Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-gtgcz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-18T11:05:05.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

South Korea's Strategy toward the US–China Rivalry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2025

Sojeong Lee  and
Krista E. Wiegand
Sojeong Lee*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA
Krista E. Wiegand
Affiliation:
Center for National Security & Foreign Affairs, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: slee138@utk.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, we examine South Korea's foreign policy strategy in the context of the increasing strategic rivalry between the United States and China. We ask why South Korea is relatively hesitant to actively balance against China, especially compared to other US allies like Japan. We present a theory that examines how the lack of territorial and maritime disputes between a US ally and China affects an ally's foreign policy strategy in the US–China rivalry, to explain the case of South Korea. In general, when a US ally is engaged in an ongoing, active territorial and/or maritime dispute with China, we expect the US ally to more actively help the US balance against China. Because bilateral relations between the US ally and China are already tense, the US ally can afford to side with the US without being as vulnerable to Chinese retaliation. On the other hand, when a US ally has no ongoing, active territorial and/or maritime dispute with China, the US ally is expected to be more cautious in siding with the US against China because doing so can provoke China to retaliate in ways more costly than if they already had ongoing disputes. We find that without ongoing, active disputes with China, South Korea is more vulnerable to retaliation by China through critical issues like North Korea and trade. As a result, it is difficult for South Korea to side with the US in actively balancing against China.

Keywords

South KoreaUnited StatesChinaallianceissue linkageterritorial and maritime disputes
Type
Article
Information
Journal of East Asian Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , November 2024 , pp. 305 - 323
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The East Asia Institute

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Beckley, Michael. 2015. “The Myth of Entangling Alliances: Reassessing the Security Risks of US Defense Pacts.” International Security 39 (4): 7–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bong, Youngshik Daniel. 2016. “The US–South Korea Alliance: Local, Regional, and Global Dimensions.” Asian Politics & Policy 8 (1): 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cha, Victor D. 2010. “Powerplay: Origins of the US Alliance System in Asia.” International Security 34 (3): 158–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cha, Victor D. 2020. “Leading by Example: Two Different Responses to China's Rise.” The Interpreter. November 11. www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/leading-example-two-different-responses-china-s-rise. Accessed August 5, 2024.Google Scholar
Chang, Yae. 2022. “Is South Korea's President Yoon Really Tough on China?” The Diplomat, August 17. https://thediplomat.com/2022/08/is-south-koreas-president-yoon-really-tough-on-china/. Accessed February 9, 2023.Google Scholar
Choi, Young Jong. 2009. “South Korea's Regional Strategy and Middle Power Activism.” The Journal of East Asian Affairs 23 (1): 47–67.Google Scholar
Chung, Jae Ho. 2001. “South Korea between Eagle and Dragon.” Asian Survey 41 (5): 777–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conconi, Paola, and Perroni, Carlo. 2002. “Issue Linkage and Issue Tie-in in Multilateral Negotiations.” Journal of International Economics 57 (2): 423–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Andrew Fenton, Higgott, Richard A., and Nossal, Kim Richard. 1993. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. Vancouver: UBS Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Andrew Fenton, and Mo, Jongryn. 2013. “Middle Power Leadership and the Evolution of the G20.” Global Summitry Journal 1 (1): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, Robert W. 1989. “Middlepowermanship, Japan, and the Future World Order.” International Journal 44 (Autumn): 823–62.Google Scholar
Davis, Christina L. 2004. “International Institutions and Issue Linkage: Building Support for Agricultural Trade Liberalization.” American Political Science Review 98 (1):153–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Erica Strecker, and Saunders, Phillip C.. 1996. “Legitimacy and the Limits of Nationalism: China and the Diaoyu Islands.” International Security 23 (3): 114–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutton, Peter A. 2014. “China's Maritime Disputes in the East and South China Sea.” Naval War College Review 67 (3): 7–19.Google Scholar
Emmers, Ralf. 2010. Geopolitics and Maritime Territorial Disputes in East Asia. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ferrier, Kyle. 2019. “Monetizing the Linchpin: Trump's Foreign Policy versus the US–Korea Alliance's Value to Washington.” December 5. Korea Economic Institute of America. https://keia.org/publication/monetizing-the-linchpin-trumps-foreign-policy-versus-the-u-s-korea-alliances-value-to-washington/. Accessed August 5, 2024.Google Scholar
Ford, Lindsey W. and Goldgeier, James. 2021. “Retooling America's Alliances to Manage the China Challenge,” Brookings Institution. January 25. www.brookings.edu/articles/retooling-americas-alliances-to-manage-the-china-challenge/. Accessed August 5, 2024.Google Scholar
Fravel, Taylor M. 2010. “International Relations Theory and China's Rise: Assessing China's Potential for Territorial Expansion.” International Studies Review 12 (4): 505–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fravel, Taylor M. 2014. “Territorial and Maritime Boundary Disputes in Asia.” In Oxford Handbook of the International Relations in Asia, edited by Pekkanen, Saadia M., Ravenhill, John, and Foot, Rosemary, chap. 27. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Harold, Scott W., Grossman, Derek, Harding, Brian, Hornung, Jeffrey W., Poling, Gregory, Smith, Jeffrey, and Smith, Meagon L.. 2019. The Thickening Web of Asian Security Cooperation: Deepening Defense Ties Among US Allies and Partners in the Indo-Pacific. RAND Corporation. www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3125.html.Google Scholar
Henrikson, A.K. 1997. “Middle Powers as Managers: International Mediation Within, Across, and Outside Institutions” in Cooper, A.F. ed. Niche Diplomacy. London: Macmillan, 46–72.Google Scholar
Heo, Uk, and Roehrig, Terence. 2014. South Korea's Rise: Economic Development, Power, and Foreign Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holbraad, C. 1984. Middle Powers in International Politics. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hook, Glenn D., and Son, Key-young. 2013. “A Tale of Two “Alliances”: Internal Threats and Networked Civil Society in Japan–US and South Korea–US Base Politics.” Pacific Focus 28 (1): 17–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurrell, A. 2000. “Some Reflections on the Role of Intermediate Powers in International Institutions.” Latin American Program Working Paper 244.Google Scholar
Hwang, Wonjae, Cho, Wonbin, and Wiegand, Krista E.. 2018. “Do Korean–Japanese Historical Disputes Generate Rally Effects?” Journal of Asian Studies 77 (3): 693–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, Patrick, Park, Johann, and Choi, Seung-What. 2006. “Democracy and Conflict Management: Territorial Claims in the Western Hemisphere Revisited.” International Studies Quarterly 50 (4): 803–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, David Martin, Smith, Michael Lawrence Rowan, and Khoo, Nicholas. 2013. Asian Security and the Rise of China: International Relations in an Age of Volatility. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karim, Moch Faisal. 2018. “Middle Power, Status-seeking and Role Conceptions: The Cases of Indonesia and South Korea.” Australian Journal of International Affairs 72 (4): 343–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Claudia J. 2021. “Military Alliances as a Stabilizing Force: US Relations with South Korea and Taiwan, 1950s–1960s.” Journal of Strategic Studies 44 (7): 1041–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Jihyun. 2015. “Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea: Implications for Security in Asia and Beyond.” Strategic Studies Quarterly 9 (2): 107–41.Google Scholar
Kim, Sangbae. 2014. “Roles of Middle Power in East Asia: A Korean Perspective.” EAI Middle Power Diplomacy Initiative Working Paper 02. www.eai.or.kr/data/bbs/eng_report/20140203158563.pdf Google Scholar
Koo, Min Gyo. 2010. Island Disputes and Maritime Regime Building in East Asia: Between a Rock and a Hard Place. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lake, David A. 2009. “Regional Hierarchy: Authority and Local International Order.” Review of International Studies 35 (1): 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Sojeong, Prins, Brandon, and Wiegand, Krista E.. 2021. “The US–South Korea Alliance: How the Patron Benefits from the Protégé.” International Area Studies Review 24 (2): 97–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Soo Hyung. 2009. “Middle Power Theory and Security and Foreign Policy of the Roh Moo-Hyun Government.” Journal of National Defense Studies 52 (1): 3–27.Google Scholar
Lee, Sook-Jong. 2012. “South Korea as New Middle Power Seeking Complex Diplomacy.” EAI Asia Security Initiative Working Paper, 25 September.Google Scholar
Liao, Tim, Hara, Kimie, and Wiegand, Krista E., eds. 2015. The China–Japan Border Dispute: Islands of Contention in a Multidisciplinary Perspective. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lostumbo, Michael J., McNerney, Michael J., Peltz, Eric, Eaton, Derek, and Frelinger, David R.. 2013. Overseas Basing of US Military Forces: An Assessment of Relative Costs and Strategic Benefits. Rand Corporation, April 29. www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR201.html.Google Scholar
Meijer, Hugo. 2020. “Shaping China's Rise: The Reordering of US Alliances and Defense Partnerships in East Asia.” International Politics 57 (2): 166–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moon, Chung-in, and Li, Chun-fu. 2010. “Reactive Nationalism and South Korea's Foreign Policy on China and Japan: A Comparative Analysis.” Pacific Focus 25 (3): 331–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrow, James D. 1991. “Alliances and Asymmetry: An Alternative to the Capability Aggregation Model of Alliances.” American Journal of Political Science 35 (4): 904–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrow, James D. 1993. “Arms Versus Allies: Trade-offs in the Search for Security.” International Organization 47 (2): 207–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nam, Chang-hee. 2010. “The Alliance Transformation and US–Japan–Korea Security Network: A Case for Trilateral Cooperation.” Pacific Focus 25 (1): 34–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neack, L. 2003. The New Foreign Policy: US and Comparative Foreign Policy in the 21st Century. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Richey, Mason. 2019. “US-led Alliances and Contemporary International Security Disorder: Comparative Responses of the Transatlantic and Asia-Pacific Alliance Systems.” Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs 6 (3): 275–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozman, Gilbert and Lee, Shin-wha. 2006. “Unraveling the Japan–South Korea ‘Virtual Alliance’: Populism and Historical Revisionism in the Face of Conflicting Regional Strategies,” Asian Survey 46 (5): 761–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saha, Premesha. 2015. “The US and the South China Sea Dispute.” International Journal of Research in Social Sciences 5 (3): 629–43.Google Scholar
Shin, Soon-ok. 2016. “South Korea's Elusive Middlepowermanship: Regional or Global Player?” The Pacific Review 29 (2): 187–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, Scott, ed. 2012. The US–South Korea Alliance: Meeting New Security Challenges. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suganuma, Unryu. 2000. Sovereign Rights and Territorial Space in Sino-Japanese Relations: Irredentism and the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swaine, Michael D., and Taylor Fravel, M.. 2011. “China's Assertive Behavior–Part Two: The Maritime Periphery.” China Leadership Monitor 35: 1–29.Google Scholar
Valencia, Mark J. 2007. “The East China Sea Dispute: Context, Claims, Issues, and Possible Solutions.” Asian Perspective 31 (1): 127–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walt, Stephen M. 1990. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Wiegand, Krista E. 2011. Enduring Territorial Disputes: Strategies of Bargaining, Coercive Diplomacy, and Settlement. Athens: University of Georgia Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiegand, Krista E., and Choi, Ajin. 2017. “Nationalism, Public Opinion, and Dispute Resolution: The Dokdo/Takeshima Dispute.” Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 27 (2): 232–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, B. 1988. The Middle Powers and the General Interest. Ottawa: The North-South Institute.Google Scholar
Work, Clint. 2023. “Rhetoric vs. Reality: Seoul & Washington's Strategic Alignment on Taiwan.” Korea Policy. November 3. https://keia.org/publication/rhetoric-vs-reality-seoul-washingtons-strategic-alignment-on-taiwan/.Google Scholar
Zhao, Suisheng. 2011. “China's Approaches toward Regional Cooperation in East Asia: Motivations and Calculations.” Journal of Contemporary China 20 (68): 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Weifeng. 2015. “China's Growing Assertiveness in the South China Sea.” Journal of International and Strategic Affairs 33 (3): 292–319.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lee and Wiegand supplementary material

Lee and Wiegand supplementary material
Download Lee and Wiegand supplementary material(File)
File 24.1 KB