Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Strategic Choice of ROK Facing the Sino-US Competition

  • Original Article
  • Published:
East Asian Community Review

Abstract

President Donald Trump’s vision for US foreign policy can be summed up in two words: “America First” and isolationism. In the name of national interests, Trump’s America has not only treated its allies with a tint of harshness or contempt, but also defined China as a “revisionist” or “competitor.” Most of all, the Trump administration has intensified frictions and conflicts with China in all domains. Sino-US competition is the biggest external factor influencing the present and future situation of the Korean peninsula. As an ally of the USA and a strategic partner of China, the Republic of Korea (ROK) has clearly felt the pressure from the increasingly fierce competition between China and USA. On the one hand, it is difficult for ROK to disengage from military dependence on the USA. On the other hand, it is also inconceivable for ROK to terminate its political and economic cooperation with China. A series of policy measures implemented by the Moon Jae-in administration deserves some credit for strengthening the confidence that ROK can exert its diplomatic autonomy and flexibility and control its destiny. This article argues that, in an era of China–USA competition, ROK needs to find a way to avoid strategic dilemmas and make its diplomatic decisions more effective, only by judging accurately the changes of the geopolitical and geoeconomic climate in East Asia and anticipating reasonably the trajectory of China–USA competition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Trump did three things after he was elected President of the USA. First, he redefined national interests. He pointed out that national interests should include the security, prosperity and free democracy of the USA, but international governance, security and interests of other countries are not the concerns of the USA. Second, the USA should focus all its attention on its own country to ensure its security and prosperity. Third, the USA should reduce its overseas obligations, intervene only in matters related to its security and prosperity and determine its policies in accordance with its national interests. After being elected President of the USA, Trump withdrew from the TPP and Paris Climate Change Agreements, reduced financial assistance to the United Nations and other international organizations, and re-talked with the countries concerned about the FTA that had been signed. Teng (2018) Strategic Focus Shift of Trump Administration. Contemporary World 3:35.

  2. In 2017, despite the impact of the THAAD anti-missile system issue, the total trade volume between China and ROK reached 280.36 billion US dollars, up 10.3% year-on-year, much higher than the total trade volume between ROK and the USA ($119.35 billion) and between ROK and Japan ($81.96 billion). “Country Trade Report—ROK,” China’s Ministry of Commerce (2018). https://countryreport.mofcom.gov.cn/record/qikan110209.asp?id=9857.

  3. President Moon Jae-in first put forward the “Nine Bridges Strategic Plan” when he attended the Oriental Economic Forum on September 7, 2018. The plan aims to strengthen cooperation between ROK and Russia in nine areas (gasoline, railways, harbors, electricity, Arctic waterways, shipbuilding, employment, agriculture and aquatic products) in order to achieve mutual benefit and win–win situation. “ROK and Russia should explore new areas of cooperation on the basis of the Nine Bridges,” keynote speech of LeeHae-chan’s fourth Oriental Economic Forum, September 12, 2018. http://news1.kr/articles/3424693.

  4. There are three conditions for ROK to regain its wartime operational control: first, a stable security environment on the Korean Peninsula; secondly, after the handover of wartime operational control from the USA, the ROK Army has the core military capability to dominate the joint defense forces between the two countries, while the USA can provide sustainable complementary forces; and thirdly, the ROK Army has the ability to respond to the DPRK nuclear and missile threat in the early stage of local provocation and comprehensive war, while the USA provides extended deterrence means and combat capability equipment.

  5. In September 2018, President Moon Jae-in visited Pyongyang. While the DPRK and the ROK issued the Pyongyang Joint Declaration, defense ministers signed the Agreement on the Implementation of the Historic Panmunjeom Declaration in the Military Domain.

    [Korea] Daily News, 2018.9.19. http://www.m-i.kr/news/articleView.html?Idxno=454649.

References

  • Bi, Yingda. 2018. The U.S.—ROK Alliance in Adjustment: History of Development, Strengthening Motivation, and Challenges. American Studies 1: 83–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brzezinski, Zbigniew. 2007. Grand Chess: America’s Primacy and Geo-Strategy (trans), 44–45. China Institute of International Studies. Shanghai Century Publishing Group, Shanghai.

  • Brzezinski, Zbigniev, Hong Man, et al. 2012. Strategic Vision—US and Global Power Crisis (trans). Beijing: Xinhua Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • China’s Ministry of Commerce. 2018. Country Trade Report—ROK. https://countryreport.mofcom.gov.cn/record/qikan110209.asp?id=9857.

  • Chong, Wa Dae. 2018. President Moon Jae-in, Wartime Operational Control and the Redeployment of US Troops in Korea will be Resolved as Soon as Possible Through Close Consultation. Asian Economy, November 1. http://view.asiae.co.kr/news/view.htm?Idxno=20101108114944984.

  • Dai, Weilai. 2017. The Rise of Middle Countries and New Changes in International Relations. Central Compilation and Publishing House.

  • Fan, Jishe. 2018. Sino-US Relations: Will Competition Slide into Confrontation. Strategic Decision-making Research 2: 16–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao, Lan. 2018. Korean IT Enterprises Bore the Brunt of the Sino-U.S. Trade War. Central Daily. October.13. https://chinese.joins.com/gb/article.aspx?art_id=184084&category=001002.

  • Huong, Le Thu. 2018. Three Traps in Building the Indo-Pacific Narrative thus Far, PacNet #43 CSIS. https://www.pacforum.org/sites/default/s3fs-public/publication/180622_PacNet_43.pdf.

  • Jeong, Deok-Gyu. 2011. Korean Diplomatic Security in Distress between the United States and China through United States and China solution. Seoul: Daily Economic News Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koo, Bon-Hak. 2015. Coordination of U.S.—ROK Alliance and ROK—China Strategic Partnership. New Asia 22: 135–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ling, Shengli. 2018. Double Dilemmas and Dynamic Balance: Sino-U.S. Leadership Competition in the Asia-Pacific Region and the Strategic Choice of America’s Asia-Pacific Allies. World Economics and Politic 3: 71–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Shengxiang, and Jiang Jiamin. 2018. On the Role of South Korea in the Perspective of Sino-U.S. Relations. Journal of the Pacific Ocean 3: 28–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobell, Steven. 2003. The Challenge of Hegemony: Grand Strategy, Trade and Domestic Politics. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mazarr, Michael J. 2018. We Need a New International Order. Here’s Why, RAND, June 25. https://www.rand.org/blog/2018/06/we-need-a-new-international-order-heres-why.html.

  • Nikkei Business and Commerce. 2018. China’s Technological Innovation can No Longer be Stopped. https://business.nikkei.com/atcl/NBD/15/world/071800610/.

  • Park, Peonghyeon. 2018. Prospect of East Asian Power Structure in the Age of Power Competition and Korea’s Response. National Strategy 2: 68–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, Robert D. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization 42: 427–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, Glenn H. 1984. The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics. World Politics 36: 461–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, Scott A. 2018. South Korea at the Crossroads—Autonomy and Alliance in an Era of Rival Powers. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Teng, Jianqun. 2018. Strategic Focus Shift of Trump Administration. Contemporary World 3: 35–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Xinbo. 2017. On the Major Transformation of the Asia-Pacific Regional Structure. World Economics and Politics 6: 32–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Wenmu. 2017. The Three Changes in the Postwar World Political Structure and the Emergence of the “Critical Point” of Historical Changes—Analysis Based on the World Geopolitical Structure (Part I). World Socialism Research 1: 70–81.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a major grant of the Ministry of Education (2017JJDGJW005), titled “Trends and Changes in Korean Peninsula and Our Response”.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Northeast Asian Studies College of Jilin University, No. 2699 Qianjin Street, Changchun, China

    Huizhi Zhang

Authors
  1. Huizhi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huizhi Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, H. The Strategic Choice of ROK Facing the Sino-US Competition. East Asian Community Rev 1, 127–145 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s42215-019-00011-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s42215-019-00011-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation