Choosing US, China needs not be a zero-sum game for Seoul

BEIJING _ Meet Prof. Han Suk-hee at Yonsei University and Prof. Kim Heung-kyu of Sungshin Women's University.

Given the tumultuous relationship between South Korea and China last year, The Korea Times will run a series of articles examining the Seoul-Beijing ties. The following is the first installment. _ ED.

By Sunny Lee

BEIJING _ Meet professor Han Suk-hee of Yonsei University and professor Kim Heung-kyu of Sungshin Women's University.

Han and Kim have been among the busiest troubleshooters of the Seoul-Beijing relationship in 2010, frequently shuttling between the two capital cities to talk with Chinese academics, security experts, and government officials, about pending bilateral issues such as the sinking of the frigate Cheonan and North Korea’s shelling of Yeonpyeong Island, among others.

“It was a year that South Korea and China saw a large divergence of views,” summed up Han, who sits on a committee that advises President Lee Myung-bak on foreign policy.

Kim’s answer was no different. “It was a year in which mutual mistrust manifested itself,” said Kim, who until recently had had a stint with the Institute of Foreign Affairs and National Security, the foreign ministry’s top think tank. Now, at his new post at a private institution, Kim is extending his China expertise to public diplomacy.

Given the bitter diplomatic spat the two countries had over how to deal with North Korean belligerence and all the titillating media reports on the estranged relationship between the two neighboring countries, the duo’s assessment may come as no surprise.

Yet, the two experts’ description of bilateral ties is much more nuanced than the simple black and white picture some pundits tend to paint.

Although differences remain between Seoul and Beijing, Han said, “Meeting often and talking face to face certainly had its usefulness. Both countries have also come to recognize the importance of confidence-building measures.”

Kim believes China sometimes had good intentions, but ended up being a poor communicator. He took the example of Chinese envoy Dai Bingguo’s recent visit to Seoul in which he displayed a lack of diplomatic decorum during a meeting with President Lee Myung-bak. South Korean conservatives saw it as reflecting Beijing’s heavy-handed attitude.
Kim said there was an alternative way to look at the incident. He said the diplomat flop could be seen as a case in which China’s (good) intention to play the role of a mediator for the two Koreas didn’t deliver its intended effect.

China’s symptomatically non-committal posture on North Korea’s military provocations and its muscular diplomacy last year has stirred massive antipathy toward China not only in South Korea, but also in many other pockets of the world. It also led to strengthening of the security bloc in East Asia, among Seoul, Washington and Tokyo, to check China.

Susan Shirk, a prominent China expert at U.C. San Diego, sees that China’s foreign policy last year ended up doing the very opposite of what for years it had tried to avoid. Looking at China’s “counterproductive” foreign policy, Shirk suggested in the Los Angeles Times “a disjointed policy process” by China’s leadership.

Kim was bolder in his diagnosis. He said Beijing’s foreign policy was in “a state of confusion” as it has yet to find newly discovered global identity that has come with its rapid growth.

“China is not certain about how to proceed with global affairs commensurate to its size, and with a new vision, without a clear internal consensus or coordination. It adds future uncertainty,” said Kim.

Last year, South Korea’s conflict with China was mainly over North Korea. Han believes it’s high time for Beijing to initiate a fence-mending process to heal ties with Seoul.

Han said China can reduce South Korea’s concern, for example, by sharing the roadmap it has for North Korea’s future.

“I am most curious to know what blueprint China has for the future of North Korea and what effort it is making to achieve it. And if it is not working, what alternatives it has,” he said in a recent conference. “This will help South Korea to do better policy research on the China-North Korea relations.”

Han and Kim differ in their divination over the prospect of the future of Beijing-Pyongyang relations.

Kim thinks the relationship is impregnated with a lot of mistrust and their ties will degenerate. Han believes China-North Korea ties will likely remain intact, saying the fact that the two countries have mistrust doesn’t mean they cannot maintain their ties citing the South Korea-U.S. alliance as an example, which has experienced ups and downs over the years.

Han and Kim concur that engaging China is important, especially with regard to North Korea. “On the one hand, Seoul needs to extend dialogue to Pyongyang; while on the other, Beijing should refrain from its tendency to shield the latter whenever it conducts wrongdoing,” said Han.

South Korea has high expectations from its relationship with China, in terms of Beijing nudging North Korea to integrate into the international community. Even President Lee Myung-bak Wednesday said, “The best role model for North Korea’s change is China.”

Kim said what is most important is understanding the bottom-line principle that South Korea and China cannot turn their backs on each other, as Seoul keeps its alliance with Washington.

“For South Korea, forging relations both with Washington and Beijing doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game. South Korea should ally with Washington, while keeping friendly ties with Beijing,” said Kim.