2 Undergraduate student in International Relations at UFRGS. Research Assistant at NERINT. Contact:

Transcription

1 The Political Crisis in South Korea: Internal Dilemmas and Regional Geopolitics Pedro Vinícius Pereira Brites 1 and Maria Gabriela Vieira 2 President Park s impeachment creates a power vacuum in South Korea and opens up room for the intensification of internal political disputes in the country. In regional terms, the South Korean crisis is directly related to the evolution of the South Korean, Chinese and Japanese relations in the last two years. Park s Foreign Policy was aimed at building an alternative to the Asian Paradox (increasing economic interdependence versus growing political-security rivalries) and was grappling with the discontent of the US, its main ally. The impeachment creates a challenge for the maintenance of this autonomist strategy, especially with the uncertainties of the Trump government.. Presentation The approval of the impeachment of South Korean President Park Geun-Hye by the constitutional court on March 10th brought an end to a political crisis that began in 2016 with allegations of corruption in the Park government. The impeachment process was marked by a series of protests, in favor of and against the president, and by the void of political leadership faced by country in light of the crisis. At the regional level, internal political instability in South Korea blends into a context of heightened rivalries in East Asia. Given this context, South Korea occupies a central position in regional geopolitics. Although the alliance with the United States is the main pillar of the country s foreign policy, reducing South Korea s position simply to an extension of the United States performance in Asia does not reflect the country s importance to the balance of forces in the region. The alliance with the United States has played a central role in the country s international insertion since its founding in However, there is a continuing debate in the country s history between two distinct perspectives on the strategic partnership with the United States. On the one hand, one can put the perspective that the alliance must be unconditional, with South Korea having a supporting role within the US insertion strategy in Asia. More recently, the Lee Myung-Bak government ( ) represents this strand of action. On the other hand, there is the view that the alliance with the United States is fundamental to guarantee the country s security at the regional level, so it must be maintained, but it should not impede the quest for autonomy in its foreign relations. The 1 Coordinator and Professor of the International Relations undergraduate course at the University Center Ritter dos Reis (Uniritter). PhD candidate and MSc in International Strategic Studies by the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS). Research Assistant at the Brazilian Centre for Strategy & International Relations (NERINT). Contact: pvbrittes@gmail.com 2 Undergraduate student in International Relations at UFRGS. Research Assistant at NERINT. Contact: maria.g.vieira95@gmail.com.br 60

2 Park government ( ) fits this second perspective. For this reason, the impeachment of the president implies the possibility of altering the recent regional balance, in which South Korea sought closer ties with China, Japan and Russia. The Korean peninsula has a unique geopolitical position, as it has only major powers as neighbors - China, Russia and Japan, as well as the effective US military presence in the region. Since the end of the Cold War, the peninsula has been at the heart of discussions about regional security, especially because of the North Korean nuclear issue. In view of this situation, South Korea s actions oscillated between moments of search for engagement with the north and phases of increased tensions with the neighboring country. These oscillations are directly linked to the internal political disputes in the country, and to the political project of international insertion adopted by each government. Despite these oscillations in external performance, the state model in South Korea has remained basically the same since the 1960s, when the country under Park Chung-Hee ( ), President Park s father, adopted a model of development focused on industrialization based on the strengthening of large national conglomerates (chaebols). The Western differentiation between public and private does not actively contribute to understanding the nature of chaebols and the uniqueness of this national management model. After all, in many cases, typical functions of the State are exercised by the conglomerates, which shows that the State and chaebols mingle, interchange functions and sometimes confuse themselves. The partnership between the State and the chaebols is the essence of the elites pact that has governed the country ever since. In this sense, the impeachment process and the resulting political crisis evidences this relationship of symbiosis between the State and the conglomerates and put in question the economic model of the country, precisely at a time when the Government Park sought affirmation at the regional level. For this reason, internal political developments in South Korea are mixed with regional developments and bring more instability to East Asia. The regional action of the Park Geun-Hye Government ( ): regionalism and network diplomacy Park Geun-Hye s election by the Saenuri Party in 2012 represented a change in globalist politics adopted by his predecessor Lee Myung- Bak ( ), whose government was marked by unchallenged alignment with the United States. Although it belongs to the same party as its predecessor, the president has adopted a new profile of international insertion, based on the view that there is an Asian Paradox. This paradox concerns the growing economic interdependence among the countries of the region and the growing distrust and political-security rivalries (Snyder 2016). Thus, the Park government sought to consolidate the country as a medium power, structuring a network diplomacy, according to which South Korea would occupy a central position for Asian multilateralism. The country would, therefore, be the link between the various powers in the region. In practical terms, the consolidation of this foreign policy aimed at changing the status of a pawn in the East Asian geopolitical board, raising the country to the pivotal level. The country would be able to build advantageous relations with the neighboring powers and with the United States 61

3 without becoming excessively dependent on any of these. Even before its election, the Park already advocates a Trustpolitik, whose final goal was to roughly approximate the neighbors of Northeast Asia around the need to resolve the situation on the Korean peninsula (Lee 2015). The Trustpolitik is based in three priority geopolitical areas: the Korean peninsula, northeast Asia and eurasia. Acting in these different spaces would therefore be simultaneous and would contribute to the normalization of relations with North Korea. Asian paradox, marked by the establishment of China s rebalancing strategy promoted by the US and intensified tensions between China and Japan. The Northeast Asia Cooperation (NAPCI) was the most ambitious project to put South Korea at the heart of regional multilateralism. In that sense, in 2015, Seoul hosted the China-Korea-Japan Summit, as well as strengthened the Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat (TCS) - an agency aimed at stimulating relations between countries. At the 2015 Summit, the three neighbors also launched a Joint Declaration for Peace and Cooperation in Northeast Asia (Tiezzi 2015). In relation to the Korean peninsula, the Park government changed the rationality around the discussion of the reunification process. It shifts the focus of economic issues, as was the case in the Lee Myung-Bak government, to identity issues. Thus, at first, it interrupts discussions about the North Korean nuclear program, reduces existing trade restrictions, seeks to expand the Kaesong Industrial Complex, and presents a plan of 96 cooperation projects in areas such as fishing industry, tourism, among others (Yong 2014). In 2013, following the third North Korean nuclear test, despite conservative pressures within the country, especially in the armed forces, the government opted for a discreet stance, in order to avoid a resurgence of the crisis. It should be noted that South Korea s policy for North Korea during the Park Government does not match the closest approximation period during the Sunshine Policy 3 during the Kim Dae Jung government ( ). However, it has advanced in relation to the Lee Myung-Bak government. The policy of articulation with the North was embedded in a broader plan of rapprochement with neighbors. To a large extent, the objective of foreign policy for Northeast Asia was to offer an alternative to the country in the context of the 62 At first, the priority was given to relations with China. Thus, the president sought to establish broader relations with the Xi Jinping government. In 2013, he made a long visit to Beijing in which he laid the groundwork for the free trade agreement between the two countries that was signed in This rapprochement with China has altered regional geopolitics and given Beijing an important option given the tension between Sino-Japanese relations 4 and China s increased rivalry with the United States in Asia. Cooperation between China and South Korea opened doors for Seoul to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). AIIB is considered a China-led alternative to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which are responsible for directing investments in Asia-Pacific and are led by the US and Japan. United States publicly opposed the entry of allies into the new institution. However, participation in the AIIB is in line with the South Korean geo-economic strategy in the region. After all, the Park government had as one of its main objectives to build an infrastructure network linking the country to the mainland, especially through projects such as the Trans-Korean Railroad (TKR) and the Trans-Siberian Railway (TSR).

4 Thus, the analysis of relations between South Korea and China during the period under review evidences an ambitious strategy of the Park government to reverse the historical distrust that exists between Seoul and Beijing. More than that, the approach with China meets the objectives of an autonomous international insertion strategy. Despite this, increasing ties with the Xi Jinping government did not represent a reorientation in its foreign policy. After all, the US continued as priority partners. That is, it is not the exchange of priority alignment and the maintenance of the condition of subservience with another partner. In practice, it represents a policy of diversification of the strategic partners. What was at stake was the pursuit of regional stability. After all, the growing military competitiveness in the region prevents the country from establishing itself as a link between the Great Powers, relegating multilateralism to the background. For South Korea, the scenario of increased competition and security rivalry between China and the United States is the most drastic scenario, because in this context, Seoul has no room for maneuver. In addition, in December 2013, the Japanese Prime Minister visited the Yasukuni Shrine, dedicated to the memory of Japanese combatants in World War II, which generated reactions in Seoul and Beijing. For these reasons, between 2012 and 2014, there were no meetings between the leaders of South Korea and Japan. From 2014, Japan began to seek to revise its position vis-à-vis its neighbors, after all the country had promoted self-isolation in the region. South Korea, in turn, in view of Trustpolitik, sought to reestablish ties with its neighbor. Bilateral relations have advanced significantly in the meantime, and in December 2015 the two governments announced an agreement regarding comfort women. Japan acknowledged the pain of the victims and pledged to pay compensation to create a foundation to support the victims. In this way, Park s foreign policy for China and Japan succeeded in widening ties with neighbors. This approach, which began bilaterally with Beijing and Tokyo, paved the way for a resumption of trilateral relations. In addition, the approach with China leverages economic growth opportunities. It should be noted that the South Korean economy is based on exports, so the rapprochement with the Chinese is crucial for the country to recover its average economic growth since the financial crisis of In relation to Japan, at first, there was a separation between the two governments, especially because of the revival of historical rivalries like the Comfort Women 5 issue. Since the election campaign, Park has affirmed Japan s need to revise its colonialist history. In contrast, the Shinzo Abe government (2012 -) adopted a nationalist stance on relations with neighbors, maintaining a discourse that denied the aggressions that occurred during World War II. 63 As for Eurasia, the rapprochement with Russia was the main vector of Park s policy. Still in 2013, Vladimir Putin (2012 -) visited Seoul, when the two countries matched South Korea s participation in the consortium of the Russian-North Korean railway Rason (Rason KonTrans). Although Russia has historically prioritized its relations with Europe, to the detriment of Asia, since the intensification of the country s relations with NATO, especially after the crisis in Ukraine in 2014, the Putin government has been seeking to reaffirm its status as an Asian country. Whether through regional institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (OCX), or bilateral relations - especially with North Korea and China - the Russian government has been consolidating a more Asian foreign policy.

5 For South Korea, the rapprochement with Russia serves two main purposes. On the one hand, it allows triangulation with North Korea. Russia has been an important partner of Pyongyang since the Cold War and, after a period of withdrawal during the 1990s, maintains active economic relations with the country. Between 2012 and 2014, Moscow has expanded exports of energy resources, food and vehicles to North Korea (Zakharova 2015). Thus, the rapprochement with Russia may be important in order to put pressure on North Korea in case of crisis or to widen the channels of dialogue with the neighbor. On the other hand, Moscow is an energy-relevant partner. The possibility of building a gas pipeline in the Far East as well as exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) are relevant to the pursuit of South Korean energy security strategy. South Korea depends on imports to ensure its energy independence. In view of the tensions in the South China Sea and the country s inability to ensure the supply of energy coming mainly from the Middle East through the maritime communication lines (SLOCs), the rapprochement with Russia may offer an important alternative. In this sense, the Eurasian Initiative launched in 2013 was aimed at implementing projects in energy, transport and trade networks, and was in line with this perspective of approaching the Eurasian continent. The pretension is to create a bond between the peninsula and the heart of eurasia, opening space for relations with Europe as well. This project, on the one hand, strengthens the prospect of rapprochement with North Korea, after all, this infrastructural network would only be feasible if Pyongyang is included. On the other hand, it brings the country closer to regional infrastructure building initiatives, such as the one led by China s OBOR (One Belt, One Road). The structuring of this network diplomacy that reshapes the geopolitical project of the country, is a reorientation at the regional level, and rejects the globalist policy of its predecessor. More broadly, it could be said that the aim was to reformulate the identity of a small country - a shrimp among whales - to consolidate itself as the axis of Asian multilateralism. Relations between the United States and South Korea in the Park Government: between discontent and reaffirmation Relations with the United States are central to South Korea. Since the founding of the country in 1948, Washington stands as a guarantor of South Korea s existence as an independent country. The United States was responsible for preventing the North s intended reunification in the Korean War, to aid in the outbreak of economic development the country has experienced since the 1960s and include South Korea under its nuclear umbrella. Seoul does not even have full autonomy over its Armed Forces, since they have been under US command since Aware of the importance of the strategic alliance with the US, President Park made his first international visit to the US in More than that, Park supported Obama s strategy on the North Korean nuclear issue and reaffirmed the importance of the partnership for the country s economy. That is, South Korean foreign policy in this period did not seek to break relations with the US, especially since there is a significant dependence on security. Although South Korea has adopted a process of military modernization, based on the alliance with the chaebols, especially since the government of Kim Dae Jung, the country is still vulnerable in defensive terms. Mainly, if one 64

6 considers the regional security context in which the country is inserted. ensuring the independence of its international insertion strategy? Despite this, President Park promised during his presidential campaign to regain command of the armed forces. Like the former Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama ( ), who had promised to withdraw from the US base in Okinawa during his campaign, the president did not succeed in the negotiations. Thus, the military command, rather than being transferred to Seoul, was maintained with the US and the transition postponed indefinitely. It should be noted that the transition in command was not a consensus in South Korea. There was much resistance among the country s political and military elites about the change. As for South Korea s approach to China, another point of possible tension with Washington, the Park government sought to lead the process without generating distrust in the United States. According to Snyder (2016), South Korea s diplomatic corps sought constant consultations with the United States during the process of rapprochement with China to avoid mutual mistrust. Nonetheless, as US- China relations escalated, with the establishment of the Asian pivot for China, South Korea s position became delicate. During the Obama administration, US policy toward East Asia focused on establishing policies that were reactive to all Chinese actions. In addition, Washington sought to empty China-led fora such as the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and create alternatives to Chinese initiatives such as the Comprehensive Regional Economic Partnership (RCEP). Faced with this pressure on China, South Korea s strategic position has gained significant relevance to the US. So, South Korea was faced with a dilemma: meeting the demands of the strategic partnership with its preferred ally or 65 This scenario was evident in the discussion of South Korean fighter renewal. The final choice for the Lockheed Martin-produced F-35 in 2014 was vital for the US project to leave out of role and put in the background the autonomous development project of fifth generation fighters. Despite this, the biggest obstacle to South Korea s autonomous project was the US project to install anti-missile shields on the Korean peninsula. The Great Altitude Area Defense Terminal (THAAD) is an anti-missile shield allegedly aimed at defending South Korea from the North Korean nuclear threat. However, from the Russian and Chinese perspective, the installation of THAAD represents a threat to the second attack capability of the two countries. And, while the argument is that it is aimed at North Korea, according to Russia and China the shield aims to ensure the US nuclear primacy in East Asia. It should be noted that this type of action occurred in relation to Russia in Eastern Europe, when promising to install antimissile shields in the Czech Republic and Poland. China has repeatedly requested that THAAD not be installed. Deterrence has been a structuring element for relations between the Great Powers since the Cold War. Therefore, reaping China and Russia s second-strike capabilities directly affects the international balance. Particularly, the South Korean fear was due to the Chinese economic retaliations applied to Seoul. Finally, it is possible to evaluate that the South Korean relations with the US during the Park government were based on the search for the maintenance of the strategic partnership. However, the installation of THAAD has shown that US geopolitical interests can directly affect South Korea s foreign policy, which is dependent on and conditioned by Washington s actions. In addition, with the outbreak of the political crisis in

7 Seoul, after the accusations of corruption in the Park government, the country lost the condition of maintaining the haughtiness in the face of the troubled external scenario. The Accusations of Corruption and the Impeachment Process of Park Geun-Hye The political crisis South Korea is experiencing has worsened with the impeachment process against Park Geun-hye, the democratically elected president and daughter of one of the leading names in the National Revolution. Investigations into the relationship between Park and Choi Soon-Si (daughter of the spiritual leader of the Church of Eternal Life and mentor of the president, Cho Tae-min) were held, and ended up finding a close link between the two in october The intensity of the relationship between Choi and Park was such that the president s friend influenced from dressing to political appointments in the government. However, according to the findings, the most aggravating of the situation would have been the fact that Choi had access to information and official documents of the presidency, and would have used them, and the influence on Park, to get millionaire donations from large South- Korean companies - such as Samsung, LG and Hyundai - to the creation of foundations and for personal enrichment. There is doubt in society about the president s actual participation in the story: while some believe that Park would have advised Choi and her advisors to raise this money; Others argue that the president was a mere puppet. The sum of all these accusations culminated in the opening of an impeachment process in December 2016 (BBC 2017). After ratification of the impeachment motion by the National Assembly (234 favorable votes), the then Prime Minister, Hwang Kyo-ahn, took over as interim president. In March the South Korean 66 Constitutional Court unanimously approved the request for impeachment, definitively removing Park from the presidency and convening new elections in 60 days. It is interesting to note that the figure of the liberal Moon Jae-in is presented as a strong name to take office. At the end of March, the president was taken into custody and charged with crimes of bribery, abuse of authority and the leaking of official documents. Against this backdrop, Samsung, one of the largest and most significant companies within Korean conglomerates, has been hit hard by having its vice president involved in this corruption scandal. The company, which in 2015 had revenues of $ billion (corresponding to 12.6% of South Korea s GDP in that year), had four executives in addition to Vice-President Lee Jae-Yong, indicted for corruption (Forbes 2017). Following the announcement that chaebols vice president and heir had been arrested for taking part in the scandal, the South Korean giant s share price closed at a very strong low (Ians 2017, McCurry 2017). To the South Korean economy, it is known that it is heavily anchored in the export of goods and services (in 2016, it accounted about 46% of GDP, especially in electronics and automobiles) and that such exports are balanced because of very significant domestic consumption. However, there has been a decline in domestic consumption in the last two years. In addition, because of their involvement in the corruption scandal, chaebols are facing serious difficulties, which, combined with the competitiveness of world trade, presents a scenario that is not conducive to growth in exports and, consequently, GDP growth (Fendos 2016). On the other hand, some economists hope that by defining Park s situation and convening new elections, there will be a fiscal stimulus for the second half of 2017, which would likely have a positive impact on the economy in However, some geopolitical

8 challenges, the growth of the external debt and the withdrawal of domestic consumption still present themselves as risk. In numerical terms, it is believed that the forecast of growth of 2% to 3% in GDP for 2017 is still maintained, due to of some resolutions in the political crisis (Lockett 2017). The involvement of the daughter of one of the main leaders responsible for the country s economic modernization, as well as of the companies that ascended with the process of rapid industrialization and development in South Korea, puts in check this development project proposed in the 1960s (Brites 2014). Many South Koreans hope that greater transparency will be verified within the chaebols, as the revolt of much of the public who went on the streets clamoring for Park s impeachment was channeled directly to the conglomerates (Manning 2017). This disruption, which directly affects the pillars of the alliance between the government and the South Korean conglomerates, is a matter of concern and uncertainty about South Korea s future. Especially when analyzing this internal panorama from the perspective of the current regional situation. Final considerations The political crisis in South Korea has triggered a series of events whose developments are far from measurable. President Park s impeachment process has left Seoul vulnerable to an unstable regional landscape. If during the Park government the country sought to assert itself as the axis of Asian multilateralism, as tensions in East Asia evolved this condition deteriorated, and the installation of the THAAD was the apex of this situation. For this reason, the internal political crisis cannot be separated from the regional situation. Furthermore, the current framework that marks contemporary international relations must be observed, as the systemic competition has been expanded. And, historically, in the face of a climate of war between great powers the opportunities for autonomous insertion become more fragile, especially for a country that is dependent on security terms such as South Korea. In this sense, the political crisis in the country is quite emblematic. In a country marked by the difficult separation between the public and private spheres, where the chaebols have relations very close to the government, the escalation of this specific crisis to the process of impeachment of a government that sought an autonomous insertion leads to numerous reflections. In addition, the election of Donald Trump as US President extends the frame of uncertainty mainly because the new president focused his campaign on rivalry with China. Therefore, the upcoming presidential elections are a key indication of the future of South Korean relations with the US, China and North Korea. If Moon Jae-in confirms favoritism, it will be important to see to what extent the new president will be able to maintain the party s historic traditions even in the face of increased rivalries in East Asia. Therefore, South Korea is a key stage for understanding relations in the region in the coming months. Although South Korea has traditionally been an undisputed ally of the United States, the country s internal dynamics show that there are distinct 67

9 Notes 1. Sunshine Policy was a policy of cooperation and reconciliation with the North and in support of Pyongyang s initiatives to approach Washington and Tokyo. 2. Sino-Japanese relations have deteriorated from disputes involving the Diaoyu-Senkaku islands that have returned to the agenda in An attempt by the Japanese government to buy the islands generated a wave of prototypes in China and culminated in the end of direct operations between the two Governments. In addition, in 2013, China established an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) on the East China Sea, which also covered the disputed islands. It was attached to escalating tensions between the two countries. 3. Women of Comfort or Comfort Women was the name given to women and girls forced into a regime of sexual slavery in the territories occupied by Japan during World War II. In South Korea, which was colonized and occupied by Japan between 1910 and 1945, the sexual exploitation of Korean women was a humanitarian tragedy that has left its mark on bilateral relations to this day. References BBC De Tráfico De Influência A Participação Em Seita: Entenda O Escândalo Que Levou Ao Impeachment Da Presidente Sul-Coreana - BBC Brasil BBC Brasil. Justin Fendos, The Diplomat South Korea Is Poised For Economic Disaster. The Diplomat. com/2016/12/south-korea-is-poised-for-economic-disaster/. Lockett, Hudson Economists React To South Korean President S Impeachment. Financial Times. content/da529b67-f5fa-35ad-b78f-3d06390f8a07. Manning, John The Economic Impact Of South Korea s Presidential Impeachment. International Banker. internationalbanker.com/finance/economic-impact-south-koreas-presidential-impeachment/. McCurry, Justin Samsung s Acting Head Indicted On Bribery Charges As Scandal Grows. The Guardian. theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/samsung-head-indicted-on-bribery-charges-as-scandal-grows. Ians Samsung Stocks Plunge After Arrest Of Heir Over Corruption Scandal Business-Standard.Com. Forbes Samsung Electronics On Forbes Lists Forbes Panda, Ankit South Korea Joins the AIIB. The Diplomat. Sang-Hun, Choe U.S. And South Korea Agree To Delay Shift In Wartime Command.Nytimes.com. 68

10 com/2014/10/25/international-home/us-and-south-korea-agree-to-delay-shift-in-wartime-command.html. Snyder, Scott South Korean Identity Under Park Geun-hye: Crosscurrents & Choppy Waters. Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies. Tiezzi, Shannon With Trilateral Summit, China-Japan-Korea Cooperation Completely Restored. The Diplomat. thediplomat.com/2015/11/with-trilateral-summit-china-japan-korea-cooperation-completely-restored/ Yong, Kwon South Korea s Eurasia Ambitions. The Diplomat. Zakharova, Liudmila Russia-North Korea Economic Relations. us-korea_2016_-_russia_nk.pdf Received on April 2, Approved on April 17,