Number of results to display per page
Search Results
42. Towards Guanxi? Reconciling the “Relational Turn” in Western and Chinese International Relations Scholarship
- Author:
- Siyang Liu, Jeremy Garlick, and Fangxing Qin
- Publication Date:
- 01-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
- Institution:
- Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
- Abstract:
- In recent years, the “relational turn” in International Relations (IR) theory has attracted extensive attention. However, the limitations of the substantialist ontology of mainstream (Western) IR theory means that it encounters difficulties and dilemmas in interpreting the evolving international system. Against the background of the rapid development of globalization and regional integration, the reality of world politics is constantly changing, and increasingly shows obvious characteristics of interconnection and high interdependence. In this context, there is insufficient research comparing the Western and non-Western versions of the “relational turn”. Relational ontology may be able to provide a bridge between Chinese Confucian philosophy, Western philosophy, Western sociology, and mainstream western IR theories capable of generating productive synergies. However, there are major theoretical and cultural obstacles to be overcome if a reconciliation of the Western and Chinese versions of relationalism is to be achieved.
- Topic:
- International Relations, International Relations Theory, Academia, Confucianism, Relationality, and Relational Ontology
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, and Guangxi
43. Cross-Strait and U.S.-Taiwan Relations from the Kuomintang Point of View
- Author:
- Alexander Huang, Eric Huang, Johnny Chiang, Thomas J. Christensen, and Andrew Nathan
- Publication Date:
- 02-2022
- Content Type:
- Video
- Institution:
- Weatherhead East Asian Institute, Columbia University
- Abstract:
- Speaker Bios: Alexander Huang is the Associate Professor of the Institute of Strategic Studies at Tamkang University, the Chairman & CEO of the Council on Strategic & Wargaming Studies, and Special Advisor to the Chairman & Director of International Affairs at Kuomintang (KMT). Dr. Huang received his BA in Political Science at Soochow University in 1982, earned a MA from the Institute of Strategic Studies at Tamkang University 1984 and a MSFS from the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University in 1988. In 1994, Dr. Huang received a PhD in Political Science from George Washington University. Eric Yu-Chua Huang is the KMT’s Representative in Washington D.C., and an entrepreneur. Mr. Huang previously served as the party's spokesperson and deputy director of international affairs, a lecturer of International affairs at Tamkang University, and non-residential research fellow at National Policy Foundation. Mr. Huang joined the KMT party headquarters in 2014 after which he served as the international spokesperson for the KMT’s presidential candidate during Taiwan’s 2016 presidential election campaign. Previously, Mr. Huang worked as legislative aide for a KMT legislator representing a constituency in Taiwan’s capital, Taipei City, where his portfolio included national security and foreign relations, as well as constituent services and youth organizing. Mr. Huang graduated from Johns Hopkins University with a Master’s degree in International Relations; he earned his Bachelor’s degree at the University of Virginia majoring in International Relations; in 2018 he was a Visiting Scholar at Fudan University. Johnny C. Chiang was elected the chairman of the KMT to rejuvenate the party in 2020. The KMT ruled Taiwan from 1949 to 2000 and from 2008 to 2016, and is now the main opposition in Taiwan. During August 2018-July 2019, Dr. Chiang was the convener (caucus whip) of KMT Party Caucus in Legislative Yuan. From August in 2016 to January in 2017, he took charge of the secretary of KMT party Caucus in Legislative Yuan. In 2016, he held the post of the convener in Foreign and National Defense Committee; Previously, in 2013 he ever served as the convener in Internal Administration Affair Committee. Besides, as to international inter- parliamentary exchanging activities, he currently serves as the chairmen of R.O.C(Taiwan)-United Kingdom Inter-Parliamentary Amity Association. He is also the chairman of R.O.C(Taiwan)-Singapore Inter-Parliamentary Amity Association. Dr. Chiang received his Ph. D. in International Studies from the University of South Carolina and his master degree of public and international affairs from the University of Pittsburgh. He has previously served as Minister of Government Information Office (GIO) as well as Government Spokesman of Executive Yuan, ROC (2010- 2011); Deputy Executive Director of Chinese Taipei APEC Study Center (2009-2010); Director of International Affairs Department, Taiwan Institute of Economic Research(2005-2010); Deputy Secretary-General, Chinese Taipei National Committee of Pacific Economic Cooperation Council (PECC) (2005-2010); Associate professor, department of political science at the Soochow University in Taipei (2003-2010). In 2021, Dr. Johnny Chiang was named by Time magazine to be one of the "100 emerging leaders who are shaping the future." In 2006, Dr. Chiang was selected as the Top 10 rising stars in Taiwan. His research interests widely cover such areas as international political economy, international organizations (especially APEC and WTO), Asia- Pacific studies, cross-Strait relations, globalization and international relations theory. This event is sponsored by the Weatherhead East Asian Institute and cosponsored by the China and the World Program.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America
44. Analysis of Chinese Response Patterns to Diplomatic Friction and Its Influencing Factors
- Author:
- Jai Chul Heo
- Publication Date:
- 03-2022
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
- Abstract:
- As China grows into a global power, it is forming a closer relationship with the international community. In the process, the nation is experiencing increasing levels of diplomatic friction, such as confrontation and conflict with other countries, as well as cooperation. Accordingly, this study analyzes China's response to various forms of diplomatic friction, as Korea seeks an effective response to possible friction with China in the future. More specifically, China's response to diplomatic friction was examined through various cases, with the aim of categorizing China’s response measures based on these examples. In addition, this study aims to prepare for possible friction with China in the future by identifying factors that differ in China's response to diplomatic friction.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Territorial Disputes, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, and South Korea
45. The Future of U.S.-North Korea Relations After the 2022 U.S. Midterm Elections
- Author:
- Jungkun Seo
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- Jungkun Seo, Professor at Kyung Hee University, claims that with the results of the midterm elections in favor of Biden and the Democrats, Biden could likely run for re-election. Added to this, he expects that there will be no innovative strategy to tackle North Korea as Biden would have no choice but to take a hardline stance ahead of the 2024 election if North Korea's provocations make a prominent security threat to the United States. Professor Seo emphasizes that it will be extremely difficult for the U.S. to find a new breakthrough to the stalled peace process on the Korean Peninsula.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, and Elections
- Political Geography:
- Asia, North Korea, North America, and United States of America
46. Global Health Diplomacy as a Path to De-escalatory Engagement with North Korea
- Author:
- Andrew Ikhyun Kim
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- Andrew Ikhyun Kim, White House Fellow at the Office of Management and Budget, suggests global health diplomacy as a conceptual framework to bring North Korea back to the negotiating table and de-escalate the situation. In specific, he proposes a health aid package engaging North Korea in the long term which is owned, driven, co-financed by North Korea, and coordinated with strategically lifting without precondition, the sanctions. He highlights that even if these do not come to fruition in the short term, aid efforts would still have the potential to build trust, lay the groundwork for future engagement, and alleviate the dire health needs of North Korean people.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Diplomacy, Health, and Engagement
- Political Geography:
- Asia, South Korea, and North Korea
47. Analysis of North Korea’s Nuclear Force Policy Act: Intentions and Drawbacks
- Author:
- Ildo Hwang
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- Recently promulgated “Law on DPRK’s Policy on Nuclear Forces” reveals North Korea’s intention to use nuclear weapons in a war-fighting capacity. Ildo Hwang, Associate Professor of Korea National Diplomatic Academy, points out the similarities between North Korea’s nuclear policy and Russian 2020 Basic Principles of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence and the possibility of Pyongyang’s adoption of Russia’s “escalate to de-escalate” strategy on the Korean Peninsula. However, Dr. Hwang argues that North Korea is not likely to gain any leverage through this new Policy Act, given that Pyongyang is yet to secure the Assured Retaliation capability in the eyes of Washington. Nevertheless, Dr. Hwang claims that North Korea’s attempts to lower the nuclear threshold can lead to the inadvertent use of nuclear weapons, thus jeopardizing the security of North Korea as well as the stability of Northeast Asia.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Nuclear Weapons, and Denuclearization
- Political Geography:
- Asia and North Korea
48. The Road to Denuclearization of the DPRK: The DPRK’s Strategy and the ROK-U.S. Response Plan
- Author:
- Won Gon Park
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- Won Gon Park, a professor at Ewha Woman’s University, appreciates that the Yoon government’s “Audacious Initiative” reaffirms the goals and methods of denuclearization. However, Dr. Park points out that Pyongyang refuses to accept President Yoon’s proposal to receive economic incentives in return for denuclearization, as DPRK has recently passed a radical law enshrining the right to automatically use preemptive nuclear strikes to protect itself. In addition, given that DPRK continues its offensive posture refusing to have any negotiations with Washington or Seoul, he highlights that South Korea and the United States should first agree on a precise definition, goals, and approaches to denuclearization.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, and Denuclearization
- Political Geography:
- Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and United States of America
49. America’s Alliance First vs. DPRK’s “neo-Cold War” First: An Assessment on US-DPRK Relationship
- Author:
- Li Nan
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- Li Nan, a Senior Research Fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Institute of American Studies, criticizes the Biden administration’s North Korea policy as undermining the Korean Peninsula’s denuclearization process. Dr. Nan indicates that United States’ “alliance-first approach” puts North Korea on the opposite side of the US and closes the door to bilateral talks. And he points out that prioritizing alliance over denuclearization may hamper prospects of denuclearization as North Korea will highly likely rely on China and Russia and keep improving the conventional military system. Furthermore, he highlights the importance of effective coordination with North Korea by maintaining a favorable diplomatic conditions conducive to talks.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Diplomacy, Alliance, Denuclearization, and Unification
- Political Geography:
- Asia, South Korea, North Korea, and United States of America
50. President Yoon's Trip to Madrid: Rethinking Seoul's Policies toward Moscow, Beijing, Tokyo, and Pyongyang
- Author:
- Yang Gyu Kim
- Publication Date:
- 07-2022
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- In this Commentary, Yang Gyu Kim, Principal Researcher at the East Asia Institute (EAI), explains the objectives behind the U.S.’ invitation of its key allies the Indo-Pacific to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Summit. He posits that the U.S. aims to establish a highly institutionalized cooperative mechanism that combines the capacities of existing alliances among like-minded countries in the Indo-Pacific. In this context, the author stresses the need for South Korea to address the implications of the Russia-Ukraine War, the emerging Chinese threat, and reestablish ROK-Japan relations. Lastly, Dr. Kim proposes that the administration should carefully consider how it might restore international cooperation on the North Korea issue and resume the denuclearization process.
- Topic:
- International Relations, NATO, Denuclearization, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Russia, Japan, China, Asia, South Korea, and North Korea
51. After Hegemony: Japan’s role and dilemma in maintaining the rules-based order
- Author:
- Yu Inagaki
- Publication Date:
- 11-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- The phrase “rules-based order” has recently become a recurring theme in the Japan-US alliance . This is based on the recognition that the liberal international order (LIO)—which the United States built and maintained, and that Japan has significantly benefited from—is now being challenged. While the war in Ukraine has heightened the sense of crisis over global power dynamics, China has been considered the main threat to the LIO. The United States has identified China as not just a security threat but a “ most consequential strategic competitor and the pacing challenge ,” and Japan has come to view the current international environment from a larger perspective, international order. In fact, Japan has expected to play a leading role in maintaining the LIO as US international engagement weakened under the Trump administration. However, is it possible for Japan, a constrained middle power, to maintain the existing order in the face of a declining hegemon and rising challengers? This raises a classic question in international relations: What will happen to the international order after hegemony; and what can and will Japan, occupying a particular place and role in the international system, be able and willing to do regarding international order?
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Politics, Hegemony, and International Order
- Political Geography:
- Japan, China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
52. Taiwan Matters for America/America Matters for Taiwan
- Author:
- East-West Center
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- The inaugural edition of Taiwan Matters for America/America Matters for Taiwan, part of the Asia Matters for America initiative, maps the trade, investment, employment, business, diplomacy, security, education, tourism, and people-to-people connections between the United States and the Taiwan at the national, state, and local levels. This publication and the AsiaMattersforAmerica.org website are resources for understanding the robust and dynamic US-Indo-Pacific relationship.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Climate Change, Economics, Education, Environment, Politics, Science and Technology, Governance, Culture, Population, and Travel
- Political Geography:
- Taiwan and Asia
53. New Opportunities for the United States-Kingdom of Thailand Alliance in the Indo-Pacific
- Author:
- Lance D. Jackson
- Publication Date:
- 09-2022
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- In March 2022, the East-West Center in Washington (EWCW), in collaboration with the Royal Thai Embassy, Washington, DC, convened a two-day seminar in which experts from Thailand and the United States discussed issues and opportunities for the US-Thailand alliance. The workshop included a diverse array of discussants hailing from government, military, academic, think tank, and private sector backgrounds. This report, which adheres to the “Chatham House Rule” under which observations referred to in the report are not attributed to any individual participant, is a summary of the group discussions and the key themes from the seminar. The recent signing of the United States-Thailand Communique on Strategic Alliance and Partnership and a memorandum of understanding (MOU) focused on promoting supply chain resilience on July 10, 2022, highlight the pertinence of this report and the associated seminar. The topics detailed in this report aligned with many of the pressing issues addressed in the Communique and MOU, including expanding law enforcement cooperation, deepening cybersecurity collaboration, supporting resilient transportation corridors, advancing military modernization, and catalyzing Thailand’s bio-circular-green (BCG) economy. The report also covered topics and key themes from a series of jointly produced public webinars and an Asia Pacific Bulletin series of policy briefs on US-Thai affairs.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Climate Change, Economics, Education, Environment, Politics, Science and Technology, Governance, Population, Leadership, Public Health, and Travel
- Political Geography:
- Asia, North America, Thailand, Southeast Asia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific
54. INDIA-CHINA STRATEGIC COMPETITION IN THE INDIAN OCEAN
- Author:
- Chuong Nguyen, Binh Nguyen, Hiep Tran, and Mi Le
- Publication Date:
- 12-2022
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
- Institution:
- Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
- Abstract:
- The XXI is considered by major countries in the Asia-Pacific region as ‘the century of sea and ocean’ and is accompanied by fierce competition among the nations to gain interest in the sea regions. On the basis that previously only considered the competition for military objectives, geostrategic bases and traffic channels through the straits, nowadays, countries worldwide have stepped up the competition for economic interests and marine resources. The development of military power and the competitive activities for resources at sea show clear the tendency to use the sea to contain the continent. In that context, the Indian Ocean, as the world’s third largest ocean, has an important geographic location and rich and diverse natural resources; the arterial sea route is gradually becoming the center of new world geopolitics and an important area in the strategic competition between two ‘Asian giants’ - India and China. The competition between these countries in the Indian Ocean is growing and profoundly impacts the region’s stability and security. This article focuses on the position and important role of the Indian Ocean in the policies of India and China, the fierce competition between the two countries in nearly two decades of the XXI century.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Military Affairs, Geopolitics, and Strategic Competition
- Political Geography:
- China, India, Asia, and Indian Ocean
55. A Principled Middle Power Diplomacy Approach For South Korea to Navigate the U.S.-China Rivalry
- Author:
- Saeme Kim
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- In the context of growing US-China tensions, South Korean administrations have opted for degrees of strategic ambiguity, refraining from overt actions that suggest South Korea is taking sides. While strategic ambiguity has been moderately successful, there are limits to this approach which make it unsustainable. This paper will argue that rather, South Korea needs to apply a principled middle power diplomacy, which refers to a middle power carrying out roles expected of it in accordance with a set of rules or values that uphold the liberal international order. The goal of principled middle power diplomacy would be to shape the environment in which the current great power rivalry is unfolding, in order to moderate the fallout of great power competition. After an analysis of South Korea’s middle power diplomacy, this paper will recommend that South Korea double down on its commitment to multilateralism so that it can augment its roles as a facilitator and agenda-setter on the international stage.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Multilateralism, and Rivalry
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America
56. South Korea as a Fourth Industrial Revolution Middle Power?
- Author:
- Dongwoo Kim
- Publication Date:
- 10-2021
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- This paper proposes a framework for conceptualizing middle powerism in the context of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, using South Korea as an example. The paper argues that the systemic transformation of the Fourth Industrial Revolution has created new openings for middle powerism, and proposes 1) technology, 2) networks, and 3) governance as factors that could enable it. Then, South Korea’s capacities in each of these three areas, potential barriers, and ultimately Seoul’s capacity to act as a “Fourth Industrial Revolution” middle power are evaluated.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Economics, Science and Technology, Governance, Industrialization, and Middle Power
- Political Geography:
- Asia and South Korea
57. Between a Rock and a Hard Place: How Should South Korea Manage its Relations with the United States and China?
- Author:
- Zhiqun Zhu
- Publication Date:
- 11-2021
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- This paper deals with one of the most critical issues in contemporary international relations: how China’s rise challenges foreign policies of U.S. allies, with a focus on the Republic of Korea (ROK) or South Korea. South Korea has been carefully hedging between the United States and China, its traditional security patron and largest trade partner, respectively. Strategic rivalry between the two great powers has put South Korea in an awkward position as pressure grows from the two powers to pick a side. Using a modified dual-track economics-security nexus framework, this paper suggests that the United States and China each has a significant impact on South Korea’s security and economic policies, making it important but challenging for South Korea to simultaneously manage relations with the two great powers. So far, South Korea has maintained these two sets of relationships remarkably well, but it may be difficult to continue with business as usual in the years ahead. For its own national interests, South Korea must seek to preserve the status quo under which it can continue to benefit from good relations with both great powers. The paper also proposes that South Korea should form a “middle power coalition” with like-minded nations to deflect pressures and avoid the dilemma of having to choose sides.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Foreign Policy, Alliance, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, South Korea, and United States of America
58. The Sino–U.S. National Identity Gap and Bilateral Relations
- Author:
- Danielle Cohen
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- The national identity gap between China and the United States has become increasingly apparent. Under Xi Jinping, China has sought to reclaim its historical greatness and proclaimed itself to be a responsible great power that offers a credible alternative to Western values, while also promoting increasingly authoritarian policies at home, complete with extensive repression in Xinjiang and renewed state control of the economy. Assertions of U.S. national identity were somewhat muted under Donald Trump, confused by the battle between those who supported the administration’s “America First” policy, its transactional approach to foreign affairs, and its deemphasis on human rights and democracy promotion in U.S. foreign policy, and those who worried about the global repercussions of an isolationist, nativist policy. For a time, the United States seemed more preoccupied with its trade war with China than with claims that the United States should act as the global protector of human rights and democracy. The COVID-19 pandemic further complicated already tense Sino–U.S. relations and called both countries’ national identities into question. While China had, as of spring 2021, succeeded in keeping its COVID-19 outbreak remarkably small, the damage caused by its initial suppression of medical reports, along with successful virus mitigation in a number of non-authoritarian states, called into question its claim to be a responsible world power on the basis of its pandemic performance. Meanwhile, the Trump administration failed to protect U.S. citizens from catastrophic death tolls and prevented the United States from taking a leading role in resolving this global crisis. In January 2021, the Biden administration took office with a focus on swiftly ending the pandemic, while also reasserting the traditional U.S. global leadership role. When combined with its assessment of U.S. power after the 2008 Global Financial Crisis and of U.S. domestic social and political instability evident throughout 2020-2021, the pandemic has strengthened China’s perceptions of the United States as a country in decline, and of China as a “risen” great power that should now play a major role in shaping the global order. At the same time, although U.S. policy towards China remains firm despite the presidential transition, the underlying rationale has shifted from the “America First” approach of the Trump administration to the democratic values-infused approach of the Biden administration. As the world struggles to move beyond the pandemic, the national identities of China and the United States are increasingly defined in opposition to each other and seem likely to drive an ever more challenging bilateral relationship in the coming years.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Culture, and Domestic Politics
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
59. The Pandemic as a Geopolitical Game Changer in the Indo-Pacific: The View from Japan
- Author:
- Glen S. Fukushima
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- The coronavirus pandemic that struck in late 2019 has affected the world profoundly, and Japan is no exception. But the direct impact on Japan has been relatively small considering the number of cases of infections and deaths relative to the size of Japan’s population, particularly considering its elderly population and high density. For instance, among the G7 countries, Japan has had the fewest cases of infections (4,690 per million population as of May 2, 2021) compared to 32,276 in Canada, 40,620 in Germany, 64,804 in the United Kingdom, 66,828 in Italy, 86,283 in France, and 99,652 in the United States. Similarly, among the G7 countries, Japan has had by far the fewest number of deaths (81 per million population as of May 2, 2021) compared to 638 in Canada, 996 in Germany, 1,601 in France, 1,776 in the United States, 1,870 in the United Kingdom, and 2,004 in Italy. This chapter argues that although the direct disruptions to Japan resulting from the pandemic have been less than to the other G7 countries, the effect of the pandemic on other nations with strong geopolitical importance to Japan—in particular, the United States and China—coupled with changes in Japan’s domestic political and economic environment have accelerated changes in geopolitical posture and direction that were already in progress in Japan. The fundamental geopolitical challenge facing Japan is how to ensure its military security, political independence, and economic prosperity in the face of a less reliable and less predictable United States and a more powerful and more assertive China. For Japan, the ideal resolution of this challenge is to maintain positive and constructive relations with both countries, while recognizing the reality that even as economic ties with China—whether in trade, investment, finance, tourism, or the exchange of people—are growing relative to ties with the United States, political and security ties (and the sharing of common values) with the United States remain the centerpiece of Japan’s foreign policy. Given this context, it is only natural that Japan would seek to diversify and strengthen its relationships with other countries, regions, economic arrangements, and international organizations and institutions. This diversification, which could be seen since the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, has gained momentum in recent years, and the pandemic has served only to accelerate it. The analysis proceeds through the examination of the following: 1) pandemic chronology; 2) Japan’s domestic politics; 3) relations with the United States; 4) relations with China; 5) Japan’s diversification strategy; and 6) conclusions.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Geopolitics, and Economy
- Political Geography:
- Japan and Asia
60. How COVID-19 Has Affected the Geopolitics of Korea
- Author:
- Jung-Yeop Woo
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies
- Institution:
- Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
- Abstract:
- COVID-19 has not gone away, and observers are now discussing possible long-term effects of the pandemic, including on geopolitics. A report by the European Parliament discussed five COVID-generated factors that could impact the geopolitical environment, i.e., supply chains, health multilateralism, digital diplomacy, climate change, and democratic activism. It predicted a reshuffling of value chains, where cooperation within the same “bloc” would be strengthened, while states continue their reshoring efforts, consequently shifting the current geopolitical environment. The report pointed out that the pandemic necessitated thorough scientific cooperation and information sharing beyond the level that the WHO had initially offered, suggesting changes in patterns of behavior, as in adapting to digital platforms while opening opportunities for nations to counter climate change and strengthen their geopolitical positions. Moreover, it also looked at the number of protests resulting from the pandemic and its economic effects and suggested that such pressure would encourage governments to mollify inequality. Missing is optimism that countries will be stirred to pursue common interests. Missing too is the geopolitical fallout from acutely worsening Sino-U.S. relations, as in South Korea, which stands at the forefront of states facing pressure from both sides. With the unforeseen disruption in both global and domestic economies, much attention has been paid to the effect of COVID-19 on the economic side rather than the political side, perhaps because many did not expect that the pandemic would last this long. However, recent disruptions are clearly rife with serious political implications, both domestically and globally. Above all, as seen from Seoul, their impact on the relationship between Beijing and Washington demonstrated how much the economic forces could spill into geopolitics. Koreans follow this impact attentively, realizing that worsening Sino-U.S. ties may reverberate on one or both powers, increasing pressure on Seoul’s efforts to sustain a precarious balance for the sake of its North Korean policy and its hope for regional stability. Many nations in the Indo-Pacific have recently struggled between the United States and China, trying to find the most advantageous equilibrium between security and economy. South Korea has uniquely stood on the frontlines, as in 2016-17 when it bowed to the U.S. and deployed the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense targeting North Korea, which was met with strong Chinese pressure—strict economic sanctions through unofficial channels and demands to promise the “three noes” that restricted further missile defense deployment to deescalate the tension. President Biden’s new measures to bridge security and economy through multilateralism call for Seoul to choose between acceding to U.S. requests or risking China’s threats to respond aggressively—even as some anti-THAAD sanctions remain in place. President Xi Jinping’s warnings point to China’s harsh response. South Korean concerns have grown because of the relationship between the current global supply chains and geopolitics, which is a preoccupation of the Biden administration. Situated at the juncture of supply networks centering around China, South Korea’s economy is almost certain to be heavily hit. Furthermore, the pandemic brought ongoing pressures for de-globalization and de-dollarization to the forefront with major ramifications for Seoul. Much of the anxiety has focused on the geopolitics of deteriorating relations between Beijing and Washington. The former is warning Seoul against joining the Quad, agreeing to trilateralism with Japan and the U.S., and tilting the balance away from China in the Sino-U.S.-ROK triangle. Meanwhile, the Biden administration, even before it clarifies its regional strategy, is nudging Seoul in precisely the opposite direction. The year 2020 raised challenging issues for Seoul, which loom in 2021 as more severe geopolitical tests for the Moon administration. To properly gauge the effect of COVID-19 on South Korea’s geopolitics, it is crucial to understand the world before the pandemic. Has COVID-19 functioned as an independent variable in South Korean geopolitics? If there is a discernable difference, we have to see whether that difference was caused by COVID-19. This paper proceeds in four parts: 1) outlining the pre-pandemic status quo up until 2020; 2) assessing how COVID-19 affected international geopolitics; 3) examining how it influenced South Korea’s supply chain and geopolitics; and 4) analyzing ongoing discourse on South Korea’s strategic choice amid the U.S.-China rivalry. These sections are followed by brief conclusions on implications for policy choices.
- Topic:
- International Relations, Security, Geopolitics, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Asia and South Korea