South Korea's US-China predicament

By Park Jung-won

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken's critical visit to China last month sparked a flurry of hasty analysis in South Korea concluding that U.S.-China relations were entering a thaw. This contact between the two countries is, however, not a sign of ending the conflict as such, but only shows the urgent challenge posed by military tensions between the two powers over Taiwan and the South China Sea. The U.S. policy of curbing China's rise, and Xi Jinping's "China Dream" of overtaking the U.S. by 2049, have not changed at all. The conflicting nature of U.S.-China relations is long-term and cannot be resolved by a diplomatic visit.

South Korea, caught between the two countries in its economic and security interests, is the country most affected by the U.S.-China conflict. Nevertheless, some experts in South Korean society see in this confrontation an opportunity to play off both sides to South Korea's advantage. In a recent newspaper column, Kim Yeon-chul, who served as the unification minister during the Moon Jae-in government, criticized the Yoon Suk Yeol government's diplomacy as being absurdly hostile to China, and only focusing on "values" rather than the "national interest."

He argues that flexibility is the key for a country such as South Korea to survive during this transitional period. He deeply laments that no country in the world besides South Korea gives up its national interest in the sole pursuit of values. This is an odd take, indicating that he does not quite understand the concept of national interest. Values are a key component of a country's national interest.

South Korea's advocacy of liberal democracy and emphasis on human rights reveals its identity to the international community. Sustaining and reconfirming this identity is a far greater national interest than the short-term economic benefits that might be gained from a more cooperative stance toward China.

How many other countries have like South Korea fought for decades to tear down a military dictatorship in order to create a true liberal democracy? Hasn't the history of the Korean nation been one of threats from outside major powers? As a country with liberal democracy, human rights and the rule of law at the core of its modern identity, South Korea should naturally criticize international situations that undermine such cherished values.

South Korea should therefore support the "rules-based international order." This is natural because an order that pursues liberal democracy, respect for sovereignty, free trade, the rule of law and peaceful settlement of international disputes is ideally matched with the country's identity.

Of course, South Korea's support for this order does not mean that it should always take sides unconditionally with the U.S. The U.S. has led this order, but it cannot monopolize it. As illustrated by the Joe Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the CHIPS and Science Act, the U.S. does not always abide by this order properly.

In these cases, South Korea, alongside Japan and other key NATO countries that share liberal values, should point out the U.S.' errant behavior. South Korea should establish firm principles on international issues with a strong basis in international law and take independent action, so that it can protect its national interest regardless of how the U.S.-China rivalry develops.

The responsibilities and costs incurred in this process are unavoidable and must be borne by South Korea. In the past, South Korea looked to the U.S. for its national security and to China for economic opportunities. This reflected a selfish desire to enjoy advantages from each side without paying for it with support in other areas. But the bill is now coming due. The rules-based international order led by the U.S. may be imperfect, but there currently exists no better alternative, so it is imperative for South Korea to make efforts to maintain this order in a sound manner.

Blinken's visit to China this time was also likely tied to domestic political factors in the U.S., not the start of a genuine detente with China. Both countries are experiencing very difficult domestic economic conditions. If they adopt an extremely confrontational stance, it will create a disadvantageous political environment for Biden ahead of next year's presidential election.

The Biden administration might have intended to temporarily improve its relations with China to avoid such a scenario. However, from South Korea's point of view, North Korea is a dangerous variable that should be managed very carefully amid all these developments. Recently, Kim Jong-un's regime brought back to power Kim Yong-chul, who was the mastermind of the sinking in 2010 of the South Korean corvette Cheonan, which killed 46 South Korean sailors. Kim will no doubt use him to pursue a hardline stance toward South Korea and the U.S. For Kim's regime, it is urgent for Donald Trump to be elected in next year's U.S. presidential election. It is known that Kim and Trump share positive personal chemistry.

In this regard, it is highly likely that Kim's regime will cause major provocative incidents, such as a localized invasion against South Korea, before next year's South Korean general elections and the U.S. presidential election to escape his domestic difficulties and change the status quo. Such attempts will surely be of great strategic value for the North in creating an environment favorable to the opposition party in South Korea and to Trump in the U.S. in their respective elections.

Through successful military adventurism, Kim could create a perception that the U.S. defense structure through the Indo-Pacific strategy and extended deterrence for South Korea are inherently weak. China would wholeheartedly welcome this kind of development. Yoon has already declared that if the North provokes the South, he will retaliate 100 to 1,000 times. It remains to be seen whether Yoon's actions will match his words when disastrous incidents caused by North Korea come to pass.

Park Jung-won (park_jungwon@hotmail.com), Ph.D. in law from the London School of Economics (LSE), is a professor of international law at Dankook University.