Preview
With the ink barely dry on the historic Trump-Kim summit agreement, Moscow is already maneuvering itself to take advantage of rapprochement on the Korean peninsula. The first order of business: reviving a decades – old energy megaproject that would connect Russian gas and the Trans-Siberian railroad to Seoul via North Korea. As concerning as it may seem for Washington, reinvigorated ties between Moscow and Seoul may prove a strong bargaining chip for Donald Trump in his forthcoming talks with Vladimir Putin — rumored to take place in Vienna this July.
Country or Region: South Korea
Lukin, Alexander
Abstract
Russia has historically been conditioned to exist within the European cultural tradition. However, its recent pivot to Asia poses a serious question to its cultural identity. How serious is this policy change for Russia and the world? Is the turn to Asia a long-term course or a mere repercussion of the current confrontation with the West? In this volume Alexander Lukin, a prominent scholar in international relations and Asian studies, seeks answers to these and many other questions related to Russia’s foreign policy and its relations with Asia. This collection of Lukin’s articles addresses a number of issues: Russia’s diplomacy and the place of the Asian direction in it, Russian Far East and its potential, the role of Russia on the international scene. This broad-ranging and detailed study will be welcomed by both students and policy makers as the first academic work in English to have such a wide coverage of this topic.
Chung, Eun Bin
Abstract
How can states with a history of conflict promote trust with one another? Distrust between South Korea-Japan and China- Japan aggravates security fears and limits institutional cooperation in the region. Existing studies support the promotion of a common, overarching identity (e.g. “Asian-ness”) over a strong sense of national belonging. Are salient national identities harmful or helpful for increasing trust between countries? Applying the psychological theory of group-affirmation to an international context and integrating experimental methods from behavioral economics, I aim to examine whether affirming national identities can increase trust of another country. In a novel experiment with South Korean, Chinese, and Japanese participants, I find that group-affirmed individuals reported higher levels of trust, measured by payments in a trust game.
Suh, Jae-Jung
Abstract
Kim Jong Un’s meeting with Moon Jae-In and the coming summit with Donald Trump do not constitute a volte-face by the North Korean leader. He has consistently sought meetings to find a solution to the nuclear problem, but equally consistently responded with nuclear or missile tests when his diplomatic initiatives are rejected. The recent virtuous cycle began when Moon seized the opportunity of the Winter Olympics in South Korea to create an opening for inter-Korean meetings and Kim reciprocated. Kim has also been consistent in his quest for engagement with the world economy as a strategy of economic development, and steadily taken steps away from his father’s Military First policy toward his Economy First policy. His consistency creates an opening, which Moon effectively used to engage the North to propose a Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons and end the state of war. The United States will have a historic choice to make in June when Trump meets Kim in Singapore.
Full text available at https://apjjf.org/2018/10/Suh.html
Ichimasa, Sukeyuki
Abstract
While the spotlight has focused on multilateral economic sanctions in the post-Cold War era as a non- military means of exercising force by the United Nations, there has been a long history of unilateral economic sanctions by individual states exercising their powers on international politics in order to satisfy their national interests and security needs. Regarding the nuclear issues of North Korea and Iran, various discussions have been raised for many years over the roles and effects of international economic sanctions. Unilateral economic sanctions have been undertaken since the 1970s against concerns about the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Among them are cases in which economic sanctions succeeded, such as South Korea and Taiwan, and eventually nuclear nonproliferation as a foreign policy objective was realized. However, in many cases, there is a historical reality that nuclear nonproliferation cannot be achieved only by such economic sanctions. From the examples of sanctions against North Korea and Iran, there have emerged not only issues of political coordination among the countries concerned, but also a various political considerations. These include engagement by “gatekeepers,” who have influence on the targeted countries, the shifting “breakout” status of nuclear development of targeted country, the establishment of policy objectives to be achieved by economic sanctions, and the cost to be accepted for imposing sanctions, including a possible transition to military sanctions. Under these circumstances, the value and importance of the multilayered non- proliferation framework consisting of the historic nuclear non-proliferation regime and export control on weapons of mass destruction must be re-evaluated.
Full text available here.
Park, Young-June
Abstract
The rise of China triggers a hot debate in the United States as well as in China concerning whether a rising power can coordinate with the existing power or inevitably confront each other. On this issue, some foresee a possibility of the next great war between the two countries whereas others view the prospect of co-evolution in which Beijing and Washington can shrewdly evade armed conflicts.This paper tries to illustrate how the United States and China are expanding their naval capabilities in parallel with the ongoing strategic debate within China and the United States. The rivalry between the two countries can have a lot of influence on the foreign policies of neighboring countries like South Korea and Japan. This paper also deals with how South Korea and Japan, comparatively small powers, have responded to the super powers’ power game in the region. Finally, this paper suggests some policy proposals for South Korea to play a role in stabilizing the regional order.
Weitz, Richard
Abstract
The strengthening Sino–Russian defense partnership has complicated ROK–U.S. military planning regarding North Korea, diverted U.S. and Japanese resources from concentrating against North Korea, and worsened the regional security environment by stimulating local arms races. Beijing and Moscow’s vigorous opposition to the deployment of advanced U.S. missile defenses in South Korea has illuminated their perception of increased ROK–U.S. military ties as a potential threat. Further, China and Russia’s military activities around the Korean Peninsula increase the risk of inadvertent encounters with other navies. South Korea, Japan, and the United States need to consider how China and Russia will react in such cases. Additionally, because the expanding Sino–Russian defense cooperation and technology sharing complicates assessments of military developments and security trends in Asia, it is imperative to hold expanded ROK–U.S. consultations, about Sino–Russian defense interactions, ideally with the inclusion of Japan.
Pajon, Céline, and Rémy Hémez
Abstract
This article aims to assess the progress of the ROK–Japan security cooperation in recent years, both in the bilateral and trilateral framework involving the United States. It argues that the unprecedented progress in North Korea’s nuclear program, along with a constant U.S. persuasion, led to a certain political convergence to allow and accompany the security cooperation. This said, political mistrust, asymmetric expectations and diverging perspectives still persist, explaining why the cooperation is mainly taking place within the trilateral framework. Nevertheless, the latest set of dialogue, exchanges and joint exercises did build up confidence and highlighted the benefit of an expanded cooperation while pushing the two countries to seriously consider the concrete issues, conditions and implications of such cooperation. The paper concludes that the recent progress in the security cooperation is still fragile and dependent on external factors, even if it is pointing to a greater understanding.
Li, Jun
Abstract
Despite strong opposition from China and Russia, the US and South Korea proceeded with THAAD deployment, further escalating tension on the Korean Peninsula. As the issue developed, little attention was paid to how North Korea looked at THAAD, while more people and media reports were inclined to believe that “North Korea factor” or “North Korea’s increasing nuclear-missile threat” was the trigger or root cause of American and South Korean insistence on deploying THAAD. Hence, in order to help raise awareness about the actuality and course of this issue, the author of this paper intends to review and analyze North Korea’s attitude and stance on the THAAD issue, by looking at North Korean comments on the US deployment of THAAD in South Korea.
PDF (must purchase access)
Liu, Tiancong
Abstract
Earlier this year, THAAD deployment became a concrete reality in South Korea with the Lotte Group transferring land and with pieces of equipment arriving in South Korea.According to South Korean media,South Korea and the US had mutually agreed to accelerate the process and try to complete THAAD deployment before South Korea’s presidential election in early May.1 THAAD deployment in South Korea is a case of the US leveraging its smart power to provoke tension in East Asia and contain on China,in order to not only materially strengthen strategic reconnaissance and monitoring over China,but also consolidate US alliances and alienate South Korea from China.Although the US is the chief conspirator for deploying THAAD in South Korea,THAAD deployment is largely attributed to ROK factors and would otherwise be impossible without the active conspiracy and assistance by the ROK conservative forces represented by Park Geun-hye administration.
PDF (must purchase access)
Liu, Chong
Abstract
Chinese and American officials have expressed their positions through various channels since news broke in 2014 of US preparations to deploy the THAAD system in South Korea.In academic circles,there has also been heated debate.However,these views frequently differ,even in the Sino-US non-official communication channels on nuclear strategy.Each side tends to confine itself to its own perspective,which achieves little toward meaningful consensus.Pieces THAAD equipment began to arrive in Korea in March of 2017.With the actual deployment taking place,it is inevitable that China will take strategic countermeasures based on unavoidable risks of confrontation between China and United States.The author believes that the THAAD issue embodies current barriers to Sino-US mutual strategic security,and that the two countries need to use dialogue as the touchstone for mutual trust on issues of divergence rather than something which is so clearly a watershed of military buildup and confrontation.
PDF (must purchase access)
Sun, Ru
Abstract
The THAAD issue stirs up the strategic security situation in Northeast Asia and the world, damaging mutual trust between China and South Korea as well as that between China and the United States,testing China’s ability to safeguard strategic security interests and handle relations with neighboring countries and among major powers.China’s reaction attracts wide attention,including misunderstanding and criticism. There is a view that the alliance between the United States and South Korea is dominated by the United States and followed by South Korea,marked by deployment of THAAD. China’s countermeasures should be targeted at the United States.China should not set the South Korea as the main target. There is also a view that China overreacted,and that China should confine responses to military matters and ought not to expand them to areas of economy and trade as well as cultural exchange. Other opinions hold that the deployment of THAAD is related to the North Korea issue and that China should oppose North Korean nuclear buildup instead of THAAD.
PDF (must purchase access)
Horowitz, Shale, and Sunwoong Kim
Abstract
The territory contested in island disputes is often of low intrinsic value from the national security and economic perspectives. This generally implies a stable status quo where both sides prefer peace to war. Yet island disputes commonly produce a variation whereby states engage in some degree of ‘hawk-talk’—more or less confrontational rhetoric and related, symbolically important policies. Theoretically, hawk-talk should be more likely when the disputing countries have a strong, nationalistically salient history of conflict and less likely when they have high levels of cooperation in other national security areas or economic relations. Hawk-talk is expected to beget more hawk-talk, thus to increase the ideological and diversionary political value of assertiveness in island disputes, and to limit or reduce cooperation. Nationalistically salient histories of conflict amplified by hawk-talk can most easily be shown to raise the stakes and risks in low intrinsic value disputes. Yet such histories are expected to have an even greater potential impact on high intrinsic value disputes. We illustrate this logic by analysing the low-intrinsic-value dispute between Korea and Japan over the Dokdo/Takeshima Islands. Both the theory and the case study imply that cooperation in other areas does not constitute a reliable antidote to hawk-talk–driven dispute escalation. Countervailing national interest ideologies, which emphasise other objectives imperilled by dispute escalation, are the most promising complement to increased cooperation.
PDF (must purchase access)
Kim, Aekyung, and Jiyoung Kim
Abstract
In this special section, the present article reviews South Korean perspectives on China’s ‘periphery diplomacy’ with a focus on Chinese behaviour with respect to the East China Sea maritime territory and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). By analysing research papers published by various Korean research institutions and academic journals, this article demonstrates that most Korean scholars hold that as long as China’s growth goes on, the tensions between the US and China are likely to intensify. The article also shows that one of the primary concerns of South Korean scholars lies in the question of how South Korea should respond to changing regional orders and a rising China. The article argues that South Korea’s strategic dilemma is reflected in a regional structure in which competition between two great powers has recently forced the periphery to impose bilateral ties on.
PDF (must purchase access)
Chang, Kiyoung, and Choongkoo Lee
Abstract
This article investigates South Korean views on how to deal with the two major security issues regarding North Korea: its nuclear threat and regime instability. In this Special Section, the article analyzes the ongoing debate in South Korea over the government’s policy toward North Korea in regard to these two issues. It argues that uncertainties about these two major issues are shaping the regional order in East Asia. In particular, the different levels of cooperation between South Korea and the United States may affect the regional security order in East Asia. In analyzing policy options available to South Korea, the riskiest option would be to employ early preemptive attacks and accelerate the collapse of North Korea given the security dilemma-driven action‒reaction in East Asia. Given that the role of China has become the most crucial factor in dealing with North Korea, the most promising strategy would be to reinforce guarantees of extended nuclear deterrence and prompt a soft-landing unification.
PDF (must purchase access)
