diverse, depending on to whom one asks the question. The paper tries to provide objective criteria that would allow one to define the entire population of middle powers and theorize how different types of middle powers are regarded and treated by other countries, most significantly, by great powers. Specifically, we contend that those middle powers with larger potential capability than realized capability, labeled as “middle powers with lots of unrealized potentials,” will initially receive favorable treatments in international organizations, but that favorable treatments will gradually diminish as those middle powers begin to close the gap between their potential and realized capability. In comparison, those countries with limited potential capability but with higher realized capacity, labeled as “mature middle powers,” will be treated in an unbiased manner by other countries. We demonstrate the plausibility of this argument with India and South Korea as examples of each type of middle power within the context of the International Monetary Fund. We show that India initially received some favors—in the form of larger political representation, larger than its size of economy warrants—within the International Monetary Fund when its potentials had not begun to materialize, but once realization of its potentials began, favors that India used to receive have gradually evaporated. In comparison, South Korea has been treated more “objectively” in the International Monetary Fund where its representation closely follows the size of its economy.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document