In the year 2005, perhaps the most momentous decision in East Asia will occur in South Korea, where the choice will affect not only the future of the Korean peninsula but the balance of power throughout this region.
South Koreans will have before them three options, given the rise of anti-Americanism, the forthcoming US troop reductions and realignment, improved relations with China, a resurgence in anti-Japanese sentiments, and the demands of domestic politics:
? "Go it alone" as has been advocated by President Roh Moo-hyun, to rely on Korea's own resources while forsaking alliances with other nations.
? Forge an alliance with the People's Republic of China, clearly the rising power in Asia.
? Revive South Korea's faltering alliance with the US even though there is no guarantee that the US would reciprocate. Self-reliant defense would be tempting as it would free South Korea from entangling alliances, permit South Koreans to pursue reunification with North Korea without outside interference, and satisfy nationalistic demands.
This course, however, would seem to be unrealistic. South Korea lives in a rough neighborhood and needs outside help to maintain security. A Korean diplomat asserted many years ago: "You must remember that we live next door to the world's most populous nation [China], the world's biggest nation [then the Soviet Union], and the world's second largest economy [Japan]."
Forging an alliance with China would also appear to be tempting. Korea and China are cultural cousins and Beijing is a mere two-hour flight from Seoul. Korea's trade with China has soared as has Korean investment in the blossoming Chinese economy.
The Middle Kingdom mentality in China, however, would put Seoul in danger of falling under Chinese dominance. The Chinese would not be expected to march across the Yalu River as they did in 1950 but Beijing seeks the political, economic, and diplomatic clout to insist that major decisions in every Asian capital, including Seoul, meet with its approval.
Reviving the alliance with the US would require a change in Korean attitudes and an effort to persuade Americans to return to the alliance of yesteryear. The accumulation of anti-American demonstrations and rhetoric in recent years has made Americans seriously question their support for South Korea.
Korean and American scholars have begun to define this issue. Lee Chung-min of Yonsei University in Seoul, wrote last April: "The question for South Korea in the beginning of the 21st century is whether it should strive to prolong, strengthen, and modernize its maritime alliance with the United States or strive to seek "strategic accommodation" with its traditional, pre-20th century patron, China."
A scholar at Georgetown University and longtime student of Korea, David I. Steinberg, wrote in June that American nationalism after 9/11 has made the United States "much more suspicious of any anti-American sentiments for demonstrations among our friends," including Korea. President George W. Bush has found resonance in his expression: "You are either with us or with the terrorists." That has been transformed in many cases to "you are either with us or against us." In this vein, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has said: "We want to have our forces where people want them. We have no desire to be where we're not wanted."
The former US ambassador to Seoul, Donald Gregg, has cautioned that "trust between the two countries had never been lower."
Richard Allen, national security adviser under President Ronald Reagan, has advocated withdrawing US troops from Korea,"especially now that the harm can come from two directions'North Korea and violent South Korean protestors." Moreover, prominent Koreans have cautioned that a backlash is building in the US A former defense minister, General Kim Dong-shin, has said that Korean anti-American rhetoric has caused an anti-Korea fervor in the US.
The hectoring tone of the Korean press after President Bush was re-elected was not likely to win points in the White House. It was ironic that Korean newspapers criticized President Bush for "unilateralism" when the US has insisted that nuclear negotiations with North Korea be centered in the Six-Party Talks in Beijing.
In contrast, some Korean political leaders have demanded that the US negotiate bilaterally with North Korea. That is exactly the channel of negotiations to which Seoul objected in 1994 when South Korean diplomats were shut out of negotiations over the Agreed Framework intended to halt North Korea's plans to acquire nuclear arms.
Richard Halloran is a senior journalist based in Hawaii.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs