A South Korean perspective on the latest US-China Strategic Competition
Deepening the U.S.-China strategic competition and Interactions between the US-China
On May 20, 2020, the U.S. Trump’s White House eventually announced the “US Strategic Approach to China. This report was the zenith in a series of reports related to the US’s China policies after the 2017 National Security Strategy of the U.S. published. It was like an echo of announcing the beginning of the new cold war to the world. Confronting China becomes the organizing principle of U.S foreign policy, akin to the Cold War against the Soviet Union. It manifestly declared all the audience in the world that the nature of the U.S.-China relations is “competitive.”
China’s response to the report was well witnessed in the interview of Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi and the Hong Kong security bill passed in the 3rd plenum of the 19th Party Congress this May. China prepares for a long-term strategic competition with the U.S, sensing that it is inevitable. They are building their own value chains in economy, anticipating further decoupling, the bi-circular strategy. It is noteworthy that China has increased trade volumes with East Asian countries and Belt and Road-related countries amid the COVID-19.
However, Wang Yi’s tone of speech to the US was not necessarily provocative. He still suggests to build the new type of great power relations and declared that China has no intention to change, and replace the US. And he warned that some political forces in the US are pushing the US-China to a brink of a new Cold War. Chinese leaders are very cautious of acknowledging the terminology, “new Cold War.”
The pass of the Hong Kong security bill, however, is an obvious sign that China would no longer pay respects to the U.S. concerns. It is also a strong warning to the US, “don’t impede the core national interests of China such as Taiwan issue. Otherwise, China would react to the US at any cost.”
The address of Mike Pompeo at the Nixon center in September can be interpreted that Trump’s US is ready to enter the new Cold war era against China. Due to the victory of Biden in the US presidential election, a rapid spiral of hard clashes between the US and China is likely avoided. Biden’s China policy is to focus on establishing rule-based norms and institutions aligning with allies and partners instead of antagonizing China directly.
Challenges to the ROK
However, being optimistic is short of the reality we face. Domestic turbulence in the US and growing the world of Jungle in international politics partially due to Trump’s ‘America first’ policies may grab the legs of Biden administration to execute its declared foreign policy.
There are several challenges to the ROK due to ongoing U.S.-China strategic competition.
First, the fundamental frame of ROK’s economic and political success has been eroding. The world witness entering a period of turbulence in the middle of a dissolving liberal international order maintained by U.S. hegemony and leadership.
Second, prospects for North Korean denuclearization are quite pessimistic. No country has a policy priority of denuclearization under conditions of strategic competition. On the contrary, both the US and China are trying to secure cooperation from North Korea. North Korea has long experience of utilizing the schism of interests among great powers as witnessed during the Cold War era.
Third, the economic security of the ROK has been profoundly threatened. The negative impacts of the US-China strategic competition have already been obvious to the world economy in the form of recession. As a trading country with 70-80% of its GDP dependence on trade, the strategic competition may seriously damage the ROK’s economic base to support financially capability of the ROK-US alliance.
Fourth, the decoupling tendency of the US’s and Chinese economies and securitization of all economic and business activities force the ROK to choose a side. Once we believed that geoeconomics replaced geopolitics. Today, the world returns to a geopolitics much like that of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Almost all countries but the two giant countries become marginalized in world politics.
Fifth, the traditional security cooperation mechanism between and among ROK, the US, and Japan is in jeopardy. The role of the US has been pivotal to the cooperative mechanism. Japan has been a cornerstone and ROK a lynchpin. Recent disputes on history and economy between the ROK and Japan are an obvious sign of such a mechanism eroding.
Sixth, military encounters and tensions between the ROK and China-Russia have increased incessantly and the possibility of clashes have also increased in the sea and air space around the Korean peninsula.
Due to the US-China strategic competition, ROK faced four Dilemmas. And Both ROK and the US suffer trust-deficit.
First, Choosing-sides dilemma. Under the current situation, it is not affordable for the ROK to take sides. In any choice, devastating consequences are anticipated. For South Korean perspective, no country provides any alternative and can’t replace the other.
Second, Confidence dilemma. Even if South Korea took the side of the US and increased by five times its financial contribution to the US military presence on the Korean peninsula, there is no confidence at all that the US military would help in a contingency under the Trump administration. Given the domestic situations in the US, it is premature to be optimistic to the US positive commitment on the Korean peninsula in the Biden administration.
Third, Peace-building dilemma. Establishing peace with North Korea without denuclearization doesn’t guarantee South Korea’s security. In this case, South Korea is likely more vulnerable than before.
Forth, Decoupling dilemma. If the US were successful at decoupling South Korea from China, it would eventually damage the US-ROK alliance. South Korea would be no longer able to finance this alliance unless the US replaces the role of China in economy.
These dilemmas become a vicious cycle
Even if ROK’s financial contribution to the US dramatically increases as Trump requested, US motivation for denuclearization can’t be elevated. If the US addict to just short-term benefits, it can bring a Pyrrhic victory back for the US. The US army becomes mercenary.
If the ROK would deepen its security dependence on the US, defense capability of the ROK itself be accordingly weaken. The more the ROK depends its security upon the US, the more the relationship with China becomes in trouble. It will seriously damage the ROK’s economy.
Then, the feeble and shaken economy of the ROK will damage the US-ROK alliance because the ROK is not affordable of the financial demand from the US to maintain the alliance. It has detrimental effects to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula as well. It is quite possible that the ROK falls into the only victim of this vicious cycle.
Due to the strategic competition, the traditional foreign policy orientation of the ROK, relying upon the US for security and China for economy (the so-called 安美經中), is no longer tenable. Like other countries in the region, the ROK is at a crossroads in reshaping its foreign and security policies in the midst of a weakening confidence on the alliance.
Four solutions for resolving the dilemmas
There are four potential solutions to the dilemmas of South Korea.
First, China replaces the role of the US in security, providing South Korea with security guarantees. In the future, China may increase its security role along with its growing
influence in the region. China may suggest establishing a new type of regional security mechanism or architecture in Northeast Asia more actively. However, it can’t be accomplished in the near term.
Second, the US replaces the role of China in economy. It is questionable, however, whether the US would be willing to take such a role, providing the ROK with the ways and opportunities for economic development.
Third, ROK is to seek a third way, refusing to take sides, which requires creativity and a well-coordinated strategy of not choosing between China and the US or waiting until the winner becomes obvious. Most countries seem to be seeking such a strategy. According to Fareed Zakaria, only three out of 61 countries have responded affirmatively to the US call to refrain from business with the Chinese Huawei Co,.
Finally, not necessarily to be the best, South Korea goes nuclear. It would definitely damage the current NPT regime and the relationship with the US. If the US allowed South Korea to arm with nuclear weapons, South Korea would likely be willing to pay for the five-times increased defense burden without hesitation. However, no consensus between the ROK and the US seems to be available so far.
Scenarios for the Regional Order in East Asia
As a result of the strategic competition, we face a G-zero world where no great power provides common-goods to the world. Populism, patriotism, strongman leadership, weaponization of relative power superiority of interdependence, and securitization of all the issues are steeply on the rise.
So far, no regional security mechanism/architecture has been established. Many experts start being afraid of the vacuum of the US alliance system in this region. The six party mechanism would not work out in the period of the US-China strategic competition.
Even if the US and China are able to resolve the current trade disputes sooner or later, they would not likely return to the relationship of the past. The scars, distrust, senses of competition and rivalry, and animosity are legacies of the strategic competition in the Trump administration.
Every country in this region faces a situation of being alone without reliable support. Without any security mechanism, without the US for the time being, each country must struggle by itself to keep peace and stability in this region.
ROK’s Choice
As the U.S.-China conflict heats up, South Korea needs to establish the directives of its national strategy, preparing for the aggravation of the U.S.-China relations. First, South Korea must reexamine its relations with the US and China in the short-long term perspectives. My suggestion is to transform the US-ROK alliance to a different level of comprehensive strategic alliance as well as to increase collaboration with China(結美聯中) and reduce our excessive dependence on security and economy from the US and China respectively. Second, it will definitely take up more responsibility for South Korea and Japan in the security in the region. Third, South Korea needs active participation in the establishment of global governance with increasing role of middle power states. Fourth, South Korea needs to secure a role of initiator and organizer among middle powers by using South Korea’s improved status such as in the K-health, K-pop, and K-IT. Finally, South Korea needs to create new prospects and dynamics for multilateral cooperation in Northeast Asia and western Pacific-ocean. More friendly and cooperative strategic relations between South Korea and Japan are the ‘must’ requirement in the era of the strategic competition between the US and China.