HOME / Regions / International Cooperation in Disaster Relief
   
Regions
 
Asia
China
Japan
Korea
 
Europe
Middle East
Russia & Eurasia
 
 
Asia
Korea-China
Korea-China in a Changing Korean Peninsula Security

The very nature of U.S.-China security relations comes to suggest some policy implications on the Korean peninsula for both the United States and the Republic of Korea, either in short term or long term perspective.

  First of all, the United States should not deemphasize the important policy dilemma that China's improving military might should be for deterrence to Soviet power without posing a threat to the U.S.'s longtime friends and allies in the Asia-Pacific region. It can be argued that the PLA's capability to be improved modestly can be less effective to deter the Soviet Union, but more formidable to intimidate and coerce U.S. friends and allies.

  At present, China looks inward, and leaders in Beijing repeatedly emphasize "China is a peace force." But China has long placed itself as an Asian power, suggesting that the Chinese are willing to prevent Western power's penetration into Asia. As shown in the cases of the Tibet problem and the anti-bourgeois movement which took place recently, the Chinese have become sensitive to American interference in their internal affairs.

In coping with this dilemma, the United States is required to maintain close bilateral relations with China, and continues to reevaluate China's foreign policy objectives and its power potential's synergistic effect which may lead to a quantum leap in the PLA's capabilities in the future. In the meantime, the United States should double diplomatic efforts to keep China moving westward. This is particularly true in case that U.S. influence proves insufficient to modify China's behavior in favor of American policy objectives. In the long run, the United States should be prepared to remain a Pacific power credible to its allies and friends in order to neutralize growing Chinese military power. In addition, the United States may consider that U.S.-China joint naval exercises in the Yellow Sea and frequent American fleet calls to Shanghai or Qingdao may alarm North Korea and further force it to rely on the Soviet Union.

  Secondly, the United States and the Republic of Korea should keep paying their concern to China's growing role in arms dealings with Third World countries, including North Korea. Washington is not in a position to fully control Beijing's transfer of arms to Third World countries like north Korea. By the mid-1980s, China exported arms worth nearly $ 2 billion(7% of total exports), placing itself among the top five arms exporters. In the future the Chinese arms trade will be further accelerated for economic and political reasons. The Chinese government has and will have difficulty allotting appropriate funds to defense modernization without increasing the arms trade. As revealed in China's delivery of guns and tanks to Thailand, and of medium range missiles to Saudi Arabia, China regards arms sales and aid as an integral part of its foreign policy, despite its declared threepoint policy on arms sales.

  In this context, it should be noted that the Chinese arms trade is again likely to cause diplomatic problems with Washington, which may adversely affect the bilateral security relations. Equally notable is the fact that China, as an important arms supplier and as a major security partner of North Korea, will be capable of altering the balance of forces on the Korean Peninsula, if it decides to do so.

  So long as bilateral security relations remain stable and good, it seems likely that the Chinese will endorse the presence of American forces on the Korean Peninsula, and would actively collaborate with the Americans with regard to preventing renewed hostilities and easing tension in the region. But close security cooperation between the two countries should not lead to work on an excuse for reducing the American deterrent posture in the peninsula and to barter away the South Korea's security interests in the region. In utilizing improved Sino-American security ties, the United States may induce China to open North Korea's economy and society to the West, and bring North Korea into a dialogue between South and North. In this respect, the United States needs to consider that the Chinese appeared to relate indirectly their role with North Korea on the Korean question to the American role with the Taiwan government on the Taiwan question.

  It is obvious that China will attempt to move the United States to cultivate economic and political ties with North Korea. Recently, particularly after the Seoul Olympics ended, China has been thinking that the balance of international forces tipping against North Korea and the courtship of Seoul by communist nations is making Pyongyang feel more isolated. Chinese Premier Li Peng reportedly told a foreign dignitary recently that Beijing supports in principle an initiative announced on July 7, 1988 by South Korean President Roh. In this context, China is likely to play a certain neutralizing role, helping establish political and economic links between North Korea and the United States and Japan. In this post-Olympic period, it is indispensible for Washington and Seoul to consult frequently and to coordinate closely each other's policies over bilateral security issues, and especially over the South Korea's northern policy as well as U.S. future policy toward North Korea.

  Nevertheless whether the new Asian policy of the United States as this will be maintained or undergo some substantial change denies any supposition at the present.

International politics is a science that has been developed for the purpose of maintaining of world peace. After the second World war, mankind organized the League of Nations and the United Nations as a world system for the peace of world. But the organizations did not work well for the demand the expectation of nations because they were insufficient in themselves function and there were even multifarious and heterogeneous factors among nations. Besides after world war II, the world has been the cold war system ideologically so that confrontation and antagonism among nations become acute. Moreover owing to the technological development and expansion of the armaments, the peace of the world has been more threatened. So international politicians have tried to solve conflicts and disputes among nations not by the way of war but the way of amicability. In order to maintain world peace they also have tried to make a institution for coexistence and copros perity through conference. These efforts of people have led to the regional integration theory which is a field of technical course in international politics.

  In 1960's. the order of the world began to change slowly from the ideological cold war to the age of multipolarized world in search of utility what is called national interests. As a result of the change, mutual cooperation, capital, labour, and technique are spreading all over the world.

  After world War II, moreover newly emerging nations have been modernized actively for the past two decades and the volume of the trades have increased much among them. Those have increased interdependence in the end. Especially the degree of the interdependence are remarkably increasing in Asia-pacific region every year. Acknowledging the need of mutual cooperation in the pacific region following the changing world order from bipolar multipolar order, this study is to verify the possibility of forming of regional cooperative systemofpacific basin by analyzing a lot of literature on the regional integration theory worked out during the past two decades.

  To verify this possibility of forming regional cooperative system in the pacific I have found out the proper integrative factors and a measuring model with analyzing the need of mutual cooperation in this area.

I quoted RA index as a measuring model which was developed by Savage and Deutseh, and I quoted Jacob's as the integrative factors. To make this analysis, I used the volume of trade of the following sixteen countries as a variable : Australia, Canada, Taiwan, Hongkong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Newzealand, Papua New Guina, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, United states, China and Russia.

  On that ground I tried to verify the possibility of integration with the degree of the interdependence revealed in the trade among the nations in this area, In order to find this possibility, First, I built up the following three hypotheses.

  (1) The more high RA index between two countries is high, the more the relation between two countries is strict.

  (2) If the relation of interdependence between two countries is high, it shows the positive relation, But if the interdependence is fragile, it appears a negative relation.

  (3) If the relation between two countries is more positive, it makes the possibility of the cooperative and integration, but if the relation is more negative, it shows the possibility of conflict and disintegration.

  When these hypotheses appeared in the proper positive consequence the possibility of the regional cooperation of pacific basin will be accurate. Of course there may be many multifarious and heterogeneous factors in this area. For example, they are history, culture, race and religion. Those conditions will be negative factors for cooperating each other, but as all these countries in this area expose liberal democratic ideology and adopt the principle of the market economy, these conditions will be also cohesive factors for cooperation each other. Besides, I decided that the relaxation of international situation and the increase of interdependence among nations in this area will be also positive factors to build up the regional cooperative system of pacific basin.

  In 1980's, the environmental change is working well for the regional cooperation. It is due to the open policy in Soviet and Red China, but the principal cause is caused by the increase of trade this area, Being influenced by the environmental change, the RA index is growing more and more every year.

  Measuring the interdependence among sixteen counties with the volume of trade among them as a variable, for the past three years of 1985, 1990 and 1992. I found out that there are still deferences of interdependence among the groups, but the interdependence in gradually increasing every year. As the result which the increase of trade prompts the interdependence among them made the hypotheses perfect, the possibility of forming regional cooperative system of pacific basin war proved positively.

  Possibility of forming Asia-pacific multi- cooperative Security is increasing day by day, so we can expect possible Asia-Pacific Multi- cooperative Security as follows, the cooperative Security in ASEAN-PMC, the cooperative Security in APEC, the cooperative Security in North-East Asia, creation of CSCA.

 

To organize a security partnership in alliance with Asian Pacific nations, we need to analyze strategic influences on Korea security into positive and negative factors, based upon Korean security circumstances subject to structural characteristics of Asian-Pacific security circumstances.

  In conclusion, in the formation of Asian-Pacific security partnership, South Korea Should only actively participate in developing, South Korea should not only actively participate in developing, partnership through technical approaches, but should also sustain existing bilateral relationship with other allies in the form of mutual complementary structure. Negotiation and implementation accompanied by the partnership should be based upon the principles of (1) Self- determination of anation (2) Equality (3) Enovation (4) Gradualism (5) Comprehensiveness.

  Modern international policy system is getting stable in the transfer process from loose-bipolarity to bimultipolarity. In such a process, the East-West strategies and relationship changes among the Big Four surrounding the Korean Peninsular are also kept the balance of power in the Northeast Asia.

In the operation of concrete international policy system, the United States, plays the role of balancer of tripolarity among the United States, the Soviet Union and China, and of tripolarity among the United States, Japan and Europe. And the United States controls the extension of the Soviet Union complexly operating idealism and realism, and tends to stabilize international policy and local orders in the light of detente and bilaternal agreement.

  The divided Korean Peninsular is centered on the interests of the Big Four among Japan and China in the axis of the United States and the Soviet Union.

 
Footer National Defense Economics & Strategy Institute UN WRO HQ UN WRO Secretariat UN Secretariat