From the Age of Diplomacy to the Age of Armed Forces
The age of dazzling diplomacy is turning into an age of savage force.
The naive prospect that there will be no more major wars in the 21st century is already fading into a gray past.
For the sake of national interest, Russia has been invading Ukraine for seven months, and despite training, a Chinese missile is flying over Taiwan.
A barbaric situation is unfolding in which a strong man pursues his own interests.
Not only us, but also North Korea, Japan, and all other countries will realize the cruel truth that international organizations and clumsy national agreements are of no use, and that only force can guarantee the existence of a nation in the end.
Philosophers such as Toynbee and Schopenhauer have a slightly different texture, but what they preached that “history does not progress, only the main character changes and repeats itself” deeply penetrates the mind at this point.
Enlarging an image
While Pelosi's visit to allies of the US House of Representatives had a positive effect of strengthening the alliance, on the other hand, analysis is pouring in that it places a great burden on allies and diplomacy in general.
In Korea, there is a controversy over neglect of reception, and there is even a phenomenon of division in public opinion over the criticism that the president's failure to meet Chairman Pelosi on the grounds of vacation is not to look out for China.
Forced to line up following the conflict for hegemony
Conflicts for hegemony between great powers inevitably lead to forcing neighboring countries to line up.
It would be more comfortable if you could definitely stand on someone's side.
This is because, in solidarity with them, security and economic activity, which are the basic requirements for national survival, can be guaranteed.
However, there are countries where it is not so easy to line up.
That's us.
Security is heavily dependent on the United States, and the economy is inextricably linked with China.
In short, it can be said that the present prosperity was achieved through the division of labor with China under the security support of the United States.
The Republic of Korea would be the only country closely tied to the two hegemons.
This is the reason why the conservative regime can't 'better' on either side, even though the conservative regime focuses on the United States and the progressive regime on China.
It is also an area where people with different tendencies who hate US imperialism or China's great power are also forced to accept it.
Now, China is very hot.
Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, which was carried out despite all kinds of threats, has seriously damaged China's face and self-esteem both internally and externally in its path to a hegemony.
The more authoritarian the country, the more sensitive it is to face.
As the United States, which had been rushing to confront each other, was recognized as not being able to speak, it is ready to take radical actions to restore self-esteem.
In the midst of this, we are faced with a queue on sensitive issues.
What is at hand is the Chip 4 alliance that the US demands.
The U.S. must answer by the end of this month whether it will join the alliance between the United States, Japan and Taiwan to isolate China from the semiconductor supply chain.
Chinese state media are threatening South Korea's joining the Chip4 Alliance, saying that it would be 'commercial suicide'.
Actually, it's not wrong.
It is analyzed that 40% of our semiconductor exports are from China, and 60% if Hong Kong is included.
However, not joining is a bigger sacrifice.
Our memory semiconductor capability is absolutely dependent on US source technology and Japanese equipment.
Experts say that it is virtually impossible to survive if the two countries do not supply technology and equipment.
Enlarging an image
Economic-security separation policy difficulties… Respond according to national capabilities
South Korea has survived the competition for hegemony between the United States and China through its economic and security separation policy, but the situation is unfolding in an unexpected direction as the two major hegemons begin to equate economy and security.
The so-called 'strategic ambiguity' no longer works.
If you are frantically swayed by the clash of supremacy and respond spontaneously from time to time, there is a high possibility that you will fall into an irreversible state.
In order not to fall off the string, which is swaying with strong force from both sides, you must first examine your own abilities before jumping on a tightrope.
If you look at common statistics that can represent Korea's national power, it ranks 10th in the world for GDP, 6th in the world for national defense, and 6th in the world for per capita income among countries with a population of 50 million or more.
In addition, after space launch vehicles, it was also ranked in the top 10 in the world for the development of supersonic fighters and exporters of weapons.
There is also an analysis that the overall national power ranks 8th in the world.
There may be a small controversy over the accuracy of some statistics, but in any case, it cannot be denied that Korea is a developed country in name and reality and a country with a strong presence.
No matter how hegemonic the country was, it became a difficult opponent to deal with as it was in the past.
At one time, the “Northeast Asian Balancer Theory” was raised.
The idea was to reverse the geopolitical position in which the interests of great powers are intertwined, and to play a leading role as a balancer of great powers.
It was ideal, but there were many criticisms at the time that it was unrealistic for Korea's national power.
A balancer is possible when there is a sense of weight.
Which superpower will play a balancing role for a country that does not have the weight and capacity to assume it?
Faced with the pressure of countries competing for supremacy to line up, we need to judge our own weight soberly.
If the weight of us felt by them is great, both the US and China will be afraid that Korea, angry at the pressure to stand in line, will completely adhere to either side.
Then, naturally, the long-awaited role of balancer may come.
As always, we didn't want to, but the hegemony conflict is forcing a new paradigm in our foreign policy.
Depending on how wisely you get through this situation, it will depend on whether advanced Korea will expand further or stop here.
It will also be the first gateway to a dense test of the new government's capabilities.
Ko Cheol-jong, editorial member