Setting the right level of ambition for Korea- China relations

Ahn Ho-young

A trilateral summit between Korea, Japan and China was held in Seoul on May 26 and 27 after a hiatus of four and a half years. Given the many challenges still facing the relations among and between the three countries, the summit meeting made notable progress in improving them. Besides, the bilateral meeting between Korea and China, held on the sidelines of the summit, attracted extraordinarily high attention in Seoul.

After the deployment of THAAD missile defense batteries in Seongju County, North Gyeongsang Province, in 2017, relations between Korea and China entered a tough patch. Concern over these relations have grown only deeper since then.

Chinese Premier Li Qiang visited Seoul for the first time in nine years for a Chinese premier and had a meeting with President Yoon Suk Yeol, making agreements on widening economic exchanges and having further security dialogue between the two countries. Many Koreans seem to be relieved of their concerns about the tough patch and expect to see tangible progress in Korea’s relations with China. However, premature expectations can lead to deeper frustration and tension between the two countries. This is a time to set the right level of ambition for Korea-China relations.

First of all, the agreements made in Yoon-Li meeting were on the process, not on the substance. It will take much time and effort to make substantive progress through the process.

With respect to the free trade agreement (FTA) between Korea and China, it was agreed to begin negotiations in order to further open the service markets in culture, tourism and legal services. The Korean service sectors that suffered acute market access difficulties due to the “punish Korea order” imposed after the deployment of THAAD missiles were cultural services and tourism. Thus, the new round of negotiations on services raises expectations for improved market access for those sectors. What we must remember, though, is that China’s official position has been that there does not exist any “punish Korea order.” The FTA negotiations cannot undo the non-existing order.

Similar concerns are in order about the agreement on fuller utilization of the bilateral channels to address supply chain issues and launch a new dialogue to address export control. On supply chain issues, Korea and China seem to talk past each other. For Korea, supply chain issues are mainly about the stable supply of critical minerals and other materials. For China, supply chain issues are centered on semiconductor-related products, equipment and technology, which are closely affected by the overall U.S.-China relations and the U.S. export control regime. Soon after the Yoon-Li meeting, the supply of diesel exhaust fluid issue flared up once again due to China’s move to limit its exports.

Yoon and Li also agreed on May 26 to begin a 2+2 dialogue on foreign and security issues, where vice foreign ministers and director generals of national defense of each country would participate. Its first round of discussions was held in Seoul on June 18, immediately before Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to North Korea. South Korea is highly concerned about the deepening relations between North Korea and Russia, given its dire implications for North Korea’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities and the war in Ukraine. Putin’s visit to North Korea was thus a subject of paramount apprehension for Korea at the 2+2 meeting. For China, Putin’s visit, according to the spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, was nothing more than a routine visit between countries wishing for exchanges and cooperation.

In order to reset their relations, the leaders of the two countries have to start by acknowledging the significant gap in perceptions and policies between them and show a firm commitment to removing it. For now, there seems to be a huge asymmetry in the way the leaders of the two countries are addressing these issues.

Yoon issued the Indo-Pacific Strategy in December 2022 and declared that Korea’s foreign, security and economic policies will have to be based on further strengthening the rules-based international order. At the same time, he declared his firm commitment to further developing relations with China. His declaration was followed by Korea’s efforts to deepen dialogue with China at various levels of government.

China’s response so far has been lukewarm at best. In Korea’s view, China kept on ignoring diplomatic démarches from Korea while responding far more attentively to the approaches by other U.S. allies in the Indo-Pacific region. Furthermore, Korea has often been offended with instances of “wolf warrior” diplomacy.

Such asymmetry in how Korea and China address each other must be recognized and removed. On that basis, the two countries could move ahead, make progress through the channels of dialogue established in the Yoon-Li meeting on May 26 and meet the expectations raised through the meeting.

Ahn Ho-young is chair professor at Kyungnam University. He served as the South Korean ambassador to the United States.