ASIA CENTRE CONFERENCE SERIES
memo
Two Koreas
Facing China’s Rise
Débats Asie avec
Professeur Moon Chung-in, Professor of political science
at Yonsei University and Editor-in-Chief of Global Asia
28 janvier 2013
Animé par :
François Godement, Directeur de la stratégie, Asia
Centre
Arnaud Rodier, Président, Asia Presse
One of the main questions surrounding China’s rise is
whether it is hegemonic or not. If hegemonic, this rise will
necessarily lead to a clash and increasing tensions with
the United States (US). If not, there is no need to worry
about it. To understand if China’s rise is hegemonic, one
needs to look into: China’s national capabilities, China’s
intentions, and its political leaders’ will.
National capabilities are defined in terms of hard, soft,
and smart power. Can China compete with the US on
any / several of these three levels?
71 boulevard Raspail
75006 Paris - France
Tel : +33 1 75 43 63 20
Fax : +33 1 75 43 63 23
www.centreasia.eu
[email protected]
siret 484236641.00029
In terms of economic hard power, China will be able to
compete with the US in the future. China should become
the world’s first economic power within the next three
years, and Chinese trade with the rest of the world will
continue to grow. But China’s GDP/capita will remain
significantly below that of the US, for quite some time.
Nevertheless, in terms of technology, China has been and
will continue to catch up in terms of cutting edge industries,
and thus be able, even more so, to compete with the US
on an economic basis.
The picture is quite different in terms of military. There is
no way for China to beat the US militarily. Even if China
continues to increase its military spending at high growth
rates, it will not catch up with the US’ for several decades
(not before 2050 or so).
When considering navies only, the US navy forces are
present all around the world, which cannot be replicated
in the short or medium term for Chinese military, and China
does not benefit from the large array of alliances that the
US have. The US have military alliances with 68 countries
while China has only one military alliance, with Pakistan.
Thus, China still has a long way to go and the US will
remain the hegemonic military power.
In terms of soft power, China has done a lot of efforts
to build up its soft power. The country has established
Confucius Institutes in 111 countries around the world –
7 in Korea alone – and plans to open more in the future.
Nevertheless, China cannot compete with the US’ soft
power. One important indicator of soft power, the number
of foreign students studying in the country, is largely in the
US’ advantage. China does not manage to attract nearly
as many foreign students as the US. Therefore, it will be
very difficult for China to defeat the US in the area of soft
power.
In terms of smart power, China has an advantage over
the US. The US has greatly damaged its smart power by
launching wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while China tends
to control its foreign policy, minimizing risks and mistakes
while maximizing national interest.
Despite China’s advantage in terms of smart power, China
cannot compete with the US for hegemonic power.
There are three competing IR strategies in China.
The first one is named “peaceful development”, and
encourages peaceful relations with China’s neighbors to
favor and promote, firstly, Chinese internal and economic
development. A second theory is that of polarization. China
is de facto highly polarized: gender polarization, minorities’
polarization, regional polarization, ...
Thus, domestic issues are a priority. A third strategy is the
one that promotes China’s development into a responsible,
pro-active actor internationally.
Xi Jinping, today, does not seem to possess any hegemonic
desire, and seems to be favoring a peaceful Chinese rise,
but he promotes a hard line in terms of territory, national
unity, ...
Thus, China does not have, at the moment, hegemonic
intentions.
have a strong army and strong economy.
Finally, the EU (European Union) school states that all
countries are international actors and interconnected, and
it is therefore self-defeating to pursue a policy that takes
up one camp against another. One should thus learn from
EU countries, which overcame their struggles through
integration and cooperation, to transcend animosity.
The new government is in favor of the EU vision and of
greater integration of regional powers. According to
current officials, inter-Korean relations have hit to bottom,
so have Korea Japan relations. And those relations need to
be rebuilt and strengthened.
The government believes that, to maintain South Korea’s
alliance with the US, the country sacrifices alliances and
relations with other powers or countries in the region. The
country should instead put inter-Korean relations first, and
promote “trust” politics between Northeast Asian countries
and disalignment. A greater balance between Washington
and Beijing should be found, and ties with China repaired.
In terms of political will, Pr. Moon notes that Chinese
leaders since Deng have been more bureaucratic than
ideological leaders. They do not have a vision, neither a
strong political will, and want, mainly, to pursue economic
goals rather than hegemonic power.
What about North Korea?
Whatever happens, North Korea will most probably pursue
its stand-alone policy. But recently, North Korea has been
showing some signs of another, possible, strategy.
What does South Korea think about China?
Some South Koreans think that China’s rise will cause
the finlandization of the Korean peninsula, and that South
Korea needs to strengthen its alliance with the US, pursue
other alliances, and remain careful. It needs to get closer
to market economies and democracies. This vision is the
mainstream approach in South Korea.
Another view predominates within China specialists. One
can see the end of US hegemony coming, and China will
be the next regional hegemon. Thus, South Korea should
be in good terms with China, even if it means sacrificing
alliances with US.
A third school of thought argues that South Korea should
not chose between China and the US, and that the country
should just take benefits stemming from both relations,
because trade with China is in South Korea’s advantage
(South Korea cannot actually live without China anymore,
especially in terms of commodities trade), and because the
US ensures South Korea’s security in the face of China. So
South Korea needs to have both. Cooperation with China
is inevitable, and so is South Korea’s military alliance with
the US.
A fourth view revolves around a so-called stand-alone
strategy. It is a rather ultra-nationalist view. According to
its supporters, South Korea should have nuclear weapons
and use deterrence to ensure its security. South Korea
should not trust outside powers, and should be strong
itself, so as not to rely on anyone. Thus the country should
China and North Korea are historically very close. The
Korean war, amongst other things, brought the two
countries closer together, and today, China remains North
Korea’s closest “ally”. The two countries have recurrent
exchanges, notably through their respective communist
parties. This is a very special relation, which no other
country on the region can build. South Korea for example,
has to necessarily go through its foreign affairs ministry,
which complicates the situation.
Prof. Moon explains that, when you have a good
relationship with a country, you don’t need to worry about
it having a nuclear weapon. Therefore, South Korea should
try and build a better relationship with North Korea.
Conclusion
Today’s South Korea could not exist without past
and present US help: US saved South Korea from
Japan, from North Korea, etc. The country brought
significant help to South Korea, in the form of
security and protection, of soldiers (there are still
27,000 soldiers in South Korea). Over the past 50 years,
South Korea could not have prospered as much without
the US as an ally.
Nevertheless, the next 50 years will be different. South
2
Korea’s future is much more dependant on China. The
two countries have are becoming increasingly dependent,
and the most important task of South Korea’s new leaders
is to define how to handle relations with China, and how
to caliber the South Korea-Chinese relationship. How to
create peace and prosperity in country? In the region? It
has to be done with China.
Comments and Q&A
South Korea-Japan relation in the future?
Relations with Japan are very bad at the moment. The
two countries have entered a vicious circle of criticism
and mistrust. Although it would be much better for the
two countries to build peaceful relations, and cooperation
(especially in the face of China’s rise), national politics
prevent this from happening.
It’s been a key judgment of the US that the US could
NOT trust North Korea in negotiations, which is an
essential limitation to any kind of opening to North
Korea, and which differentiates North Korea from
Burma for example.
The solution to that is pro-active bargaining. It is the strong
(understand the US) that should make the first concession,
which will in turn lead to gains for the two negotiators.
But for now, the US has always asked concessions from
the weak (North Korea). This cannot bring North Korea
to the discussion table, and negotiations of any kind are
impossible in this situation.
China’s economic interest in North Korea: Does North
Korea really want to change its economy? Is North
Korea able to build a successful market economy?
There have been profound changes in North Korea
since 2002: opening and reform measures have been
announced and launched by Kim Jong-il, and there has
been a relative liberalization in certain sectors.
North Korea has always wanted to open up to new
technologies, to investments. But this all depends on
North Korea’s international environment. When there are
tensions with the US and South Korea, then the military’s
hard line wins, and political leaders cannot pursue reform
and opening.
Agatha Kratz
Débats Asie
Les publications électroniques d’Asia Centre
Conçu pour confronter les expériences et analyses des
décideurs économiques, des acteurs institutionnels,
universitaires et de la presse, de France ou d’Asie, le
cycle Débats Asie 2013 vous est proposé par Asia
Centre, Asia Presse, le Centre d’Accueil de la Presse
Étrangère (CAPE) et le Comité National des Conseillers
du Commerce Extérieur de la France (CNCCEF).
Réunis dans la collection « Extraits des Conférences
d’Asia Centre », les Articles et Memos constituent un
ensemble inédit de travaux de recherche et de débats
actuels sur l’Asie organisés avec les meilleurs experts
internationaux.
Les Notes et les Etudes approfondissent l’actualité
asiatique en la mettant en perspective avec les
tendances de long terme à l’œuvre dans la région.
3