Security Conditions and Regional Competition in after the New Millennium: A South Korean Perspective

Chong Jin OH* Abstract Introduction

Even after the new millennium, the Korean East Asia is perhaps the world’s greatest peninsula still remains not only the heart of military spending area; it is “ripe for the Northeast Asian security discourse, but also as the centre of global security concerns. The rivalry” according to some experts on absence of visionary leadership in East Asia and East Asian issues.1 East Asian states North ’s self-destructive survival strategy are competitively building up military make it difficult to achieve peace on the Korean resources with which to coerce others and peninsula. Looking back at the last two decades of globalisation, the South Korean people have engaging in “head-to-head” economic been embarrassed by the fact that although competition. With economic and energy the country has been extending its reach as a resources, they are coercing or inducing meaningful global player economically, it has others to achieve their desired outcomes.2 been struggling to contend with security issues such as the North Korean nuclear problem, However, the incentives for cooperation revision of the South Korean-US alliance, among states have been growing since Japanese militarisation, the rise of , and the new millennium. Recently, due so on. Thus, there continues to be many security to dramatic increases in trade and concerns remaining for (also known as the Republic of Korea, or ROK) in investment ties within the region, East the new millennium. Asia has come close to the and North America not only in Key Words the size of its economy but also in its level of integration. These developments South Korean foreign policy, Inter-Korean have led national leaders to realise that Relations, Northeast Asia. East Asia is becoming a crucial power, and that their fate is closely associated with the prosperity of the region. In the duality that the region presents, rivals * Professor at the Hankuk University of Foreign compete over how to cooperate. While Studies, South Korea. promoting cooperation in a regional

105 PERCEPTIONS, Winter 2012, Volume XVII, Number 4, pp. 105-128. Chong Jin Oh

institutional framework, they advocate of these groupings are incompatible different alliances, ideas, and role with one another, and they compete allocations. Each state is architecting for primacy. Thus, the conditions for a regional institution that would best projecting power have been dramatically position itself in the regional leadership changing recently as these powers play stakes.3 a soft power game. Accordingly, the resources that provide the best basis for power are changing these days. Due to dramatic increases in Considering these development, this trade and investment ties within article examines the security conditions the region, East Asia has come of South Korea in the new millennium, close to the European Union and will discuss the security conditions and North America not only in surrounding the Korean peninsula both the size of its economy but also internally and regionally. The security in its level of integration. implication of the Six-Party Talks will be analysed. Lastly, this work will explore the competitive dynamics of pursuing The upshot is that different regions soft power among the key regional have been selected by different states. For states in East Asia. By doing so, it will example, China has worked to embrace try to provide an empirical account of under the Association of regional competition from a soft power Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Plus perspective. Three (APT: China, , Korea), as well as Central Asia under the Shanghai The Security Conditions and Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Japan is racing to connect the countries Environment of Korea in the of East Asia under the proposed East New Millennium Asian Community (EAC) that includes the APT countries plus , New With the end of the Cold War the Zealand, and . The United States meaning of security started to differ has attempted to enlarge the functions of from region to region, and the change the economically oriented APEC (Asia- in security conditions brought about Pacific Economic Cooperation). Finally, by globalisation has also been different South Korea has pursued a Northeast in places as a result of regional political Asian Community composed mainly of and social restrictions. Compared to China, Japan, and South Korea. Many Europe or the North American region,

106 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia the East Asian international order has the well being of each other. To this experienced a distinctly unique process new sense of regionalism, the so-called of formation. Unlike the European case interdependence allows for a certainty in which countries of similar economic of security aspects. Interdependence may development, social stability, etc., reduce the risks of any serious troubles. formed Europe’s regional security order Unfortunately, however, the development through a process of reciprocity, the of economic interdependence does not state of international relations among easily bring any meaningful spill over East Asian countries could be seen effect into the security area. as a result of the proliferation of the The major limitation in East Asian Western way of diplomatic relations. regional security is fairly straightforward. This sort of historical characteristic The differences in power among has influenced the uniqueness of the different nation-states, unresolved regional security order in East Asia. In historical issues, the existence of largely East Asia, there still remains the Cold autonomous cultures unaccustomed War tradition of resolving major security to long-term habits of association and 4 issues bilaterally. Such traditions have interaction with their neighbours, and been institutionalised in the form the extraordinarily rapid economic and of a “fragmented array of bilateral social change in recent years have all relationships” of which the United States constrained the development of a more 5 is the centre of these relationships. mature and stable regional order.6 South Korea, in particular, needs to pay greater The rise of China has forced attention to these factors more than South Korea to ask itself two any other country in the region due to security questions. its confrontation with . As previously mentioned, South Korea symbolises the security confrontation In addition, the astonishing economic of the East Asian region in the new development in East Asia is ushering millennium. It is still a divided nation in growing regional interdependence. and also the neighbour to one of the Due to the outcomes of globalisation most bizarre and unpredictable regimes in the field of communication, in the world, North Korea. Regarding transportation, networking, and civilian the security conditions of the Korean activity, distances are shrinking and peninsula in the new millennium, the the economies of the region’s countries rise of China draws striking attention. are becoming ever more dependent on China favours maintaining a peaceful

107 Chong Jin Oh

security environment in order to advance continuity and disparity between global its own industrialisation. However, the and regional hegemonic influence. rise of China has forced South Korea to Since the new millennium, the United ask itself two security questions. First, States and China have been contending South Korea has to consider its relations for regional hegemony in East Asia. with the United States, China, and Although the United States asks for a Japan along with each state’s status in the harmonious partnership with China region. The United States is the regional in order to maintain a more efficient stabiliser in a distance, and its security leadership in the region, there are many alliance with South Korea and Japan unrevealed competitions and behind- has been strengthened and transformed the-scenes manoeuvring between the to suit the 21st century international G-2 countries. Thus, South Korea’s security environment. However, as choices, regarding its security issues, a consequence of increased Chinese are becoming more limited and power, maritime territorial disputes and complicated. To be sure, the full-scale rise historical territorial disputes continue to of China and the beginning of the G-2 occur among China, Japan, and Korea. accelerated a new stage of international Thus, South Korea is more likely to relations in East Asia. The East Asian pursue a balance-of-power approach in security structure is characterised by this region. the co-existence of strategic conflict and realistic cooperation. However, because the conflict between the United States Problems with North Korea and China has not yet intensified, and have become the most symbolic neither is it an open conflict, now would and significant issue among any be an appropriate time to maximise other Northeast Asian regional South Korea’s national interest, including security issues, primarily due issues concerning North Korea. to North Korea’s continuous Thirdly, the most salient and enduring resistance to cooperate in the security subject in the East Asian region East Asian regional order. is how to handle North Korea. Although there have been many efforts made by the United States and South Korea to engage The second security question is with North Korea over the last 20 years, concerned with the G-2’s (the US and the North Korean regime continues to China) global leadership in the region. pursue a nuclear weapons programme. There are contending arguments on Offers by the United States to North

108 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia

Korea for its disarmament cannot called “South-South conflict” in South credibly reduce the regime’s fear for its Korea, which has placed South survival. In dealing with North Korea, into one of the two different camps: both the United States and South Korea the pro-engagement camp that favours have moved back and forth between engaging with North Korea to bring policies of engagement and coercion, about gradual reform and openness in occasionally leading to contradictory the country; and the pro-regime-change policies and a lack of consistency on the camp, which advocates regime change part of both the United States and North in North Korea to completely stop Korea. Problems with North Korea have Pyongyang’s irrational behaviour. become the most symbolic and significant Kim Jong-il might have believed that issue among any other Northeast Asian pursuing nuclear weapons is North regional security issues, primarily due Korea’s only option for defending itself to North Korea’s continuous resistance against security threats and for avoiding to cooperate in the East Asian regional any loss of control over domestic politics. order. As a result, many regional security If North Korea is actually determined to difficulties, such as the US-Chinese be a nuclear state, then there is not much conflict over the Korean peninsula, the the international community can do. underdevelopment of multilateralism in In short, the international community the region, and the arms race among East may simply sit and wait until North Asian countries, are far beyond solutions Korea reveals their nuclear weapons to for peace in the East Asian region. the world and try to trade the weapons As mentioned earlier, the North at an appropriate price. To avoid this Korean nuclear problem has lasted for worst-case scenario, two options are almost two decades, filling the pages available. First, it is extremely important of East Asia’s post-Cold War stories on that both Seoul and Washington share security. Living under this nuclear threat the goal of completely denuclearising has become a part of daily life for many North Korea. However, since the Barack South Koreans. As the problem continues Obama administration came to power to go unresolved, more and more of the in the United States, there have been general public as well as the policymakers several indications that the United in South Korea and the United States are States may accept North Korea as a de beginning to become pessimistic about facto nuclear power under the condition whether North Korea will ever give up that Pyongyang does not attempt to its reckless pursuit of becoming a nuclear proliferate.7 Although this indication may state. Such pessimism has led to the so- not reflect the US government’s official

109 Chong Jin Oh

position, many Koreans are worried allows it to pursue its national interests that Washington may compromise and separately on the East Asian level as well complete a nuclear deal with Pyongyang as on the global level.8 As far as Korea’s due to other US security priorities. national security interests are concerned, the US-Korean alliance is the highest However, the role of China has priority in the country’s national security become the most crucial factor in the strategy. The future international order subject of the North Korean nuclear has been characterised as a complex issue, Chine is critical in the negotiation network or complex transformation. process of the North Korean nuclear In such an environment, a country like problem since it has the most leverage South Korea, surrounded by stronger over North Korea. Due to the nuclear neighbours, must pursue a strategy issue, both South Korea and China have that exploits the benefits of the rich, been caught between the United States diverse, and complex networks in all and North Korea. China has continued areas of national security. In that sense, to emphasise economic relations with the relationship with the United States North Korea over the years, although takes top priority. However, Korea and there has been intense debate within the United States must work to reduce China about the best way to deal with the negative implications associated with North Korea. Although an inseparable the term “strategic alliance”, especially relation between the two countries for China. Its alliance must not be seen exists, China must participate more as if it were preventing a rise of Chinese actively in the international community power in the region. Rather, both South to deal with the denuclearisation of Korea and the United States need to North Korea. For a more prosperous and explain to their neighbours, especially to stabilised East Asia, South Korea, China, China, that their aim is to cope with the and the United States must find common comprehensive security threats of East ground to better understand each other’s Asia in the future. intentions in a constructive way. Under such circumstances, a strategic Considering South Korea’s alliance with the United States has national security and national become one of the important ways interest, stable multilateral South Korea can maintain its security. diplomatic relations in East The US-South Korean alliance spans a Asia is one of the most critical period of 60 years, and it is a valuable conditions for its security. diplomatic asset for South Korea since it

110 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia

In this perspective, handling East Asian (NEASED) at the first ASEAN Regional security issues in terms of the regional Forum Senior Official’s Meeting. The Kim context has been carefully considered Dae-jung administration has emphasised since the end of the last millennium. the importance of multilateral security Institutionalised cooperation in the cooperation in East Asia on many region is urgently needed for the long- occasions.9 Truly, a long and hard way term prosperity and peace in East Asia. exists in order to accomplish such a However, the absence of an emergent mechanism in the region. However, in collective identity in East Asia is a order for these efforts to succeed, there big obstacle. Moreover, East Asia must be a region-wide consensus on has survived without any permanent the ideas and interests among the East multilateral security mechanism. The Asian states. Thus, creating institutions region apparently lacks a more or less for a multilateral security framework is enduring multilateral mechanism crucial groundwork for future long-term like the Organisation for Security cooperation. and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Considering South Korea’s national However, people in the region view security and national interest, stable the emergence of linkages in East multilateral diplomatic relations in Asia as being beneath the level of state East Asia is one of the most critical actions. In recent years, East Asian conditions for its security. Thus, the countries have become considerably South Korean government is supporting more interdependent, connected, and the development of a collective identity cohesive. This increased cohesiveness has among East Asians which would be the been driven by developments in, among base of a regional multilateral framework. other things, trade and investment, cross- However, countries in the region differ in border production, banking, technology their domestic values on many security sharing, popular culture, transportation, issues, such as Japan’s military build- communication, and environmental up, China’s rising power, North Korea’s cooperation, as well as in crime, drug, nuclear programme, and the US-centric and disease control. Previous South bilateral alliance system. Regarding these Korean governments all endeavoured subjects, different domestic security to contribute to the creation of more values among the East Asian countries or less lasting multilateral security are known as the most significant barriers arrangements in East Asia. The Kim to the emergence of a sense of collective Young-sam government proposed to identity. Thus, these barriers should be create a Northeast Asia Security Dialogue overcome by active interdependence

111 Chong Jin Oh

and convergence of each state’s domestic continuous attention must be paid to values through multilateral dialogue. We South Korea’s national interests. may consider the creation of multilateral security dialogue, region-wide collective The Security Implications of military exercises, and civilian discussion the Six-Party Talks channels on East Asian military issues in order to create a permanent multilateral The Six-Party process has been in security mechanism in the region. recession since 2008. Hence there is Regarding the security concerns of scepticism on whether the Six-Party Korea, it is highly probable that the framework can succeed in denuclearising United States, China, and Japan will North Korea. However, it seems crucial adhere to the policies of maintaining to explore the security implication of the the status quo on the North-South Six-Party Talks, since the North Korean Korean division. As a result, to remain issue can be regarded as a good example as a meaningful actor in East Asia is of how security is being organised in East not an easy task for South Korea. The Asia in the post-Cold War era. According Korean peninsula is a place of strategic to Hemmer and Katzenstein, it appears importance, where territorial and to be highly unlikely that the East Asian marine forces collide, and Western and region can easily establish a cooperative non-Western civilisations adjoin. Thus, security regime because the region lacks there should be a consistent emphasis both a collective regional identity and that, without peace and prosperity multilateral institutional experience due on the peninsula, East Asian regional to its bipolar structure during the Cold security cannot be guaranteed. Since War. 10 However, the North Korean issue the dissolution of the Soviet Union, engendered the major regional actors to the international relations of East establish a multilateral security dialogue, Asia have developed into a complex the Six-Party Talks, to manage East Asia’s security structure that depends on the regional security challenge. following competing elements: the role of the United States as a balancer, the The security implications of the Six- possibility of a hegemonic war between Party Talks are often analysed in terms China and the United States, the US- of a concert of powers. Ness characterises Japanese alliance, and finding resolutions the Six-Party Talks as “a four-plus-two to the division of the Korean peninsula. security consortium” which can create a Considering the change in the balance long-term security institution to remove of power among the surrounding states, instability in East Asia.11 He adds

112 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia that if the major powers of East Asia, the Six-Party process now shows one China, Japan, Russia, and the US, could significant difference from what it did at commit themselves to cooperation, the beginning: the Six-Party framework the Six-Party framework can generate now allows all of the major actors in “a security consortium” or “a formal the East Asian region to have a voice in concert of powers” for the region. dealing with a particular security issue. Likewise, it is important to consider the Specifically, the particular pattern of a long-term perspective of the Six-Party multilateral forum is accepted by all of the framework in tackling the issue of a countries involved. Despite the absence security guarantee for North Korea. In of any formal institutionalisation, it this regards, the Six-Party framework can is clear that the Six-Party Talks has play the role of a concert-like diplomacy operated as an engine to solve common to build up regional cooperation for both security concerns in the region. the dismantlement of the North Korean nuclear programme and North Korea’s re-engagement with the international It seems crucial to explore the community.12 security implication of the Six- At this point, it is critical to examine Party Talks, since the North China’s perception of the Six-Party Talks, Korean issue can be regarded as since China has largely contributed to a good example of how security establishing and maintaining it. China is being organised in East Asia also sees the Six-Party framework in the post-Cold War era. as a concert of powers system.13 Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing emphasised the role of the Six-Party Recently, it seems fair to say that the Talks as “concert efforts” in arriving at Six-Party Talks basically resembles a peaceful resolutions of the nuclear issue concert of powers system since the key in the Korean peninsula. Chinese State elements of the Six-Party framework Councillor Tang Jiaxuan even went can be examined in the same way a further, saying that the “implication of concert of powers would be. Also, the Six-Party framework is the handling China’s proactive engagement in the of regional security matters through North Korean nuclear issue showed that dialogue to build a mutual trust when a concert of powers system was valuable tackling disputes emerging in East in preventing the breakout of major war Asia”. Compared with the earlier stage between the members. China’s proactive of the nuclear issue, it is apparent that engagement policy can be understood as

113 Chong Jin Oh

the attempt of a great power to prevent a permanent security architecture in war. Ever since March 2003, when the the region, but instead established to United States intervened in Iraq, China deal with the nuclear proliferation has radically changed its stance from a issue. Thus, the Six-Party Talks has a “hands-off” attitude to an “engagement limitation in providing a long-term policy” on North Korean issues. general framework for governing East Definitely, China doesn’t want a similar Asia’s security issues. Also, creating the situation to play out in its backyard. common regional identity and political Although the Six-Party Talks was not value in East Asia are still secondary to a formal institution, it continued to the balance-of-power political practice in play its role as holding a regular pattern the region. Nonetheless, it has somehow of conferences dealing with particular demonstrated the basic foundation for security issues. Its establishment and the creation of the multilateral security maintenance showed that it has paved dialogue in East Asia. Although its the way for a concert-like diplomacy process has been slow and marginal, not only by providing opportunities for its progress can be developed into a regional actors such as the United States, regional security organisation. As East China, Russia, Japan, and South Korea to Asian states have achieved remarkable take part in managing the nuclear issue, economic growth and have played an but also by offering a regular pattern increasingly important role as a trading of forums to discuss regional security partner in today’s world economy, many issues. Nevertheless, there still remains economic discussions, e.g., APEC, APT, 14 a question of why the Six-Party process and the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), has not been functioning in recent have begun to extend their scope to years. In this respect, it is important to security issues. understand that despite its resemblance of a concert of powers system, the Six- The Six-Party Talks has a Party Talks has some limitations. More or less, a concert of powers is a permanent limitation in providing a long- framework for managing a broad range term general framework for of international affairs rather than an governing East Asia’s security ad hoc vehicle for solving a particular issues. problem. The Concert of Europe sought to manage European politics in general. However, the Six-Party Talks was not Consequently, its security implication born for the purpose of establishing and the meaning in the region of the Six-

114 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia

Party Talks cannot be ignored, because all in 1996. Most of them were designed the member states are directly involved to discuss economic cooperation in the regional stability in East Asia. The which is less sensitive than politics or Six-Party Talks can play the role of a security. However, these institutions permanent channel for communication, have often faced criticism due to their while the member states maintain failure to meet earlier expectations. their existing bilateral relations with Some countries had not achieved full neighbouring states. The duality of the democratisation, and, moreover, some communication channels is essential newly industrialised countries were not given the complexity of each member free from their government’s protective state’s political and diplomatic interests. policies and hence they could not take The permanent establishment of the Six- initiatives in regional cooperation Party Talks could promote both bilateral without considering their national and multilateral relations which could policies. Therefore, East Asian countries enhance reciprocal communication could not easily come to a conclusion among the member states. This can on a common cause at the expense of eventually stabilise regional security as a their national interests. As Hemmer whole. In this sense, it seems to be better and Katzenstein mentioned, it was very to have a leading group such as China, difficult to expect a smooth operation Japan, and South Korea to take the of international organisations in this initiative in providing the new regional region.16 However, East Asian countries system with a sense of direction and have been showing a slow but gradual objective. progress in the development of a regional cooperation organisation since the new Soft Power Competition millennium. Also, leading countries in in East Asia: A Korean the region, such as China, Japan, and Perspective South Korea, are taking the initiative in providing a new regional system with a different direction and objective. The economic crisis in 1997 made East Asian countries realise that they should As mentioned earlier, the incentives protect themselves.15 Starting in the post- for cooperation among the East Asian Cold War period, a series of multilateral states have been growing since the new institutions came into existence in East millennium. Rapid increases in trade Asia: APEC was founded in 1989, the along with investment ties within the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) was held region are making East Asia similar to in 1993, and the first ASEM was held the European Union not only in the

115 Chong Jin Oh

size of its economy but also in the level to continue growing, undermining of integration. Thus, the conditions for the perception of China as a threat. projecting power have been dramatically Additionally, China portrays itself as changing as major East Asian powers a benign, peaceful, and constructive start playing a soft power game. By the actor in the world. A peaceful rise is a beginning of the new millennium, a new carefully constructed concept that would China had emerged on Asia’s strategic allow China to become a global power.19 horizon, shifting gears in foreign Thus, China’s soft power strategies aim policy. China toned down its previous at a larger national goal: leadership in strategy of using military strength to Asia. While the response to China’s soft intimidate its Asian neighbours through power extends beyond Asia, for example aggressive moves and calling on others it includes nations from Venezuela to to abandon their alliances, mostly with Nigeria, its soft power strategies have the United States. Instead, the Chinese focused on Asia, shifting influence away leadership has focused on a proactive from the United States and Japan, and diplomacy in shaping a regional creating China’s own sphere of influence environment conducive to domestic in the region.20 economic development. China has tried Given the rise of regionalism among to maintain peace and stability on its the East Asian states, China believed that borders and has portrayed itself to others its future would depend on the stability as a benign and constructive actor.17 and prosperity of the region, and decided China has also embraced regional to take the lead in constructing regional multilateral institutions and pursued free cooperative frameworks. Since the new trade agreements (FTA) with neighbours, millennium, China has developed subtle and it aims to improve its image and strategies to achieve this goal. One is influence through these new strategies.18 establishing a leadership position in East These new concepts and strategies were Asia through proactive involvement in all devised to increase China’s soft power. the APT. The other focuses on Central By the early millennium, the term Asia through an initiative to develop the “peaceful rise”, developed by Zheng SCO. Accordingly, China has begun Bijian, an important advisor to the to enunciate a doctrine of “win-win” Chinese leadership, provided the most relations, emphasising that participants important guiding principle of China’s would benefit from their relationships foreign policy. By claiming that China with China. It also proclaimed a doctrine will not rise at the expense of others, it of non-interference, saying that it would purports to allow the Chinese economy listen to the needs and desires of other

116 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia nations without asking for anything way in which Beijing assists others is quite in return.21 Both were in line with the noticeable. Assistance is not explicitly broader strategy of a peaceful rise. targeted for economic development, but also for the cultural and language promotion, and aims to improve friendly By claiming that China will not cooperation between China and the rise at the expense of others, it other developing countries.24 purports to allow the Chinese economy to continue growing, In addition to the economic undermining the perception of perspective, China’s cultural promotion China as a threat. is part of a broader effort at public diplomacy. China has made an effort to increase cultural exchanges with its On the economic perspective, China neighbours, expand the international has pursued a soft power strategy in reach of its media, increase networks of using FTAs as a strategic engagement informal summits such as a Davos-style tool. Sensitive to the fear of China’s world economic forum, and promote economic rise, the Chinese leadership Chinese culture and language studies reassured ASEAN countries by signing abroad. In particular, the establishment an FTA and making substantial trade of Confucius Institutes (Kongzi concessions. To the surprise of many xueyuan),25 a “Chinese cultural-cum- ASEAN partners, China offered a trade language centre” responsible for creating deal including an “early harvest package” enthusiasm about learning Chinese, is a that, even before the FTA came into case in point. In fact, Chinese language effect, would reduce China’s tariffs on and cultural studies have soared in some Southeast Asian goods. Apparently, popularity around the world. South this was a conscious strategy for earning Korea is a good example. As China has goodwill from its ASEAN neighbours.22 become South Korea’s largest trading It was also a strategy of engagement partner, there has been a boom in interest that uses economic means to ameliorate in China. Since the establishment of the non-status quo elements of a rising the first Confucius Institute in Seoul power’s behaviour.23 Backing up its trade in November 2004, 322 institutes had and investment promises, China has been set up worldwide as of October also developed a substantial foreign aid 2010. The number of Korean students programme. It now competes with the studying in Chinese universities has United States and Japan in the Southeast also increased rapidly. The number Asia and Central Asia regions. Again, the of Koreans travelling to China have

117 Chong Jin Oh

skyrocketed and overtaken the number limitation: “China’s charming image of Japanese visitors. might recede as the honeymoon period ends; the world will focus more intensely In short, China’s subtle but persistent and critically on what China says as it pursuit of a good neighbour policy, becomes powerful”.28 proactive economic engagement, and systematic promotion and dissemination The increase in China’s soft power has of its own cultural values have all increased had the greatest impact on Japan. Japan its soft power. By skilfully combining is also a country that has great soft power this with its rapidly increasing economic resources in the region. Japan was the and military capabilities, China has first non-Western country to achieve successfully increased its influence in East modernisation and industrialisation in Asia as well as in Southeast and Central Asia. Thus, its economic and development Asia. China’s central position in both the model have been welcomed as an APT and the SCO proves its successful alternative model to the Western course efforts. The response of development by to China’s soft power Japan's economic and devel- many Asian states. now extends to opment model have been wel- There is no doubt that South Korea and to comed as an alternative model an East Asian brand the rest of the world. to the Western course of devel- of modernisation Indeed, China’s soft and capitalism was opment by many Asian states. power diplomacy created by Japan, and has been impressive. was then followed by As Shambaugh says, “bilaterally and South Korea and other Asian countries. multilaterally, China’s diplomacy has Japan has also used its soft power and been remarkably adept and nuanced, organised its strategic importance. In earning praise around the region.” As attempting to implement soft power a result, many nations in the region strategies, Japan made the most of its now see China as a good neighbour, a cultural traditions and assets. Japanese constructive partner, a careful listener, arts, music, design, fashion, and food have and a nonthreatening regional power.26 long served as global cultural magnets. In Kurlantzick calls the Chinese approach particular, Japanese popular culture, such a “charm offensive”.27 However, China as J-pop, manga, and animation, have has yet to prepare an elaborate ideational become extremely popular among Asian or institutional framework under which youth. One Japanese scholar argued Asians can get together. Also, a recent that Japan has been playing a key role critical observation describes China’s in creating an East Asian middle-class

118 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia culture in Asia.29 However, when there plus Australia, , and India. was a massive opportunity for Japan to Japan thought that these countries could take advantage of its overseas investment easily be identified as regional members and aid, Japan walked away from Asia since they share those universal values.32 due to its self-defeating politics and However, in attracting the East Asian economic management.30 Japan’s long people to take part in the EAC, Japan recession since the 1990s has led Japan defined its role in the EAC as a leader. to focus on its own problems and its own Just as China has attempted to establish economy. Also, Japan’s political scandals its sphere of influence beyond the scope and a society-wide decline in morality of East Asia, Japan seems to have similar made its foreign policy passive; it became aims. a secondary concern. Where foreign policy was concerned, strengthening its Japan’s EAC proposal of open hard alliance with the United States was regionalism seems realistic and persuasive, the primary goal.31 given the presence of the United States as well as Australia and India as important It was precisely in this context that stakeholders in the region.33 Also, Japan’s China aggressively made inroads into functionalist approach seems realistic, Southeast Asia. When China signed given the diverse, unequal, and often the 2001 Framework Agreement on conflictual nature of the East Asian Economic Cooperation with ASEAN and region, which renders the creation the China-ASEAN FTA, the Japanese of an institutional whole, such as the government was astonished. In 2006, the European Union, almost impossible. In Japanese government proposed a broader East Asian Community (EAC). Within addition, an EAC based on the concept this framework, Japan proposed to hold of a community was attractive because an East Asian Summit (EAS) to pursue of the community’s importance in the a community-based identity, as in the Asian tradition. In particular, the idea case of postwar Europe, that emphasises of the Chinese/Confucian civilisation, peace and democracy as its ideals. Japan which idealises a Gemeinschaft-like suggested that East Asia should shape world of obligation and harmony, was an identity that was directed towards welcomed by many East Asians. The freedom, democracy, human rights, the contents of the Japanese message seemed rule of law, and the market economy, so- persuasive based on a realistic judgment called Western and universal values. By of regional conditions as well as the use doing so, Japan tried to create the EAC by of knowledge, potentially attractive to including the existing APT membership the people in the region.

119 Chong Jin Oh

China, it suggests that Japan is too close Given the resurgence of to an American ally.37 nationalism in both societies, which leads to their striving for By far, the greatest challenge both China and Japan have had to face and will leadership in Asia, any attempt face is the question of nationalism. The to assume the leading role in the credibility of a source is undermined when creation of a regional community the source promotes an international is hardly trustworthy. position that clearly furthers its interests. Given the resurgence of nationalism Japan’s dilemma, however, was that the in both societies, which leads to their attraction of the message was likely to striving for leadership in Asia, any decrease when the source of the message attempt to assume the leading role in was from Japan. For Asians, Japan’s the creation of a regional community is promotion of the community concept hardly trustworthy. China’s setback in reminds them of Japanese’s earlier the EAS proves this. Despite repeated attempt at establishing the “Greater East commitments to multilateralism, when Asian Co-prosperity Sphere” during the China’s aspiration for a leadership role time of Japanese imperialism, an idea in an exclusive regional setting became that was also embedded in traditional apparent, Asians turned away. They Asian values at the time.34 Thus, given warned that China seems to be using its imperialistic heritage, Japan is not this multilateral institution as a cover, a credible source for such message. In aiming to deter Japanese and American order to avoid Asians’ doubt or fear, influence in East Asia.38 Likewise, when Japan has attempted to claim that a Japan’s drive for regionalism was seen as community’s identity should be based a clear balancing act against China’s rise, on universal values such as democracy, its attractiveness declined. In addition, freedom, human rights, rule of law, and inherent in both Chinese and Japanese the market economy.35 The Japanese domestic politics is the problem that government labelled this as value frequently their messages are for their diplomacy and promoted it as a key pillar domestic popularity, legitimacy, and even of its diplomacy for the beginning of regime survival, which undermines their the new millennium.36 However, when soft power in creating multilateralism in viewed in the Asian context, this message East Asia. was not so appealing. The message The best example is the historical sounds too American and, especially to dispute. Just as Japan has never fully

120 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia repudiated its past aggression, China its diplomatic tools and foreign assistance also has not fully come to terms with have been directed toward North Korea its own imperial past. Both countries and the four great powers (the US, have been engaged in historical disputes Russia, China, Japan).43 Diplomacy with their neighbours.39 For example, and foreign assistance efforts outside South Korea’s recent dispute with the peninsula are largely understaffed, China over the history of the Koguryo underfunded, and underused. They are Kingdom has generated a sharp decline neglected in part because of the difficulty of China’s popularity among Koreans.40 of demonstrating their short-term effect The territorial disputes over the Tokdo on progress toward a peaceful peninsula. islands, increased by the Japanese prime South Korean foreign policy has minister’s official visit to the Yasukuni tended to view soft power as a cultural Shrine, created massive popular phenomenon. In this perspective, South resentment, putting Japan’s popularity Korea’s soft power strategy lies in the at its lowest in postwar history. These field of cultural diplomacy. Recently, historical disputes and suspicions that the South Korean government has been remain in Korea and other post-colonial promoting Korean popular culture, the states in Asia limit Chinese and Japanese so-called “Korean wave”, in the region soft power to create multilateralism in in the name of public diplomacy. Korea the region.41 is using the appeal of its popular culture to play a role in inspiring other Asian In the midst of these soft power contests neighbours and to develop common between China and Japan, what are Asian values. Thus, cultivating political South Korea’s options? What can South ideas and values as well as performing Korea learn from their practices? Situated skilful diplomacy are, perhaps, the at the crossroads of great powers, South crucial mission for the South Korean Korea absolutely faces an apparent deficit government at this point. In order to in hard power. Therefore, a wise strategy achieve this, decision makers in the for South Korea would be to fill this void South Korean government should by fortifying its soft power.42 This differs understand what soft power means and from a great power’s strategy in which what it can achieve on its own. soft power complements military and economic might. South Korea should Despite its status as a latecomer in the make greater investments in soft power region, South Korea has potential. Both than the great powers. Since South China and Japan have recently created Korean foreign policy is struggling to problems that undercut their own soft solve the peninsula question, almost all of power. China has demonstrated an

121 Chong Jin Oh

increasingly offensive posture in the case Japan fall short in their credibility and of several territorial disputes (such as on ability to inspire hope and optimism. the Senkaku islands and South China Sea) The core of the problem is that they are that contradicts its previously cautious self-centred and nationalistic. In this charm offensive. China’s suppression sense, the key to gaining credibility is of human rights also undercuts its soft overcoming self-centred nationalism and power. In a different way, indecisive establishing consistency in words and and frequent changes in the Japanese action. leadership in its recent efforts to create an “Asian Shift” as well as its pursuit of an equal relationship with the United By improving its soft power, States are caught up with its internal South Korea can play a political debate. It is not only hindering constructive role as an arbiter Japan’s further progress in the region, but or broker who helps to avoid also weakening the Japanese voice in the a zero-sum game, or possibly international arena. a collision course, among the great powers in the region. South Korea can take advantage of these two countries’ mistakes to develop a strategy based on four principles. First, Thirdly, overcoming a myopic, inward- South Korea’s soft power strategy must looking, short-term mindset is extremely be appropriate to its position as a middle important. Efforts that are only spent power in the global system. Judged from on the Korean peninsula (e.g., regarding a hard power perspective, South Korea North Korea or the Six-Party Talks) will not be able determine the regional will not necessarily bring comparable order. However, the biggest challenge improvement in South Korea’s security is to decide between China and Japan/ and peace. South Korea’s bargaining the United States. By improving its power with neighbouring states can be soft power, South Korea can play a increased by efforts outside the peninsula. constructive role as an arbiter or broker To be sure, this may not produce the who helps to avoid a zero-sum game, or desired outcomes immediately, and possibly a collision course, among the such efforts often work indirectly and great powers in the region. may take years to bear fruit. Given Secondly, South Korea’s success in the South Korea’s limited budget and the arbiter’s role will turn on its ability to win need for trade-offs among policies, it credibility from others. Both China and is difficult to invest for the good of the

122 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia region and the world. However, it would South Korea was once the weakest be wise to consider seriously such an nation in the East Asian region. option. The South Korean foreign policy However, today South Korea is should broaden its perspective to include categorised as a “middle power” that can regional and global dimensions. assume initiative in international matters that are too sensitive or impossible for stronger states to engage in.44 Moreover, Different domestic security compared to any of its neighbours, values among East Asian South Korea has achieved a dynamic and countries on these subjects are participatory democracy. Due to such known as the most significant democracy, South Korea has experienced barriers to the emergence of a amazingly rapid development as well as sense of collective identity. the development of a highly professional civil society. In addition, South Korea is at a contact point of continental powers Lastly, South Korea should learn (China) and maritime powers (Japan), lessons from the Japanese and Chinese and thus, South Korea is relatively better cases. The soft power strategies of situated to develop a collective identity both China and Japan have been very of East Asia. South Korea’s networking much government driven. As a result, power will gain a competitive edge in the governments have always taken the East Asian region.45 initiative in creating and disseminating Different domestic security values soft power. However, many critical soft among East Asian countries on power resources are private. The key to these subjects are known as the most success is to think of a soft power increase significant barriers to the emergence in terms of a connection of activities, of a sense of collective identity.46 The linked through flows of potential systemic process should move forward resources into networks. Here, the role the interdependence and convergence of the government is in providing an of each state’s domestic values. As infrastructure and environment that the specific conduct of such systemic allows creative experimentation by processes, we may consider a creation private individuals and groups, and of multilateral security dialogue, region- establishing networks that constitute wide collective military exercises, and relational structures and processes in civilian discussion channels on various which creative actors interact. issues.

123 Chong Jin Oh

Conclusion directly involved in regional stability in East Asia, and therefore they should all This article explored the security be engaged in a regular contact point. conditions in East Asia in the new More specifically, the Six‐Party Talks can millennium, particularly focusing on the play a key role as a permanent channel South Korean perspective. As a result, of communication, whilst the member it discussed the security conditions states maintain their existing bilateral surrounding the Korean peninsula both relations with neighbouring states. The internally and regionally. Moreover, the article emphasised that the duality of research examined regional competition communication channels is essential in East Asia from a soft power perspective. given the complexity of each member state’s political and diplomatic interests. Despite East Asian states’ rivalry Any possible deadlock in one channel in political and military sectors, the can be dealt with by the other one. The degree of their interdependence is permanent establishment of the Six-Party likely to be strengthened in East Asia. Talks would promote bilateral relations The major bilateral relations in the and vice versa. In this way, the reciprocal Asia-Pacific are mostly prosperous, communication would stabilise regional although historical bitterness still security as a whole. remains in Japanese-Chinese and the Japanese-Korean relations, regardless of the increasing degree of economic The Six‐Party Talks can play a interactions and cultural contacts. key role as a permanent channel As mentioned throughout the paper, of communication, whilst the while maintaining the existing bilateral member states maintain their relations, multilateral relations should be existing bilateral relations with developed. The establishment of security neighbouring states. institutions with dense networking would lessen the tense rivalry among the key states.47 Thus, the article has Regarding the security concerns of suggested the possibility of the current South Korea, it is apparent that the Six-Party Talks playing a crucial role in United States, China, and Japan will creating a multilateral institution in East hold on to its policies of maintaining the Asia. It has been argued that this seems status quo of the North-South Korean quite sustainable because the parties that division. If the North Korean nuclear are concerned are the US, China, Japan, problem is not resolved smoothly, this Russia, plus the two . They are perspective will probably increase. In

124 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia this vein, to remain as a meaningful on the following competing elements: the player in East Asia is not an easy task role of the United States as a balancer, the for Korea. The Korean peninsula is a possibility of a hegemonic war between place of strategic importance, where China and the United States, the US- territorial and marine forces collide, and Japanese alliance, and the discovery of Western and non-Western civilisations resolutions to the division of the Korean border. Consequently, there should be peninsula as well as the Strait a continuous emphasis on the phrase issue. The course of history has a definite “without peace and prosperity on the meaning. Considering the change in the peninsula, East Asian regional security balance of power among the surrounding cannot be guaranteed”. states, South Korea should follow and Since the new millennium, East Asian understand the dynamic changes in the international relations have developed a region in order to secure its own national complex security structure that depends interests.

125 Chong Jin Oh

Endnotes

1 Arron Friedberg, “Ripe for Rivalry: Prospect for Peace in a Multipolar Asia”, International Security, Vol. 18, No. 3 (Winter 1993), p. 9. 2 Kent Calder, “U.S. Foreign Policy in Northeast Asia”, in Samuel S. Kim (ed.), The International Relations of Northeast Asia, Lanham,Rowman & Littlefield, 2004; David Kang, “Between Balancing and Bandwagoning: South Korea’s Response to China”, Journal of , Vol. 9, No. 1 (2009), pp. 1-28; Lowell Dittmer, “The Emerging Northeast Asian Regional Order”, in Samuel S. Kim (ed.), The International Relations of Northeast Asia. 3 Takashi Terada, “Forming an East Asian Community: A Site for Japan-China Power Struggles”, Japanese Studies, Vol. 26, No. 1 (May 2006). 4 Ihn-hwi Park, “Changing U.S. Alliance Strategy and the Limits of the Bilateral Alliance Structure in Northeast Asia”, Journal of East Asian Affairs, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Spring-Sumer 2007), p. 59. 5 Ibid. 6 Ihn-hwi Park, “Dongbuka Kukje-Kwankewa Hankukeui Kukga-Iik (Northeast Asian International Relations and Korea’s National Interest)”, Kukgajeonryak (National Strategy), Vol. 11, No. 3 (2005), p. 15. 7 Robert M. Gates, “A Balance Strategy”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 88, No. 1 (January/February 2009). 8 Sang-Hyun Lee and Baek Jong-Chun (eds.), Korea-U.S. Relations in Transition: Korea-U.S. Alliance in Retrospect and Prospects for a New Strategic Partnership, Seongnam- Korea, Sejong Institute, 2002. 9 Ibid. 10 Christopher Hemmer and Peter Katzenstein, “Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism and the Origins of Multilateralism”, International Organization, Vol. 56, No. 3 (June 2002), p. 579. 11 Peter Van Ness, “The North Korean Nuclear Crisis: Four-Plus-Two- An Idea Whose Time has Come”, Asian Perspective, Vol. 27, No. 4 ( 2003), p. 255. 12 Charles M. Perry and James Schoff, “Building Six-Party Capacity for a WMD-Free Korea”, The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, Vol. 16, No. 2 (2004), p.17. 13 Chinese Foreign Ministry Statement, “Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing Meets Heads of Delegations to the Six-Party Talks”, at http://muchina-embassy.org/eng/xwdt/t152453.htm [last visited 22 November 2012]. 14 APEC (Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation), ASEM (Asia-Europe Meeting). 15 Kevin Cai, “Is a Free Trade Zone Emerging in Northeast Asia in the Wake of the Asian Financial Crisis?”, Pacific Affairs, Vol.74, No.1 (Spring 2001), pp. 7-24. 16 Hemmer and Katzenstein, “Why Is There No NATO in Asia?”.

126 Security Conditions and Regional Competition in East Asia

17 Joshua Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive: How China’s Soft Power is Transforming the World, New Haven- CT, Yale University Press, 2007, p.33. 18 Jianwei Wang, “China’s Multilateral Diplomacy in the New Millennium”, in Yong Deng and Fei-Ling Wang (eds.), China Rising: Power and Motivation in Chinese Foreign Policy, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc., 2005, p. 169. 19 Bijan Zheng, “China’s Peaceful Rise to the Great Power Status”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 84, No. 5 (September/ October 2005). 20 Wang, “China’s Multilateral Diplomacy in the New Millennium”, p. 172. 21 Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, p. 39. 22 Zheng, “China’s Peaceful Rise to the Great Power Status”. 23 Randall L. Schweller, “Managing the Rise of Great Powers”, in Alastair I. Johnston and Robert S. Ross (eds.), Engaging China: The Management of an Emerging Power, New York, Routledge, 1999, p. 14. 24 Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, p. 98. 25 Confucius Institutes are non-profit public institutions aligned with the government of the People’s Republic of China that aim to promote the Chinese language and culture, support local Chinese teaching internationally, and facilitate cultural exchanges. Confucius Institutes are compared to the language and culture promotion organisations such as France’s Alliance Française and Germany’s Goethe-Institut. The first Confucius Institute was opened on 21 November 2004 in Seoul, South Korea. Hundreds more have since opened in dozens of other countries around the world, with the highest concentration in the United States, Japan, and South Korea. 26 David Shambaugh, “China Engages Asia: Reshaping the Regional Order”, International Security, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Winter 2004/2005), pp. 64-99. 27 Kurlantzick, Charm Offensive, p.109 28 Ibid. 29 Takashi Shiraishi, “The third wave: Southeast Asia and Middle Class Formation in the Making of A Region”, in Peter J. Katzenstein and Takashi Shiraishi (eds.), Beyond Japan: The dynamics of East Asian Regionalism, Ithaca- NY, Cornell University Press, 2006, p. 242. 30 Hidetaka Yoshimatsu, The Political Economy of Regionalism in East Asia, Basingstoke-UK, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. 31 Gilbert Rozman, “South Korea and Sino-Japanese Rivalry: A Middle Power’s Options Within the East Asian Core Triangle”, The Pacific Review, Vol. 20, No. 2 (June 2007), p. 209. 32 Takio Yamada, “Toward a Principled Integration of East Asia: Concept of an East Asian Community”, Gaiko Forum, Fall 2005. 33 Katzenstein and Shiraishi (eds.), Beyond Japan, p. 16. 34 Rozman, “South Korea and Sino-Japanese Rivalry”, p. 209.

127 Chong Jin Oh

35 Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, at http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/gaiko/free_pros/pdfs/ shiryo_01.pdf [last visited 15 January 2013]. 36 Ibid. 37 Rozman, “South Korea and Sino-Japanese Rivalry”, p. 209. 38 Terada, “Forming an East Asian Community”, p.16. 39 Seong- Ho Ahn, “Initiating Municipal International Cooperation Towards A Sustainable East Asia Community”, in Seong- Ho Ahn & Byeong-II Rho (eds.), East Asian Cooperation in the Global Era, Seoul- Korea, Daunsaem Press, 2006, p.25. 40 Hee Ok Lee, “A Critical Interpretation about Political Disputes of the Research Project of North Eastern China”, East Asian Studies, Vol. 53 (2007), p.19. 41 Ibid. 42 Rozman, “South Korea and Sino-Japanese Rivalry”, p. 210. 43 Sang-Hyun Lee, “National Security Strategy of the Lee Myung-Bak Government: The Vision of ‘Global Korea’ and Its Challenges”, The Korean Journal of Security Affairs, 2009, p.18. 44 Eduard Jordan, “The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers”, Politickon, Vol. 30, No. 2 (2003), p. 102. 45 Rozman, “South Korea and Sino-Japanese Rivalry”, p. 208. 46 Youngmin Kwon, Regional Community-Building in East Asia, Seoul, Yonsei University Press, 2002. 47 John S. Duffield, “Why is There No APTO? Why is There No OSCAP?: Asia-Pacific Security Institutions in Comparative Perspective”, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 22, No. 2 (2001), p.23.

128