Two days after South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol assumed office on Tuesday last week, the South Korean Ministry of Defense said that, effective immediately, it would no longer refer to a missile launch by North Korea’s military as a “firing of an unidentified projectile,” but would instead use the phrase “firing of a missile.”
This change shows that Seoul has stopped covering for Pyongyang and has decided to call each missile launch what it is: a provocative action. It also indicates that the Yoon administration intends to adopt a tougher stance toward North Korea.
Before Yoon became president, his foreign policy was widely acknowledged to be “pro-Washington, anti-Pyongyang and distant from Beijing.” The South Korean military’s change of policy toward North Korea’s missile firings shows that there is a renewed resolve in Seoul to push back against the North.
Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, “offensive realism” — a structural theory in international relations — appears to have become the mainstream opinion within South Korea’s foreign policy community.
Offensive realism posits that the international system is anarchical, and individual nation states, as rational actors, must therefore take actions to protect themselves and guarantee their security through the construction of independent security capabilities. A unique aspect of the theory is its explanation of the interplay between regional actors.
The theory says that, in seeking to guarantee their own security, each nation expands their military forces and attempts to become the regional hegemon, which will eventually lead to conflict and war — such as has occurred between Russia and Ukraine.
The South Korean electorate’s selection of Yoon as their new president could be interpreted as a sign that they have had enough of Pyongyang’s provocations and threats.
Previously, South Koreans tolerated North Korea and continually sent messages of goodwill to their neighbor.
They understand that this has fallen on deaf ears and that North Korea presents a serious security threat to their country.
Many South Koreans therefore feel that they have no choice but to strengthen their defenses and adopt a more confrontational posture.
South Korea apparently adopting the “offensive realism” model bodes ill for peace and security on the Korean Peninsula.
There is a distinct possibility that the tense relationship between North Korea and South Korea could boil over into military conflict.
This would be a disaster not only for China and Japan, but also for Taiwan.
Jason Lee has a doctorate in international politics from National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Edward Jones
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Owing to the combined majority of the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), the legislature last week voted to further extend the current session to the end of next month, prolonging the session twice for a total of 211 days, the longest in Taiwan’s democratic history. Legally, the legislature holds two regular sessions annually: from February to May, and from September to December. The extensions pushed by the opposition in May and last week mean there would be no break between the first and second sessions this year. While the opposition parties said the extensions were needed to
RSS