Abstract
As early as 1589, Bartolous of Sassoferrato, the Italian post-glossator, divided states into three types: small city states, medium states, and great states. It is interesting to note that he said, “middle-sized states are the most lasting, since they are exposed neither to violence by their weakness nor to envy by their greatness, and the wealth and power being moderate, passions are less violent, ambition[s] find less support … than in large state[s].” The idea of linking size to a state’s behavior is seen in today’s definition of a middle power. However, a middle-size concept is too relative to concisely define a country’s position in the hierarchical power structure. How to define a country as a middle-sized state is also difficult since the criteria for measuring middle size varies greatly. Moreover, a middle-sized state does not translate its middle position to purposeful behavior utilizing this position. If being a certain size is a necessary condition to be a middle power, the recognition of its diplomacy by the international society is a sufficient condition for it to be called a middle power in any substantive meaning. It is fair to say that the essential nature of middle powers’ power is social in this sense.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Carsten Holbraad, Middle Powers in International Politics (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1984), 12.
- 2.
Andrew F. Cooper, Richard A. Higgott, Kim Richard Nossal, Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1993), 21–22.
- 3.
Cooper, Higgott, and Nossal, Relocating, 25–26.
- 4.
Richard A. Higgott, “Issues, Institutions and Middle-Power Diplomacy: Action and Agendas in the Post-Cold War Era,” in Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers after the Cold War (ed.) Andrew F. Cooper (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997) 37–38.
- 5.
Alan K. Henrikson, “Middle Powers as Managers: International Mediation within, across, and outside Institutions,” in Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers after the Cold War (ed.) Andrew F. Cooper (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997), 43, 55–56.
- 6.
Miles Kahler, “Networked Politics: Agency, Power, and Governance,” in Networked Politics: Agency, Power, and Governance, (ed.) Miles Kahler (Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 2009), 12–14.
- 7.
David Chatterson, “Roundtable Discussions for Middle Power Diplomacy 1: Middle Power Diplomacy of Canada and Its Implications for South Korea’s Foreign Policy,” East Asia Institute, May 3, 2013, accessed August 12, 2015, http://www.eai.or.kr/data/bbs/eng_report/2013050818265590.pdf.
- 8.
While tied into its strong alliance relationship with the USA, South Korea has long favored multilateral cooperation since the end of the Cold War. For the past three decades, a focal regional boundary that each South Korean government has emphasized has varied from the larger Asia-Pacific to East Asia or the narrower Northeast Asia. Sook Jong Lee, “Korean Perspectives on East Asian Regionalism,” in East Asian Multilateralism: Prospects for Regional Stability, ed. Kent E. Calder and Francis Fukuyama (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008).
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
Holbraad argued under the dualistic system where two great powers dominate, middle powers are exposed to intense pressure to link their international conduct to the central rivalry. Middle powers are also subject to a high degree of managerial control when two great powers concert each other. Accordingly, two great powers’ modest competition is the best situation for middle powers to act more freely. Holbraad, Middle Powers.
- 12.
See Seng Tan, “Facilitating China-U.S. Relations in the Age of Rebalancing: ASEAN’s ‘Middle Power’ Diplomacy,” EAI MPDI Working Paper No. 1, October 18, 2013, accessed August 12, 2015, http://www.eai.or.kr/data/bbs/kor_report/2013101817491034.pdf.
- 13.
“U.S. urges Korea to speak out on China sea dispute,” The Korean Herald, June 4, 2015, accessed May 18, 2016, http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20150604001186.
- 14.
Gilbert Rozman, “South Korea and Sino-Japanese Rivalry: A Middle Power’s Options with the East Asia Core Triangle,” The Pacific Review 20(2)(2007): 200–201.
- 15.
Joshua B. Spero, “Great Power Security Dilemmas for Pivotal Power Bridging,” Contemporary Security Policy, 30(1) (2009): 158–160.
- 16.
ChosunIlbo, March 15, 2012.
References
Cooper, Andrew Fenton, ed. 1997. Niche Diplomacy: Middle Powers after the Cold War. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Cooper, Andrew, Richard Higgott, and Richard Nossal. 1993. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Higgott, Richard A., and Andrew Fenton Cooper. 1990. Middle Power Leadership and Coalition Building: Australia, the Caims Group, and the Uruguay Round of Trade Negotiations. International Organizations 44(4): 589–632.
Holbraad, Carsten. 1984. Middle Powers in International Politics. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Kahler, Miles. 2009. Networked Politics: Agency, Power, and Governance. In Networked Politics: Agency, Power, and Governance, ed. Miles Kahler. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Lee, Sook Jong. 2008. Korean Perspectives on East Asian Regionalism. In East Asian Multilateralism: Prospects for Regional Stability, eds. Kent E. Calder, and Francis Fukuyama. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Pratt, Cranford. 1990. Middle Power Internationalism: The NorthSouth Dimension. Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Rozman, Gilbert. 2007. South Korea and Sino-Japanese Rivalry: A Middle Power’s Options with the East Asia Core Triangle. The Pacific Review 20(2).
Spero, Joshua B. 2009. Great Power Security Dilemmas for Pivotal Power Bridging. Contemporary Security Policy 30(1): 147–171.
Stokke, Olav. 1989. Western Powers and Global Poverty: The Determinants of the Aid Polices of Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. Uppsala: Scandinavian Institute of African Studies in cooperation with the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs.
Young, Oran R. 1989. The Politics of International Regime Formation: Managing Natural Resources and the Environment. International Organizations 43(3): 349–375.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lee, S.J. (2016). South Korea Aiming to Be an Innovative Middle Power. In: Lee, S. (eds) Transforming Global Governance with Middle Power Diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59359-7_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59359-7_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-59659-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-59359-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)