By Kim Won-soo
The recent summit between the Republic of Korea (ROK) and the United States produced a communique, akin to the thrilling moment when BTS, one of the world's most idolized pop groups from Korea, grabbed multiple Grammy awards. Of course, this summit BTS moment was different from the real BTS saga but it sets the tone of continuity for forthcoming presidencies in Korea for the foreseeable future.
Here are the three reasons why I think it was a diplomatic BTS moment.
The first, B, stands for "bold." The communique represents a bold move by the current ROK presidency, which has entered the last year of its five-year single term due to a constitutional ban on re-election. Korean presidencies in their final year, without exception, have faced political lame duck status due to plummeting popularity. So the conventional wisdom is not to take any steps in the lame duck year that are politically sensitive and diplomatically controversial. The communique this time takes such steps on multiple diplomatic fronts.
The second, T, stands for "tough." The communique sends the tough call to all of the ROK's neighbors in Northeast Asia including, in particular, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), and China and Japan to a varying degree. The call has been issued for the neighbors to pay greater attention to the increased voice of the ROK, not only on Korean Peninsula issues but also on regional and global challenges. Immediate reactions from these neighbors has been largely muted. But over time, their reactions will be mixed with sticks and carrots geared to the ROK, the weaker partner of the alliance, to test its resilience.
The third, S, stands for "surprising." The communique makes the surprising U-turn by the ROK toward the alliance and away from independence. The alliance and independence have been the two traditional pillars of Korean diplomacy. The Moon presidency has reversed its liberal orientation toward the independence pillar sought for the last four years and made a-U turn toward the alliance pillar. Immediate reactions from the Korean audience were largely receptive. They will be stabilizing toward the center right in-between the two pillars.
Overall, this BTS communique sends out a clear message that the alliance has been updated to meet new challenges arising from changing security and geopolitical dynamics. Now the alliance has evolved from the Korean Peninsula to a wider regional and global focus, sharing vital interests and universal values. Of course, the communique is the outcome of give-and-take between the two allied partners.
The deal looks like the U.S. acceptance of the ROK positions on the DPRK in return for the ROK's acceptance of the U.S. positions relating to China. Above all, it is the reaffirmation of the structural constraints inherent in Korean diplomacy. Despite its phenomenal growth and development, the ROK still has no other choice but to rely on extended deterrence and other security commitments provided by the U.S.
But the communique marks only the beginning of the updated alliance. The communique is neither "agree to disagree" nor "agree to agree in full." It agrees to agree on the framework. But the details inside the framework remain to be filled. The devil is still out there in the details. The communique's Achilles heel lies in the mismatch of the foreign policy priorities of the ROK and the U.S.
The ROK's policy priority in the region is on: 1) the DPRK; 2) China; and 3) Japan. For the U.S. it is: 1) China; 2) Japan; and 3) the DPRK. This mismatch of priorities will expose cleavages within the alliance, if and when any of these countries takes steps to shake up the alliance. What matters most is that the U.S. continues to stand firm with the ROK under any possible contingency.
The DPRK is likely to be the first fault line. The U.S. accommodated the ROK positions on the inter-Korean Panmunjeom declaration and the U.S.-DPRK Singapore Statement. But it fell short of providing concrete incentives to induce the DPRK back to negotiations. Out of desperation, the DPRK may feel inclined to take provocative steps to stir the pot.
Further challenging in such a contingency, would be how to bring China on board in responding to the DPRK's provocation. For that, extra effort may be needed to attend to the unease of China about the communique's reference to Taiwan and issues relating to the East and South China seas that are a higher priority for Beijing. Now is the time for the ROK and the U.S. to follow up with detailed advance planning for contingency prevention and response. Such planning needs to be shared with Japan and explained to China.
In geopolitical terms, the neighborhood of the ROK is tough, arguably the toughest in the world. In a journey searching for durable stability, the updated and resilient alliance with the US provides the roadmap for diplomatic consistency and continuity. But the journey ahead will still be made along a bumpy road, as it has been over the last 70 years. The ROK will have to endure future tests that will come from multiple bumps along the way. With diplomatic adroitness and persistence, the ROK may grow into an anchor for stability in the region. It will matter all the more at a time of rising uncertainty in the tough neighborhood.
Kim Won-soo is the former under secretary-general of the United Nations and the high representative for disarmament. As a Korean diplomat, he served as secretary to the ROK president for foreign affairs. He is now the chairman of the international advisory board of the Future Consensus Institute (Yeosijae) and a member of the Group of Eminent Persons for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBTO).
 |
Here are the three reasons why I think it was a diplomatic BTS moment.
The first, B, stands for "bold." The communique represents a bold move by the current ROK presidency, which has entered the last year of its five-year single term due to a constitutional ban on re-election. Korean presidencies in their final year, without exception, have faced political lame duck status due to plummeting popularity. So the conventional wisdom is not to take any steps in the lame duck year that are politically sensitive and diplomatically controversial. The communique this time takes such steps on multiple diplomatic fronts.
The second, T, stands for "tough." The communique sends the tough call to all of the ROK's neighbors in Northeast Asia including, in particular, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), and China and Japan to a varying degree. The call has been issued for the neighbors to pay greater attention to the increased voice of the ROK, not only on Korean Peninsula issues but also on regional and global challenges. Immediate reactions from these neighbors has been largely muted. But over time, their reactions will be mixed with sticks and carrots geared to the ROK, the weaker partner of the alliance, to test its resilience.
The third, S, stands for "surprising." The communique makes the surprising U-turn by the ROK toward the alliance and away from independence. The alliance and independence have been the two traditional pillars of Korean diplomacy. The Moon presidency has reversed its liberal orientation toward the independence pillar sought for the last four years and made a-U turn toward the alliance pillar. Immediate reactions from the Korean audience were largely receptive. They will be stabilizing toward the center right in-between the two pillars.
Overall, this BTS communique sends out a clear message that the alliance has been updated to meet new challenges arising from changing security and geopolitical dynamics. Now the alliance has evolved from the Korean Peninsula to a wider regional and global focus, sharing vital interests and universal values. Of course, the communique is the outcome of give-and-take between the two allied partners.
The deal looks like the U.S. acceptance of the ROK positions on the DPRK in return for the ROK's acceptance of the U.S. positions relating to China. Above all, it is the reaffirmation of the structural constraints inherent in Korean diplomacy. Despite its phenomenal growth and development, the ROK still has no other choice but to rely on extended deterrence and other security commitments provided by the U.S.
But the communique marks only the beginning of the updated alliance. The communique is neither "agree to disagree" nor "agree to agree in full." It agrees to agree on the framework. But the details inside the framework remain to be filled. The devil is still out there in the details. The communique's Achilles heel lies in the mismatch of the foreign policy priorities of the ROK and the U.S.
The ROK's policy priority in the region is on: 1) the DPRK; 2) China; and 3) Japan. For the U.S. it is: 1) China; 2) Japan; and 3) the DPRK. This mismatch of priorities will expose cleavages within the alliance, if and when any of these countries takes steps to shake up the alliance. What matters most is that the U.S. continues to stand firm with the ROK under any possible contingency.
The DPRK is likely to be the first fault line. The U.S. accommodated the ROK positions on the inter-Korean Panmunjeom declaration and the U.S.-DPRK Singapore Statement. But it fell short of providing concrete incentives to induce the DPRK back to negotiations. Out of desperation, the DPRK may feel inclined to take provocative steps to stir the pot.
Further challenging in such a contingency, would be how to bring China on board in responding to the DPRK's provocation. For that, extra effort may be needed to attend to the unease of China about the communique's reference to Taiwan and issues relating to the East and South China seas that are a higher priority for Beijing. Now is the time for the ROK and the U.S. to follow up with detailed advance planning for contingency prevention and response. Such planning needs to be shared with Japan and explained to China.
In geopolitical terms, the neighborhood of the ROK is tough, arguably the toughest in the world. In a journey searching for durable stability, the updated and resilient alliance with the US provides the roadmap for diplomatic consistency and continuity. But the journey ahead will still be made along a bumpy road, as it has been over the last 70 years. The ROK will have to endure future tests that will come from multiple bumps along the way. With diplomatic adroitness and persistence, the ROK may grow into an anchor for stability in the region. It will matter all the more at a time of rising uncertainty in the tough neighborhood.
Kim Won-soo is the former under secretary-general of the United Nations and the high representative for disarmament. As a Korean diplomat, he served as secretary to the ROK president for foreign affairs. He is now the chairman of the international advisory board of the Future Consensus Institute (Yeosijae) and a member of the Group of Eminent Persons for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBTO).
![[INTERVIEW] Virtual K-pop group MAVE: is more than just pretty pixels](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/bcc387606cf7451c94f51a5978960c9f.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
