THE RISING EAST
South Korea faces momentous '05 decision
By Richard Halloran
This year, perhaps the most momentous decision in East Asia will occur in South Korea, where the choice will affect not only the future of the Korean Peninsula but the balance of power throughout the region.
South Koreans will have before them three options, given the rise of anti-Americanism, the forthcoming U.S. troop reductions and realignment, improved relations with China, a resurgence in anti-Japanese sentiment, and the demands of domestic politics:
• "Go it alone," as has been advocated by President Roh Moo-hyun, to rely on South Korea's own resources while forsaking alliances with other nations.
• Forge an alliance with China, clearly the rising power in Asia.
• Revive South Korea's faltering alliance with the United States even though there is no guarantee that the United States would reciprocate.
Self-reliant defense would be tempting because it would free South Korea from entangling alliances, permit South Koreans to pursue reunification with North Korea without outside interference, and satisfy nationalistic demands.
This course, however, would seem to be unrealistic.
South Korea lives in a rough neighborhood and needs outside help to maintain security. A South Korean diplomat asserted many years ago: "You must remember that we live next door to the world's most populous nation (China), the world's biggest nation (what was then the Soviet Union) and the world's second-largest economy (Japan)."
Forging an alliance with China would also appear to be tempting. South Korea and China are cultural cousins, and Beijing is a mere two-hour flight from Seoul. Korea's trade with China has soared as has South Korean investment in the blossoming Chinese economy.
The Middle Kingdom mentality in China, however, would put Seoul in danger of falling under Chinese dominance. The Chinese would not be expected to march across the Yalu River as they did in 1950, but Beijing seeks the political, economic and diplomatic clout to insist that major decisions in every Asian capital, including Seoul, meet with its approval.
Reviving the alliance with the United States would require a change in South Korean attitudes and an effort to persuade Americans to return to the alliance of yesteryear.
The accumulation of anti-American demonstrations and rhetoric in recent years has made Americans seriously question their support for South Korea.
South Korean and American scholars have begun to define this issue. Lee Chung-min, of Yonsei University in Seoul, wrote in April: "The question for South Korea in the beginning of the 21st century is whether it should strive to prolong, strengthen and modernize its maritime alliance with the United States or strive to seek 'strategic accommodation' with its traditional, pre-20th century patron, China."
A scholar at Georgetown University and longtime student of Korea, David I. Steinberg, wrote in June that American nationalism after the 9/11 attacks has made the United States "much more suspicious of any anti-American sentiments for demonstrations among our friends," including South Korea.
President Bush has found resonance in his expression: "You are either with us or with the terrorists." That has been transformed in many cases to "you are either with us or against us." In this vein, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has said: "We want to have our forces where people want them. We have no desire to be where we're not wanted."
The former U.S. ambassador to Seoul, Donald Gregg, has cautioned that "trust between the two countries had never been lower." Richard Allen, national security adviser under President Ronald Reagan, has advocated withdrawing U.S. troops from South Korea, "especially now that the harm can come from two directions — North Korea and violent South Korean protesters."
Moreover, prominent South Koreans have cautioned that a backlash is building in the United States. A former defense minister, Gen. Kim Dong-shin, has said that South Korean anti-American rhetoric has caused an anti-South Korea fervor in the United States.
The hectoring tone of the South Korean press after Bush was re-elected was not likely to win points in the White House. It was ironic that South Korean newspapers criticized Bush for "unilateralism" when the United States has insisted that nuclear negotiations with North Korea be centered in the Six-Party Talks in Beijing.
In contrast, some South Korean political leaders have demanded that the United States negotiate bilaterally with North Korea. That is exactly the channel of negotiations to which Seoul objected in 1994 when South Korean diplomats were shut out of negotiations over the Agreed Framework intended to halt North Korea's plans to acquire nuclear arms.
Richard Halloran is a Honolulu-based journalist and former New York Times correspondent in Asia. He wrote this article for The Advertiser.
