Guiding light lit in Washington for Lee’s China policy
Choo Jae-woo
On Aug. 23, both President Lee Jae Myung and his special envoy to China departed Korea, albeit on separate paths. As Lee made his way to Washington via Tokyo, the envoy arrived in Beijing. The envoy’s meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi coincided with the 33rd anniversary of the normalization of relations between Korea and China. Lee’s decision could be seen as a strategic maneuver, assuming that was his intention. The timing may have been ill-advised, as it restrained Chinese President Xi Jinping from receiving him. Had the envoy’s visit occurred either prior to or following Lee’s trip to Washington, it could have saved Xi’s face and provided numerous incentives for engagement. Never had the envoy of Korea’s newly elected president not been greeted by the counterpart’s head of state.
The Chinese Communist Party issued a severe warning in the state-run Global Times on Aug. 25, saying that for Korea to sustain a positive relationship with China, it should avoid targeting any third parties and ensure that bilateral relations are not constrained by external influences. Strategic autonomy is essential for Korea to gain the genuine respect of the international community, including China. This approach would enable the nation to effectively navigate a complex and evolving global landscape while taking on a more active and constructive role. The statement further shifted the blame for the strained relationship onto the previous administration, citing its failure to heed China’s “sincere” warning. The editorial posited that the underlying issue stemmed from “some politicians (in Korea) blindly aligned with outside forces to promote bloc confrontation, even at the expense of China-South Korea relations for strategic opportunism.”
The statement unequivocally attributed responsibility to former President Yoon Suk Yeol for fully endorsing the U.S.-led policy aimed at countering China’s influence, particularly regarding Taiwan, as well as for his active efforts to enhance military collaboration between Korea, the U.S. and Japan. China perceives that Korea’s decisions were not made independently as a sovereign nation, but were instead influenced by coercive actions from the U.S. and its allies, which have negatively impacted China’s diplomatic relations. This statement has a history that extends as far back as 2016, when the THAAD anti-missile system was deployed in South Korea.
In the aftermath of the meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump, Lee’s aspiration to foster positive relations with China may be viewed as little more than wishful thinking, unless he genuinely intends to follow through. In his address at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, Lee stated that with the implementation of America’s China containment policy, it has become untenable for Korea to maintain a strategy that relies on U.S. security while depending on China for economic support. He reiterated his dedication to the core policies of the United States while setting aside room for enhancing relations with China, articulating his commitment to maintaining a stable posture in managing relations with China. These remarks came after he expanded on his contentious reputation as being “pro-China” in the plane to Washington. There he emphasized that in the realm of diplomacy, positions of pro-China or anti-China are irrelevant as long as they align with national interests. He justified that if it serves a purpose, ties will remain close; otherwise, distance will be maintained.
Lee may have received a significant tip from Trump during their discussion in the Oval Office. Trump reaffirmed his intent to visit Beijing that he posted to social media on July 28. It was conditional on receiving an invitation from Xi. Since then, it looks as if one is in place for him to confirm his availability at the end of the year or early next year. Trump also suggested a potential shift in his policy regarding China. One thing he was explicit about was allowing 600,000 Chinese students to study in America. In addition, he would restrain from pressuring China. The reason for this decision is that the consequences will be too expansive, devastating to not only China but both countries.
Lee’s visit to Washington highlighted three significant challenges facing Korea-China relations. In his address at CSIS, he underscored the importance of adhering to the fundamental policies of the U.S., cautioning against actions and decisions that deviate from these principles. China is opposed to Korea’s current pursuits. The economic consequences and risks that Korea may encounter if it proceeds with the construction of U.S. naval ships were highlighted in an editorial by Global Times on Aug. 18. The potential damage stems from the notion that shifting investment and production may lead to a reduction in domestic capacity growth, ultimately undermining its competitive advantage and misaligning with national interests.
The implications of strengthening the Korea-U.S. alliance are significant. During the CSIS address, Lee expressed his readiness to accommodate another increase in the expenses associated with maintaining United States Forces Korea. Trump’s mention of increasing weapons sales is likely to provoke China, although it may align with the newly introduced concept of “modernizing alliances” within the Korean policy discourse. The potential inclusion of intermediate-range missiles arises from Trump’s unilateral withdrawal from the INF treaty in 2019.
In light of Trump’s remarks about a future China visit, Lee faces the challenge of crafting more effective justifications for possibly retracting his previously assertive statements concerning Washington’s policy on China. To maintain the practicality he claims to embody in his foreign policy, it is essential for him to steer clear of controversy. Without further effort, the rapport that he built with Trump will soon dissipate.
Choo Jae-woo is a professor at Kyung Hee University. The views expressed here are the author's own and do not reflect the editorial direction of The Korea Times.