The Korea Herald

지나쌤

Sino-U.S. rivalry a challenge for Seoul diplomacy

By Korea Herald

Published : Nov. 22, 2012 - 11:26

    • Link copied

This is the sixth in a series of articles on the growing rivalry between the U.S. and China and its implications for the two Koreas and East Asia. ― Ed.


South Korea faces the tough task of mapping out a smart diplomatic strategy to navigate through the growing rivalry between the long-standing ally the U.S. and increasingly emboldening powerhouse China.

Experts say Seoul needs to cautiously recalibrate its strategic interest and diversify diplomacy to adapt to the new era marked by the “rise of the rest” including China among others, which is reshaping the regional and global dynamics of power.

“China’s emergence (as a global power) is becoming a reality. It is not because it has any distrust toward the U.S., but Korea needs to take into account its geostrategic interest and diplomatic variables, and make due preparations for all this,” said Sohn Byoung-kwon, political science professor at Chung-Ang University.

Along with the U.S.-Japan alliance, the U.S.-Korea alliance has been the bedrock of security on the peninsula and Northeast Asia since it was forged nearly six decades ago. Through ups and downs, the alliance has evolved into a multi-faceted partnership beyond the region and security matters.

But experts said in the changing political and security landscape, Korea’s overreliance on the U.S. could constrain its strategic choices after all, particularly at a time of intensifying competition between the U.S. and China.

They also pointed out the relationship between the established and emerging powers should not be judged through the lens of the Cold War-era zero-sum mentality. They highlighted the growing significance of economic interdependence and multilateral conflict management channels and institutions to corroborate their positive outlook.

“When cars run on the one-dimensional road, the possibility of them crashing is much higher than ships traveling on two-dimensional seas and airplanes in three-dimensional airways,” said Kim Tae-hyun, international relations professor at Chung-Ang University.

“International politics are now complex and multi-dimensional. There is no need to forecast that the Sino-U.S. relationship would move on a confrontational path.”

Suh Jin-young, professor emeritus at Korea University, said Korea should employ a “bridging diplomacy,” which will enable Seoul to maintain its alliance with the U.S. without compromising its strategic relationship with China.

“To be a bridge is like being a real estate agent. You don’t look for his or her money or influence when choosing a real estate agent,” said the leading China expert.

“What is crucial is the agent’s credibility and the conviction that the agent is trustworthy enough, will not seek his or her own self-interest and will not inflict any damage on you. It is like a coordinator between the two powers.”

Suh stressed this diplomatic strategy is possible in the era of economic interdependence, which is different from the Cold War era, when countries were forced to choose between the democratic U.S. and the communist Soviet Union.

Kim Heung-kyu, a political science professor at Sungshin Women’s University, agreed to the “bridging diplomacy” concept, noting that Seoul should continue to ally with the U.S. and maintain friendly ties with China.

“As a middle-power nation, Korea’s strategy is to serve as a bridge in multilateral networks,” he said in a recent policy paper.

“Even if Korea may not be at the center of the networks in international politics due to a relative lack of power, Korea can gain the status as a bridge while playing a role to manage, control and connect the flow of information in the networks.”

The bridging role is different from a “balancing” role, which former President Roh Moo-hyun once pursued.

“To be a balancer, one should be powerful enough to take one axis of power (in international politics). It is doubtful that Korea has that much power for now, and the possibility is high that it could be sidelined by both (the U.S. and China),” said Kim.

As seeking a fairer relationship with the U.S., the late liberal leader put forward his vision of South Korea becoming a “balancer” in Northeast Asia, Washington was apparently uncertain about Seoul’s intentions behind its foreign policy.

The balancing strategy spawned speculation that Seoul would maintain a neutral position between the U.S. and China, which apparently added to the diplomatic friction between the allies.

From a realist perspective that views the international community as an anarchic structure without an overarching central authority, a bridging diplomacy may not be easy amid the growing contest for global primacy between the U.S. and China.

“(Having close ties with both the U.S. and China) is possible when they do not clash with each other,” said Lee Choon-kun, security expert at the Korea Economic Research Institute.

“The best way for Korea is to bolster its own power. If that is difficult, it should rely on its ally the U.S. or maintain close ties with Japan. When we have difficulty maintaining stable, friendly ties with Japan due to public sentiment, we need to gain America’s backing. The possibility is, otherwise, we may be left out in the cold.”

Kim Tae-hyun of Chung-Ang University said that a strategic choice for countries in a geopolitically vulnerable position such as Korea, Myanmar and Kazakhstan is to make neighboring or concerned powers have their interests at stake in the countries so that they can keep one another in check.

“For example, If Russia has a gas pipeline running through the North and then the South, China may not be able to exert its power at its own will, exclusively over the peninsula as Russia may step in to block any political instability from undermining its economic interest,” he said.

“When big powers have their presence and interests at stake here, they would, after all, be kept in check.”

Kim also cautioned against the possibility of the big powers making their own coordinated decisions over the fate of the peninsula. To prevent it, Seoul should employ a more global, multilateral diplomacy, he argued. 

By Song Sang-ho
(sshluck@heraldcorp.com)