By Hwang Jae-ho
South Korea is quite a fluid society that faces a variety of news every morning. Among the stories, domestic politics' intense ideological struggle creates dynamic situations.
The ideology debates not only are limited to the redistribution of wealth and welfare, but also stretch to foreign policies; because the diplomatic policies are very directly involved in national survival in the mid- and long-term perspective, not simply related to the party's victory, which is only a short-term interest.
Since diplomatic decisions aim for the ultimate goal, national survival, rather than calculating good and evil, each political force seeks different paths for this destination. As Donald Trump's era has come, the domestic powers' struggles are heating up more and more.
The National Assembly of the Republic of Korea has 299 seats. The Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) with 129 seats does not exercise a majority. The Liberty Korea Party (LKP) with 112 seats, the Bareunmirae Party with 30 seats, the Party for Democracy and Peace with 14 seats and the Justice Party with five seats are the five other major parties.
Progressive powers of the DPK, the Party for Democracy and Peace and the Justice Party occupy 148 seats compared with the conservative powers of the LKP and the Bareunmirae Party occupying 142 seats. The Justice Party and Party for Democracy and Peace are the most positive toward China, and the ruling DPK shows gradual enhancement, while the LKP and Bareunmirae Party still have doubts on China and give priority to the alliance with the United States.
The conservatives fundamentally attach absolute importance to the alliance with the United States. During the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye, the appearance of the Stars and Stripes alongside the Korean flag presents the sense of kinship of the alliance.
The current government seized power by attracting the disappointed moderate and moderate-conservatives from the impeachment of President Park. Early on, the government recorded high support ratings of 80 percent, originating from the resulting disappointment and the reflective benefits of the ruling conservative party due to the impeachment, President Moon Jae-In's modest personal character, and the productive North Korea policies.
However, support has dropped to near 50 percent, mostly because of current economic problems. Not only is the reason for this drop economic policies, but also welfare distribution issues and North Korea policies. The progressive government is generally favorable to improving relations with North Korea, aims to move beyond the excessive dependency on the United States and is keen to strengthen its relations with China.
President Moon Jae-In emphasized the need to make India and ASEAN countries the fifth diplomatic axis following the U.S., China, Japan and Russia, but the basic frame is how to balance the U.S. and China.
Korea's policies toward China have been promoted ever since first diplomatic relations in 1992. Since then, there have been four conservative regimes ― Roh Tae-woo, Kim Young-sam, Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye ― and three progressive regimes ― Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun and Moon Jae-in.
Roh Tae-woo first established diplomatic relations with China, and his northward policy was the ultimate accomplishment of South Korea's North Korea policy. South Korea's diplomatic relations with China let South Korea take the overwhelming strategic advantage over North Korea.
On the other hand, Lee Myung-bak made the alliance with the U.S. the priority while pursuing only economic benefits with China. However, Park Guen-hye, though she is from a conservative regime, recorded the best relations with China by attending the China Victory Day Parade and signing the ROK-China free trade agreement. At the same time, the government also recorded the worst relations over the THAAD deployment and the disappointment when China did not support South Korea on the North Korean nuclear issue.
Thinking about South Korea-China relations in the progressive regimes, it was overall comfortable. In Kim Dae-jung's period, China highly appreciated South Korea's strategic decision on North Korea under the U.S. toward diplomacy. In addition, his Sunshine Policy enhanced communication and interactions with China. Roh Moo-hyun had to go through the historical dispute regarding Goguryeo, but his government constantly aimed for a close partnership with China. President Moon and China mostly agree with each other's thoughts and benefits in terms of North Korea policy; although the two are still struggling and making slow process due to the former Park government's THAAD deployment side effect.
THAAD was one of the most significant issues in the 2016 presidential election. Since the conservatives' media manipulation, that THAAD is an absolute necessity for South Korean security though it is a part of the U.S. security strategy, was effective on the public, the progressive parties could not fully oppose the deployment for fear of losing votes. Therefore, even though Moon's government considered the relationship recovery with China very important, it had to follow public opinion. The major views in Korea eventually sit between either the U.S. or China. The choice that one side welcomes usually brings a negative impact on the opposite side.
So far, readers might be able to see two facts in this article. Firstly, South Korea-China relations do not wholly depend on either South Korea's conservative or progressive regimes. For example, the ROK-U.S. alliance was strengthened during the President Roh Moo-Hyun period through sending Korean troops to Iraq. Also, President Park, from the conservatives, accomplished the ROK-China FTA and attended Beijing's Victory Day Parade in 2015. Secondly, the enhancement of the U.S. alliance and relations with China at the same time is the immutable dilemma for all South Korean governments throughout the era.
From now on, domestic politics will more competitively discuss South Korea's foreign policies and future; there will be three criteria in the further talks.
The first is disappointment about the U.S. for damaging the value of the alliance. For now, the U.S. is forcefully acting with the whole of international society, with the view that South Korea's domestic resistance of the U.S. will not be serious. However, if this level of disappointment rises to a certain level, anti-U.S. emotions might flow out onto the streets.
The second is the progress of inter-Korean relations. Not unification yet, but if the peace regime is possible in a long-term perspective, the importance of U.S.'s existence in our own security might be reexamined.
Third, China might arise as the alternative to the above concerns. The domestic parties' identities and stances must be changing according to chronological changes. The U.S.'s national interest-chasing attitude rather than its value at the inter-Korean Summit and DPRK-U.S. Summit was quite a shock to the domestic conservatives; because how the U.S. acts and thinks is the top priority worth to them. In other words, they might pay attention to China's leadership both in qualitative and quantitative terms. In this sense, the progressive powers would cultivate friendly relations with China, and especially will more carefully evaluate this if China's leadership is qualified or not.
Hwang Jae-ho is the director of the Global Security Cooperation Center, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul.
 |
The ideology debates not only are limited to the redistribution of wealth and welfare, but also stretch to foreign policies; because the diplomatic policies are very directly involved in national survival in the mid- and long-term perspective, not simply related to the party's victory, which is only a short-term interest.
Since diplomatic decisions aim for the ultimate goal, national survival, rather than calculating good and evil, each political force seeks different paths for this destination. As Donald Trump's era has come, the domestic powers' struggles are heating up more and more.
The National Assembly of the Republic of Korea has 299 seats. The Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) with 129 seats does not exercise a majority. The Liberty Korea Party (LKP) with 112 seats, the Bareunmirae Party with 30 seats, the Party for Democracy and Peace with 14 seats and the Justice Party with five seats are the five other major parties.
Progressive powers of the DPK, the Party for Democracy and Peace and the Justice Party occupy 148 seats compared with the conservative powers of the LKP and the Bareunmirae Party occupying 142 seats. The Justice Party and Party for Democracy and Peace are the most positive toward China, and the ruling DPK shows gradual enhancement, while the LKP and Bareunmirae Party still have doubts on China and give priority to the alliance with the United States.
The conservatives fundamentally attach absolute importance to the alliance with the United States. During the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye, the appearance of the Stars and Stripes alongside the Korean flag presents the sense of kinship of the alliance.
The current government seized power by attracting the disappointed moderate and moderate-conservatives from the impeachment of President Park. Early on, the government recorded high support ratings of 80 percent, originating from the resulting disappointment and the reflective benefits of the ruling conservative party due to the impeachment, President Moon Jae-In's modest personal character, and the productive North Korea policies.
However, support has dropped to near 50 percent, mostly because of current economic problems. Not only is the reason for this drop economic policies, but also welfare distribution issues and North Korea policies. The progressive government is generally favorable to improving relations with North Korea, aims to move beyond the excessive dependency on the United States and is keen to strengthen its relations with China.
President Moon Jae-In emphasized the need to make India and ASEAN countries the fifth diplomatic axis following the U.S., China, Japan and Russia, but the basic frame is how to balance the U.S. and China.
Korea's policies toward China have been promoted ever since first diplomatic relations in 1992. Since then, there have been four conservative regimes ― Roh Tae-woo, Kim Young-sam, Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye ― and three progressive regimes ― Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun and Moon Jae-in.
Roh Tae-woo first established diplomatic relations with China, and his northward policy was the ultimate accomplishment of South Korea's North Korea policy. South Korea's diplomatic relations with China let South Korea take the overwhelming strategic advantage over North Korea.
On the other hand, Lee Myung-bak made the alliance with the U.S. the priority while pursuing only economic benefits with China. However, Park Guen-hye, though she is from a conservative regime, recorded the best relations with China by attending the China Victory Day Parade and signing the ROK-China free trade agreement. At the same time, the government also recorded the worst relations over the THAAD deployment and the disappointment when China did not support South Korea on the North Korean nuclear issue.
Thinking about South Korea-China relations in the progressive regimes, it was overall comfortable. In Kim Dae-jung's period, China highly appreciated South Korea's strategic decision on North Korea under the U.S. toward diplomacy. In addition, his Sunshine Policy enhanced communication and interactions with China. Roh Moo-hyun had to go through the historical dispute regarding Goguryeo, but his government constantly aimed for a close partnership with China. President Moon and China mostly agree with each other's thoughts and benefits in terms of North Korea policy; although the two are still struggling and making slow process due to the former Park government's THAAD deployment side effect.
THAAD was one of the most significant issues in the 2016 presidential election. Since the conservatives' media manipulation, that THAAD is an absolute necessity for South Korean security though it is a part of the U.S. security strategy, was effective on the public, the progressive parties could not fully oppose the deployment for fear of losing votes. Therefore, even though Moon's government considered the relationship recovery with China very important, it had to follow public opinion. The major views in Korea eventually sit between either the U.S. or China. The choice that one side welcomes usually brings a negative impact on the opposite side.
So far, readers might be able to see two facts in this article. Firstly, South Korea-China relations do not wholly depend on either South Korea's conservative or progressive regimes. For example, the ROK-U.S. alliance was strengthened during the President Roh Moo-Hyun period through sending Korean troops to Iraq. Also, President Park, from the conservatives, accomplished the ROK-China FTA and attended Beijing's Victory Day Parade in 2015. Secondly, the enhancement of the U.S. alliance and relations with China at the same time is the immutable dilemma for all South Korean governments throughout the era.
From now on, domestic politics will more competitively discuss South Korea's foreign policies and future; there will be three criteria in the further talks.
The first is disappointment about the U.S. for damaging the value of the alliance. For now, the U.S. is forcefully acting with the whole of international society, with the view that South Korea's domestic resistance of the U.S. will not be serious. However, if this level of disappointment rises to a certain level, anti-U.S. emotions might flow out onto the streets.
The second is the progress of inter-Korean relations. Not unification yet, but if the peace regime is possible in a long-term perspective, the importance of U.S.'s existence in our own security might be reexamined.
Third, China might arise as the alternative to the above concerns. The domestic parties' identities and stances must be changing according to chronological changes. The U.S.'s national interest-chasing attitude rather than its value at the inter-Korean Summit and DPRK-U.S. Summit was quite a shock to the domestic conservatives; because how the U.S. acts and thinks is the top priority worth to them. In other words, they might pay attention to China's leadership both in qualitative and quantitative terms. In this sense, the progressive powers would cultivate friendly relations with China, and especially will more carefully evaluate this if China's leadership is qualified or not.
Hwang Jae-ho is the director of the Global Security Cooperation Center, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul.
![[INTERVIEW] 'Money Heist: Korea' writer feels satisfied to expand series' franchise](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/e264f8d5589442489d72f9494ca3f1c7.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
