22vPaX

Recommendations

Info

asia policy executive summary This essay examines four strategic dilemmas that the Republic of Korea (ROK) faces vis-à-vis China and discusses their implications for regional and U.S.-ROK relations. main argument The current bilateral relationship between China and South Korea is the best in the two nations’ modern histories. It is not clear, however, whether the current positive trajectory can be sustained into the future, given the recurring fluctuations in South Korea’s policy toward China. This dynamic results from four strategic dilemmas that South Korea faces in dealing with China: dilemmas over power, economics, North Korea, and entrapment in the U.S. alliance. Recent developments in Sino-ROK relations have led to new opportunities for greater bilateral cooperation but also have important implications for regional relations. In the triangular context of the U.S.-ROK-China relationship, South Korea’s closeness with China has not come at the expense of a diminished relationship with the U.S. This demonstrates that its bilateral relationships with China and the U.S. may not be mutually exclusive but could achieve positive-sum gains. Nevertheless, South Korea still faces significant challenges in managing relations with both countries. policy implications • Understanding South Korea’s strategic dilemmas vis-à-vis China is critical for the U.S. in order to successfully manage its alliance with the ROK. The two allies must address a misalignment of their policy priorities regarding China and determine how to sustain a coordinated, if not common, strategy. • The U.S. must recognize that South Korea’s outreach toward China is not construed as alliance dissonance. Seoul’s active engagement with Beijing can be a strategic opportunity to influence China to adhere to global norms and behave as a responsible stakeholder. • South Korea’s relationships with the U.S. and China need not be a zero-sum game or mutually exclusive. A deep alliance with the U.S. actually strengthens South Korea’s position as it deals with China, but only if Seoul resists Beijing’s efforts to demarcate the scope of its alliance with Washington.
kim and cha • between a rock and a hard place On September 2, 2015, South Korean president Park Geun-hye visited Beijing upon invitation by Chinese president Xi Jinping to attend the country’s celebration of the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II. Joined by Russian president Vladimir Putin and other foreign guests, Presidents Park and Xi watched a massive military parade at Tiananmen Gate. Absent from the celebration was the current North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Ironically, 61 years ago it was Mao Zedong and Kim Il-sung, founding fathers of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and North Korea, respectively, who were standing together in the same place to see a military review. Perhaps nothing can better illustrate the current state of affairs in China’s relations with the two Koreas than a juxtaposition of these two contrasting images. The bilateral relationship between the Republic of Korea (ROK) and China under the current Park and Xi governments is undeniably at its strongest point in modern history, with a series of efforts underway to consolidate and institutionalize their strategic partnership. The first summit between the two leaders in June 2013 led to the establishment of four strategic communication channels to regularize high-level strategic dialogues. Both countries also pledged to move forward on their previous agreement to set up a military hotline between their defense ministers. With respect to the economic relationship, the two countries signed the China-Korea Free Trade Agreement and agreed to establish a direct trading market for the Chinese yuan and Korean won to further boost bilateral trade. All these measures are indicative of a new level of bilateral cooperation unprecedented in the modern history of Sino-ROK relations. Nonetheless, South Korea’s relations with China remain complex, and it appears unclear whether the current positive dynamic in the relationship will or can be sustained into the future, given a pattern of recurring fluctuations in South Korea’s policy toward China. Some analysts may argue that this pattern has emerged because South Korea’s China policy is determined by the administration in Seoul or the strength of the U.S.-ROK alliance. However, this vacillation actually results from far more fundamental conditions underlying South Korea’s political, economic, and security considerations and geostrategic calculations, which create four strategic dilemmas for South Korea in dealing with China: dilemmas over power, economics, North Korea, and entrapment in the U.S. alliance. Understanding these four dilemmas is important because South Korea’s policy toward China holds important geopolitical and regional implications. South Korea is a key U.S. ally in Asia, yet Seoul’s growing closeness to Beijing amid emerging tensions and competition between the United States and China complicates U.S. strategy as [ 103 ]
Page 1 and 2:
the national bureau of asian resear
Page 3 and 4:
asia policy number 21 • january 2
Page 5 and 6:
is south korea in china’s orbit?
Page 7 and 8:
2) To help bridge the policy and ac
Page 9 and 10:
Part 2: Foreign-Language Sources Wh
Page 11 and 12:
asia policy, number 21 (january 201
Page 13 and 14:
oundtable • non-claimant perspect
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62: oundtable • non-claimant perspect
Page 75: oundtable • non-claimant perspect
Page 78 and 79: asia policy executive summary This
Page 80 and 81: asia policy in the Asia-Pacific is
Page 82 and 83: asia policy In addition, Taiwan cou
Page 84 and 85: asia policy standard of market open
Page 86 and 87: asia policy The TPP will require Ta
Page 88 and 89: asia policy implications The implic
Page 90 and 91: asia policy dependence on the mainl
Page 92 and 93: asia policy and to Taiwan’s own d
Page 96 and 97: asia policy indicators such as econ
Page 98 and 99: asia policy giving market forces a
Page 100 and 101: asia policy for yangqi to improve t
Page 102 and 103: asia policy this view, cadres loyal
Page 104 and 105: asia policy political promotion can
Page 106 and 107: asia policy administrative entity i
Page 108 and 109: asia policy higher levels of manage
Page 111: asia policy, number 21 (january 201
Page 115 and 116: kim and cha • between a rock and
Page 131: kim and cha • between a rock and
Page 136 and 137: asia policy the news media’s eage
Page 138 and 139: asia policy and intraregional nucle
Page 140 and 141: asia policy south korea’s percept
Page 142 and 143: asia policy South Korean views of C
Page 144 and 145: asia policy impressive. Although th
Page 146 and 147: asia policy increased to 65.5%, whi
Page 148 and 149: asia policy widely documented. 41 E
Page 150 and 151: asia policy November of that same y
Page 152 and 153: asia policy forces in restraining N
Page 154 and 155: asia policy assessments of the thre
Page 157 and 158: asia policy, number 21 (january 201
Page 159 and 160: ook review roundtable • the china
Page 161 and 162: ook review roundtable • the china
Page 163 and 164:
ook review roundtable • the china
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183:
Page 188:
the national bureau of asian resear
show all

22vPaX

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?