Two days after South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol assumed office on Tuesday last week, the South Korean Ministry of Defense said that, effective immediately, it would no longer refer to a missile launch by North Korea’s military as a “firing of an unidentified projectile,” but would instead use the phrase “firing of a missile.”
This change shows that Seoul has stopped covering for Pyongyang and has decided to call each missile launch what it is: a provocative action. It also indicates that the Yoon administration intends to adopt a tougher stance toward North Korea.
Before Yoon became president, his foreign policy was widely acknowledged to be “pro-Washington, anti-Pyongyang and distant from Beijing.” The South Korean military’s change of policy toward North Korea’s missile firings shows that there is a renewed resolve in Seoul to push back against the North.
Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, “offensive realism” — a structural theory in international relations — appears to have become the mainstream opinion within South Korea’s foreign policy community.
Offensive realism posits that the international system is anarchical, and individual nation states, as rational actors, must therefore take actions to protect themselves and guarantee their security through the construction of independent security capabilities. A unique aspect of the theory is its explanation of the interplay between regional actors.
The theory says that, in seeking to guarantee their own security, each nation expands their military forces and attempts to become the regional hegemon, which will eventually lead to conflict and war — such as has occurred between Russia and Ukraine.
The South Korean electorate’s selection of Yoon as their new president could be interpreted as a sign that they have had enough of Pyongyang’s provocations and threats.
Previously, South Koreans tolerated North Korea and continually sent messages of goodwill to their neighbor.
They understand that this has fallen on deaf ears and that North Korea presents a serious security threat to their country.
Many South Koreans therefore feel that they have no choice but to strengthen their defenses and adopt a more confrontational posture.
South Korea apparently adopting the “offensive realism” model bodes ill for peace and security on the Korean Peninsula.
There is a distinct possibility that the tense relationship between North Korea and South Korea could boil over into military conflict.
This would be a disaster not only for China and Japan, but also for Taiwan.
Jason Lee has a doctorate in international politics from National Chung Hsing University.
Translated by Edward Jones
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
RSS