South Korea’s middle power diplomacy: A case of growing compatibility between regional and global roles
| Date | 01 December 2016 |
| Author | Jongryn Mo |
| Published date | 01 December 2016 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020702016686380 |
| Subject Matter | Scholarly Essays |
International Journal
2016, Vol. 71(4) 587–607
!The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020702016686380
journals.sagepub.com/home/ijx
Scholarly Essay
South Korea’s middle
power diplomacy: A case
of growing compatibility
between regional and
global roles
Jongryn Mo
Graduate School of International Studies, Yonsei University,
South Korea
Abstract
South Korea has emerged as a new middle power that plays a significant role in a wide
range of important global issue areas and supports liberal international order with its
leadership diplomacy. Even though regional challenges will continue to demand large
foreign policy resources including time, human resources, and budget, the middle power
orientation of South Korean foreign policy behaviour and strategy—for example, multi-
lateralism, the rule of law, and promotion of cooperation and compromise—will remain
in place even in the conduct of regional foreign policy.
This optimism is based on the fact that South Korea is a middle power not only in
global governance but also in the East Asian region. Even on the issue of North Korea’s
nuclear weapons, the most important foreign policy challenge of the day, the South has
accepted the regionalization of the issue and, over time, its middle power role. It has
relied on the middle power strategy of mobilizing international pressure on the North
rather than deploying and strengthening its unilateral options such as the use of force or
massive economic aid.
In order to fully realize the promise and potential of middle power diplomacy, how-
ever, South Korea must make strong efforts to alleviate structural constraints on a
middle power strategy. First, Korean leaders should undertake a full-scale campaign
to de-nationalize Korean education and, thus, Korean foreign policy orientations.
Second, a strong domestic consensus should emerge giving the national interest pre-
cedence over group interests when dealing with foreign policy challenges. Finally, pol-
itical leaders and diplomats must create new opportunities in global governance and
deliver tangible national benefits through middle power diplomacy. Middle power dip-
lomacy, like all foreign policy strategies, will not be sustainable without strong domestic
Corresponding author:
Jongryn Mo, Graduate School of International Studies, Yonsei University, 50 Yonsei-ro, Sinchon-dong,
Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-749, South Korea.
Email: jongryn@gmail.com
support; and domestic support cannot be built on goodwill and commitment to uni-
versal values alone.
Keywords
South Korea, middle power, diplomacy, G20, MIKTA
Introduction
Middle powers have a role to play in global governance. Conceptually, the argu-
ment is straightforward: the presence of middle power countries situated in between
large developed and developing countries can significantly affect both the stability
and character of the new global governance system. Middle powers can realize their
potential if they do in fact work to make global governance more stable and less
polarized.
Who are the middle powers in present-day global governance? Currently, to
qualify as a middle power a country must not belong to either of the two camps
of large developed or large developing countries. For Australia, Canada, and
Nordic countries, which have traditionally been considered middle powers, this
certainly holds true. But now countries such as South Korea, Turkey, and
Mexico also qualify. These new middle powers are upper-income or upper-
middle-income developing countries whose national interests on global governance
are beginning to diverge from those of large, relatively low-income developing
countries due to their successful economic and political development. More so
than other developing countries, middle power developing countries are more
likely to assume global responsibilities and have greater faith in the capacity of
developing countries for successful development.
According to Gareth Evans, middle power leadership is essentially that of ‘‘good
international citizenship, within the utility, and necessity, of acting cooperatively
with others in solving international problems, particularly those problems which by
their nature cannot be solved by any country acting alone, however big and power-
ful.’’ He continues, ‘‘The crucial point to appreciate about good international
citizenship is that this is not something separate and distinct from the pursuit of
national interests. On the contrary, being, and being seen to be, a good inter-
national citizen should itself be seen as a third category of national interest,
right up there alongside the traditional duo of security and economic interests.’’
1
Great powers often suffer a credibility gap arising from their imperialist past.
Middle powers simply do not have this historical baggage and so can be effective
in promoting international institutions and multilateralism.
South Korea has emerged as a new middle power, playing a significant role in a
wide range of important global issue areas and supporting liberal international
1. Garth Evans, ‘‘Middle Power Diplomacy,’’ Inaugural Edgardo Boeninger Memorial Lecture, Chile
Pacific Foundation, Santiago, 29 June 2011.
588 International Journal 71(4)
To continue reading
Request your trial