[외교 원로 특별좌담] “It is not a matter of choice”

viewer

With the official inauguration of US President Joe Biden, not only the US, but also the inter-Korean, North Korean, South Korean-Chinese, and Korean-Japanese relations all faced an inflection point. As the U.S. is expected to reorganize the world order centering on solidarity and alliance among liberal democratic camps in response to the totalitarian camp, escaping from the “isolationism” stance of former President Donald Trump, there are continuing criticism that our diplomatic and security strategy should also be significantly modified. . Accordingly, Seoul Economic Daily organized a special meeting for the elders of foreign affairs and security through written and telephone calls, and former Foreign Minister Yoon Byeong-se and former UN Ambassador Kim Sook for each foreign and security issue (currently, co-director of the Establishment of Pan-National Organization for Resolving Fine Dust), Former Ambassador Shin Gak-soo to Japan, and Kwon Young-se, a member of the National Power of the People (former ambassador to China), heard comprehensive opinions. The following are their views on Korea-China relations.

viewer

△How should we establish relations with China amid rising US-China conflict?

▶Kwon Young-se: Ambassador Lee Soo-hyuk made a remark in June of last year that “Korea is no longer a country that is forced to choose, but we can choose.” This is a very misleading statement. When I was an ambassador to China in the past, I once told former President Park Geun-hye, “For the development of relations with China, we must strengthen our alliance with the United States.” If relations are strong with the US, the US will tolerate some negotiations with China.

In the past, when negotiating the THAAD (high-altitude missile defense system) issue, the “threat of North Korean nuclear weapons” was clearly communicated to China, and “if China does not let North Korea take action to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula, it will have no choice but to deploy THAAD.” If I had emphasized the position, it would have given me a justification. If so, China would not have retaliated against the economy that way.

There have been similar cases in Germany in the past. In the late 1970s, when the USSR deployed the’SS20′ missile during the presidency of US President Jimmy Carter, NATO and the United States discussed the deployment of the’Pershing ▶2′ missile. At this time, German Prime Minister Helmut Schmidt unfolded the logic that if the Soviet Union did not remove the missiles, it would have no choice but to deploy Pershing. I think that if we devise a negotiation strategy in this way, it will also be effective when dealing with China.

▶Kim Sook: The importance of China to economy and security has undoubtedly become and will become more important in the future. China will also play a major role in the process of unification between the two Koreas in the future.

But that’s just a principle story. China is strategically close to North Korea and lacks the fundamental values ​​it shares with South Korea. The undemocratic and opaque decision-making process, low levels of human rights, and per-party dictatorship are completely different from Korea. The hegemonic attitude toward neighboring countries is not a burden on us. Some say, ‘An Mi-kyung-joong (the United States for security, China for the economy), maintaining strategic ambiguity, etc., which is a general discourse. When it comes to specific issues such as the deployment of THAAD, sanctions against North Korea, the pursuit of complete denuclearization, and the missile defense (MD) system, the choice is ultimately inevitable. In the case of THAAD, they said they would only operate it in North Korea, but they imposed sanctions on Korean companies such as Lotte.

▶Shin Gak-su: It is not desirable to replace our response to the US-China conflict with a matter of choice. Conflict between the US and China differs in the degree of confrontation in each field and whether or not a’zero island game’ is a matter to be comprehensively determined.

It is reasonable to assume that we chose the United States in the 1953 ROK-US alliance and provided the basis for our peace and prosperity. Of course, China’s importance cannot be ignored from the perspective of markets, North Korea problem solving, and geopolitics. However, it is reasonable to treat the relationship with China as a category of strategic partnership based on the ROK-US alliance.

The ROK-US alliance fits not only from a security perspective, but also to the basic values ​​of our constitution. It is also important in maintaining a liberal international order. Given China’s overwhelming presence in East Asia, the ROK-US alliance and the free Indo-Pacific are also essential to creating a strategic space for us.

When ROK-US relations are strong, China’s high-pressure stance such as the THAAD crisis can be held in check. Relations with China can also be managed on a flatter basis. In defense of the possibility of a Chinese dream to recreate the vertical relationship of the Chinese order, we must maintain the ROK-US alliance well. The emphasis on the ROK-US alliance does not necessarily mean standing in confrontation with China. Consistent response from the perspective of principles, values, and national interests can minimize the costs of the US-China conflict in the mid to long term, even if there is a short-term loss.

▶Yun Byeong-se: Chinese President Xi Jinping emphasized the long-term struggle, and President Biden warned of the long-term war. South Korea faced a great burden of leaving the conservative and progressive government to make the long-term conflict between the US and China a constant and to devise a foreign and security policy.

What is important is that the peace, prosperity and democratic development of the Republic of Korea has been built on the basis of the ROK-US alliance. Also, we must never forget that the alliance will be the pivot until unification is achieved in the future. We must adhere to the grand principle of developing a partnership between Korea and China based on the foundation of the ROK-US alliance.

Balanced diplomacy or equidistant diplomacy is not in line with these principles. In the same vein, it is not appropriate to use the term “choice between the US and China”.

As the areas of the US-China conflict are expanding, it is necessary to distinguish between areas related to the core interests and values ​​of the alliance and those that are not. As far as possible, we must manage our interests wisely so that there is no conflict of interest. Otherwise, whenever an issue arises, there will be tremendous pressure from both sides.

viewer

△What are the diplomatic principles that the Korean government should have when the US and China ask Korea to make a choice?

▶Kim Sook: In principle, we must stand in the position of sovereignty, national interests, and values. ‘Three dollar policy (additional deployment of THAAD, participation in the US’s ballistic missile defense system, Korea-China-China promise not to engage in security cooperation between South Korea and the United States and Japan)’ cannot, and should not be done. Then only our position becomes weaker. We need to persuade us to say we have no intention of harming China’s core interests and admit that our core interests are also important. South Korea and the United States must understand the reality of an alliance to China and speak fairly and not to undermine it.

Participating in Quad Plus (the plan to add countries such as Korea, Vietnam and New Zealand to the US, Japan, Australia and India Multilateral Security Cooperation (Quad)) and D10 (10 major democratic countries) does not have to be noticed. We are also participating in the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). Former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is also dedicated as chairman of the Bohow Forum, which China values ​​so much. We need to expand our perception of both countries to “positive island game” rather than “zero-sum game.” China needs to listen more.

▶Shin Kak-soo: If the purpose of expanding the Democratic Alliance or Quad Plus is to contain China’s unjust acts, I don’t think it needs to be avoided. As a democratic country, spreading democracy is advantageous in terms of peace and prosperity. Participating actively and finding appropriate roles will enrich your diplomatic assets. It will also be a leverage for China. Korea has already been active with the United States in the late 1990s by creating a Democratic Community (CD). We must actively cooperate in the formation of the Biden government’s alliance of democratic states.

Even in the case of Quad Plus, it makes sense to participate with the aim of converting China’s unjust behavior, not to contain China or completely disharmony. It is also necessary to get the Biden government to use public policy based on pragmatic realism, along with other mid-tier countries. It is an activity that strengthens the alliance and alleviates the US-China conflict. Attention should also be paid to preventing backlash from China and the catastrophe of US-China relations.

The important thing in our diplomatic decision following the US-China conflict is preventing division of national opinion. Even at the expense of the decision, the people’s united will to secure national interests in the mid to long term is important. The government must endeavor to engage in nonpartisan communication.

viewer

▶Kwon Young-se: In the future, Korea will continue to be forced to choose between the United States and China. In particular, in light of President Biden’s past remarks, who value multilateralism, we, as an alliance with the United States, are expected to face pressure to participate in China’s checks, including the Quad.

We share values ​​and weapons with the United States and geography and economy with China. The volume of trade with China accounts for about 25% of our total trade volume. It is a relationship that cannot be separated.

We must have basic principles and establish Korea-China relations. We need to approach it not from the point of view that we choose between the United States and China, but from the point of view of strengthening our alliance with the United States and strengthening our relationship with China.

▶Yun Byeong-se: The important thing is that we must independently judge whether the issue falls under the core values ​​or interests of the ROK-US alliance. In 2015, Korea decided that joining AIIB could also help Korean companies enter the market. The international community, including the United Nations, was also in favor of the cause of the establishment. However, considering that the United States is sensitive, we patiently and transparently consulted with the US diplomatic and financial authorities. Korea eventually became a founding member of AIIB by jointly responding with countries with similar positions such as Australia. It’s a good example that both the US and China have admitted.

It will take some time for the “Summit for Democracy” that the US is expected to lead this year. This meeting is likely to be less (for Korea’s participation) as it is more likely to target the entire world of authoritarian human rights abusers rather than just targeting China. For Korea, which has led democracy and human rights after democratization, it would be dishonorable if we do not participate.

On the other hand, Quad has a strong focus on China in connection with the current US Indo-Pacific strategy. It is true that it is burdensome (because of participation) as the area of ​​cooperation has been expanded recently, including joint military training. But India, a non-aligned leader, is actively participating in the quad, but is clearly stating that this is not aimed at China. It even hopes to be an open council. Externally, Australia and Japan are also trying not to highlight the fact that the Quad is a Chinese blockade. We, too, need to actively utilize various means, including the ROK-US alliance as well as trilateral cooperation and quads. This is also in line with the direction of the development of a comprehensive ROK-US strategic alliance that gradually expands its contribution to peace and prosperity in the region beyond the Korean Peninsula.

/ Reporter Yoon Kyung-hwan and Kim In-yeop [email protected]

< 저작권자 ⓒ 서울경제, 무단 전재 및 재배포 금지 >