South Korea S New Southern Policy

This book examines the first regional strategy of South Korea toward Southeast Asia and India. At issue is how a middle power (a G20 country with the tenth largest economy in the world) seeks to play a larger and more comprehensive role in regions beyond the Korean peninsula. Hitherto, South Korean foreign policy has focused on nuclearizing North Korea, alliance maintenance with the United States, tricky relations with its most important economic partner China, and difficult ties with Japan marred by historical and territorial disputes. The Moon Administration has sought to diversify South Korean foreign policy by elevating ASEAN and India to the same strategic level as the United States, China, Russia, and Japan. To be sure, the latter countries continue to be most significant to the Korean peninsula. However, this book offers different country and regional perspectives on Seoul’s first regional grand strategy to play a role commensurate with its status as a middle power.

"This book examines the first regional strategy of South Korea towards Southeast Asia and India. At issue is how a middle power (a G20 country with the tenth largest economy in the world) seeks to play a larger and more comprehensive role in regions beyond the Korean peninsula. Hitherto, South Korean foreign policy has focused on nuclearizing North Korea, alliance maintenance with the United States, tricky relations with its most important economic partner China, and difficult ties with Japan marred by historical and territorial disputes. The Moon Administration has sought to diversify South Korean foreign policy by elevating ASEAN and India to the same strategic level as the United States, China, Russia and Japan. To be sure, the latter countries continue to be most significant to the Korean peninsula. However, this book offers different country and regional perspectives on Seoul's first regional grand strategy to play a role commensurate with its status as a middle power"--

The debate in South Korea over the government's engagement policy toward North Korea (the "sunshine" policy) did not start with Pyongyang's recent admission that it has been secretly pursuing a nuclear weapons program in violation of multiple international commitments. However, the evolution of the debate will be an important determinant of how the South Korean and broader international response to this latest North Korean challenge ultimately ends. This book provides a framework for viewing South Korean responses to this challenge, examining the South Korean debate over policies toward the North, analyzing the sources of controversy, and assessing their implications.

The debate in South Korea over the government's engagement policy toward North Korea (the so-called "sunshine" policy) did not start with Pyongyang's recent admission that it has been secretly pursuing a nuclear weapons program in violation of multiple international commitments. But the evolution of the debate will be an important determinant of how the South Korean and broader international response to this latest North Korean challenge ultimately ends. This report provides a framework for viewing South Korean responses to this challenge. It examines the South Korean debate over policies toward the North, analyzes the sources of controversy, and assesses the debate's implications for South Korea and the United States. The report finds that much of the public debate is a product of differences among South Koreans over the changes Kim Dae Jung made in South Korea's long existing policy after becoming president in 1998, rather than over the need for some kind of engagement with North Korea per se. while partisan politics are a component of the debate, at its core are some big questions: What should be the aim of any effort to achieve greater association with North Korea-"reconciliation" on the basis of Korea being "one people" or "unification" by extending South Korea's democratic, free-market system to the North? What role should reciprocity play in this effort? What should be the nature and scale of South Korean assistance to North Korea? How should political efforts to engage North Korea be balanced against South Korea's security and other important interests? How should the effectiveness of the government's policies be evaluated?

These essays support the argument that strong and effective presidential leadership is the most important prerequisite for South Korea to sustain and project its influence abroad. That leadership should be attentive to the need for public consensus and should operate within established legislative mechanisms that ensure public accountability. The underlying structures sustaining South Korea’s foreign policy formation are generally sound; the bigger challenge is to manage domestic politics in ways that promote public confidence about the direction and accountability of presidential leadership in foreign policy.

South Korea has experienced new challenges both internally and externally with respect to its foreign policies. Internally, democratization has changed political terrain for domestic and international politics. Democratization and the information revolution have reinvigorated civic life and citizens have become active in expressing very divergent and often polarized views on foreign policies. Democratization also promotes South Korean nationalism. Rising nationalist sentiments make it difficult for the U.S. to effectively handle regional security-related issues such as the North Korean nuclear program, balancing against China, and dealing with the potential Sino-Japanese conflict. Externally, globalization has brought significant changes to South Korea’s foreign policies. Economic dimension and issues rather than security-related issues become salient and important. For example, although security concerns are still dominant in Korean society, economic interests necessitate South Korea improve its relations with China and redefine its political position between the U.S. and China. Globalization has also promoted Korea’s national interests to reach out to other countries. The Korean government has tried to develop new economic partnerships with developing countries for the purpose of securing energy and natural resources and expanding its soft power. Economic globalization and democratization have brought about changes in South Korea that raise many interesting questions with respect to foreign policy. Has South Korea’s rise as an economic power and a democracy changed its relationship with neighboring powers? Does economic integration between South Korea and China reshape their relationship? How about its impact on U.S.-Korea relations? Are geopolitical and security-related concerns still the dominant factor in explaining South Korea’s foreign policies? Does economic integration between Korea and Japan help to reduce tensions or emotional animosities that derive from historical disputes? Has South Korea, as a growing economic power, sought to forge relations with other middle or small powers beyond the confines of its region? Overall, this book theoretically and empirically explores how democratization and economic globalization have changed domestic politics in South Korea and reshaped its foreign policies.

This book considers both Koreas - North Korea and South Korea - to examine possible pathways for the years leading up to 2032 and beyond, thus offering a composite picture of Korea and its strategic relevance in Asia and the world at large. Through a combined South-North Olympic team and an effort of jointly hosting the Games, Republic of Korea president Moon Jae-in has marked the year 2032 as special in the future of the Korean Peninsula. Although the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has expressed scepticism about a combined hosting of the Games, the expectation in Korea is that this event will underline the shared destiny of the people inhabiting the peninsula and realign two states still caught in an ideologically fraught civil conflict that is one of the last vestiges of the Cold War. Chapters begin with a brief historical review and analysis of the present, before moving to consider how these will shape the next decade, drawing comparative and complementary analyses. No matter how contrasting the contemporary trajectories of both North and South Korea might appear, ‘Korea’ as a singular entity is an old concept still containing great possibilities. As the ongoing inter-Korean reconciliation process underscores, the futures of North and South Korea can be found in a complementary singular Korea, which would again represent an important political, strategic, cultural, and social space in Asia. An evaluation of the future trajectory, social awareness and perception of the Koreas, this book offers a valuable contribution to the study of North and South Korea and Asian Politics.