22vPaX

asia policy
ally to influence China to adhere to global norms and behave as a responsible
stakeholder. The AIIB will be a good test case for this approach. South Korea
and other like-minded countries could come together and play a critical role
in ensuring that the China-led bank operates according to global standards of
governance and transparency. Instead of impeding Seoul’s cooperation with
Beijing, Washington should instead support such engagement, especially if it
helps South Korea gain insight into Chinese intentions and strategic views on
North Korea, and also promotes quiet U.S.-ROK-China dialogue on North
Korean contingencies. All these steps would help mitigate Seoul’s North
Korea and entrapment dilemmas.
The management of U.S. alliances in Northeast Asia should also be in
tandem with bilateral or multilateral efforts to enhance the U.S.-ROK alliance
and U.S.-ROK-Japan trilateral relations, as well as to promote regional
stability and cooperation. As a balancing act against South Korea’s growing
economic dependence on China, particularly following the conclusion of
the China-Korea FTA and ongoing negotiations of the RCEP, Washington
would do well to bring South Korea in as one of the first post-agreement
countries of the recently concluded Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations.
The United States should also play a more active role in managing ROK-Japan
relations. In particular, it should work to prevent historical disputes from
undermining bilateral relations between its two allies while facilitating a
positive environment for constructive dialogue and also promoting and
enhancing cooperation on functional issue areas of common interest, such as
cybersecurity and disaster relief. Any misperceptions or misunderstandings
by South Korea and Japan of each other’s actions should be managed through
confidence-building measures among these three countries to prevent further
deterioration of bilateral relations. As part of these efforts, holding regular
U.S.-ROK-Japan summits or reinvigorating trilateral ministerial meetings
and other consultative mechanisms would be helpful. In addition, the United
States, Japan, and South Korea should make concerted efforts to slowly build
consensus for a collective security statement regarding North Korean threats.
Upgrading current information-sharing into a general security of military
information agreement and an acquisition and cross-servicing agreement
would be a logical next step.
Seoul certainly hopes that it can continue to operate strategically in a
space in which it can reap security benefits from the United States and
economic benefits from China, while maintaining good relations with both.
As argued above, this is the optimal path for South Korea to circumvent the
four dilemmas of power, economics, unification, and entrapment. However,
[ 120 ]