TITLE PAGE THE DETERMINATION OF INTERNATIONAL STATUS: THE CASE OF KOREA IN MODERN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS BY: BARRY KEITH GILLS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON 1 UMI Number: U074608 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U074608 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 </) U l V) # rsTiT^ d - OF ^ u _ 1 "5® * ^ I HOC, \ 't y f ic s 0 ^ ABSTRACT The thesis examines the adaptive responses of North and South Korea to change in the international system and analyzes the effects on their international standing. The framework of analysis is constructed from a selective review of the literature on hegemony and its relationship to international order and change. Special attention is given to the position of peripheral states, and how they are conditioned by and respond to the international order. The framework of analysis includes concepts such as the structure of opportunities, emulation of forms, imposition of forms, and regime rigidities. It is posited that to the degree to which a regime achieves congruence between domestic and foreign policies and the main trends in the international system, it will be more successful in enhancing its standing. In order to do so, a regime must manage its own adjustment to overcome regime rigidities and exploit opportunities for ascendance in the international system. The thesis examines the competition for international support between North and South Korea between 1948 and 1994. It analyzes the fluctuations in the level of international support for each regime, with reference to key changes in the international system. It produces an explanation for the pattern of international support for each regime, according to the policies they pursued during each distinct period of recent international history. It is shown that North Korea did comparatively well in the first two decades after the Korean War, and that South Korea did comparatively better in the subsequent two decades. This was due to the nature of changes in the international system and the divergent adaptive responses by the two Koreas. Regime rigidities increased in North Korea, while South Korea demonstrated pragmatic flexibility, accompanying its economic diplomacy. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page p. 1 Abstract p. 2 Table of Contents p. 3 Introduction p. 4 Chapter One: Hegemony, International Order, and the Adaptive Responses of States in the Periphery p. 9 Chapter Two: The Emergence of the Korean Question in the Modern International System p. 31 t Chapter Three: Post-War Reconstruction: Breaking Out of Dependence? p. 55 Chapter Four: DPRK Diplomacy 1960-75: The Success of Third World Solidarity p. 93 Chapter Five: South Korea's Outward Orientation 1960-75: Economic Development and the Retreat From Anti-Communism p. 128 Chapter Six: Diplomatic Reversal: The Triumph of Economic Diplomacy p. 164 Conclusions p. 201 References p. 210 Bibliography p. 242 3 INTRODUCTION This thesis explores the theme of how states acquire the quality of statehood and how they compete among themselves to acquire international support to that end. This study is undertaken by first considering this subject through the literature on international political economy and hegemony, in terms of the general problem, and then more substantially, I address the particular experiences of the two Koreas. The substantive analysis examines how their respective responses to change in the international system, in terms of both domestic and foreign policy, affect their international standing and, in turn, their international status. International status is defined as the quality of being a state. International standing is related to status or has bearing on status, and is largely a product of the degree of international support. To that end the thesis seeks to explain the changes in the level of international support for the rival regimes of divided Korea during the post Second World war era, and systematically analyze the effects of this changing level of support on the attempt to change their respective international status. There are two theories of the status of statehood and its acquisition. A) a state becomes a state because it establishes control over territory and people. B) A state becomes a state because it is recognised as such by other states. (1) In the case of Korea, both claimants had fulfilled the criteria of the first theory, i.e. control over territory and people. However, the international community failed to arrive at a sufficient consensus concerning recognition. Both Korean governments claimed to be the sole legitimate representative of the entire Korean nation, though neither controlled the entire territory of pre-liberation Korea, nor had jurisdiction over the entire Korean nation. International support for the rival Korean governments tended initially to mirror Cold War alliance patterns, and the same dichotomy prevented admission of either Korea into the United Nations. The structure of the thesis is determined by the central research goals, as above. Therefore, the thesis includes a substantial discussion of international political economy and hegemony, in order to first establish a clear analytical framework encompassing both international system change and the opportunities for manoeuvrability by peripheral states such as Korea. A brief account is given of the historical background, but sufficient to explain key elements of the Korean Question, e.g. colonisation, liberation, and the character of the Korean War. Subsequent chapters analyze the political economy of diplomacy, alternatively discussing 4 North and South Korean policies. This analysis is embellished with material on their domestic political economy. These chapters focus heavily on relations with diplomatic partners in the Third World. This is because the Cold War division on the Korean Question among major powers was quite rigid. Therefore, the primary sphere for increasing the level of international support was in the Third World, among the emerging nations. The political activity surrounding the UN and its annual debate on the Korean Question is another major topic, since it was central to the competition over status. The thesis concludes with observations on adaptability, international change, and international standing and status. The central hypothesis bearing on the differential outcomes of North and South Korean policies is that "regime rigidities" are a key determining factor, which over the long run decides the success or failure of domestic and foreign policies. By regime rigidities, I mean factors that prevent a state from taking advantage of opportunities in the structure of the international system - through successful adaptation, or that cause a failure to modernise and develop by adjusting appropriately to the changing domestic and external environment. The fluctuations in the level of international support for the rival regimes in Korea cannot be properly understood except by analysis of the larger context of international change. The level of international support for each regime is the primary measure of its international standing, and thus a measure of its status. The fluctuations in the level of international support for the rival regimes of Korea since 1948 are a product of the interplay of domestic and foreign policies on the one hand, with the main trends of change in the international system on the other. This thesis systematically explores this long term relationship between internal and external variables, and on this basis analyses the outcomes of the competition for international status. The fluctuating level of international support for the rival regimes is partly a function of the degree of correspondence or "fit" between domestic and foreign policies and the main trends of change in the international system. When the correspondence between domestic and foreign policies and the main trends of change in the international system is good, the level of international support can be expected to increase. When the correspondence is poor, the level of international support should be expected to decline. Thus, it is the capacity of each regime to adapt to the main current of change in the international system that should be the decisive factor in determining the outcome of the competition for international standing and status. The ability to adapt successfully is in turn dependent on the degree of regime rigidity and upon positive action to reduce such rigidities. 5 North Korea's domestic and foreign policies have been remarkably consistent since the mid-1950s. Its adaptability to change in the international system has, however, been relatively poor since the mid-1970s. To understand first the impressive gains of North Korea in the international system during the 1950s and the 1960s it is necessary to examine the correspondence between North Korea's domestic and foreign policies and key currents of international