A Desirable Korean-Style Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Control Tower

2013 EAI Special Report

The East Asia Institute's Center for Asian Security Studies launched the 'EAI Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Decision-Making System Research Team' with the objective of presenting a desirable Korean-style national security decision-making system model concerning the establishment of a control tower for foreign affairs, security, and unification policies, the necessity of which has been more strongly emphasized since the Cheonan and Yeonpyeong Island incidents. After a research period of approximately one year analyzing and evaluating Korea's past experiences and foreign policy decision-making systems, the research team published the report [A Desirable Korean-Style Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Control Tower], proposing the 'Strategic Staff Model' and the 'Secretariat Model with a Strategic Planning Function' as foreign affairs and security policy decision-making systems suitable for our circumstances. We hope this research will contribute to the ongoing discussions at the Presidential Transition Committee regarding the establishment of a National Security Office.

I. Introduction

1. Research Objectives

This study aims to present a desirable foreign affairs and security policy decision-making system suitable for our circumstances by analyzing and evaluating Korea's past experiences and foreign policy systems, based on the premise that the content and execution efficiency of policies are significantly influenced by a nation's policy decision-making system (structure, procedures, operational methods, human resources, relationships, etc.).

During the five years of the Lee Myung-bak administration, various incidents, accidents, and challenges occurred in the foreign affairs and security domain, including the detention of South Korean personnel at the Kaesong Industrial Complex, the shooting incident of a tourist at Mount Kumgang, North Korea's missile tests and nuclear tests, the Imnam Dam water release incident, the Battle of Daecheongdo, the sinking of the ROKS Cheonan, the shelling of Yeonpyeong Island, and the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) with Japan. In response to each of these events, the common and recurring criticism was the lack of policy coordination and the inefficiency and inconsistency in policy execution among relevant ministries due to the incompleteness of the 'control tower' in foreign affairs and security. While measures were taken to supplement and strengthen the system after specific incidents, they are assessed to have been very limited and minimal responses and adjustments, rather than fundamental and comprehensive solutions.

Conversely, during the Roh Moo-hyun administration, operations were centered around the National Security Council (NSC). While this ensured that related ministries spoke with one voice and policy consistency was maintained, the excessive status and influence of the NSC led to a 'top-down' approach in policy formulation and alternative setting, rather than coordination and adjustment. This approach became entrenched, exhibiting a bias towards a specific direction and neglecting the positions, opinions, and judgments of related ministries. It is assessed that by performing not only planning, coordination, and adjustment but also execution functions, the scope of action for related ministries was reduced, leading to a situation where they had no choice but to adopt a limited approach in discovering and executing alternatives and countermeasures.

The distinct systems represented by the Roh Moo-hyun and Lee Myung-bak administrations, as described above, clearly illustrate the significance and impact of the foreign affairs and security policy decision-making system and its operational methods on policy formulation, execution, direction setting, and the selection of policy alternatives and their efficiency. In other words, it is important to note that the outcomes and results can differ, excluding the direction of policy, depending on the procedures and form of the foreign affairs and security policy decision-making system established.

One of the crucial factors to consider in conducting such research is the change in the conditions and environment related to the foreign affairs and security policy decision-making system. Unlike in the past, the actors influencing foreign affairs and security policy have diversified, including civil society organizations, and foreign affairs and security issues have become more complex and multi-layered. To devise effective solutions for complex problems, the ability to analyze issues from various perspectives and combine or integrate diverse means is required. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze and evaluate which system is appropriate for reflecting the characteristics of the changed environment and ensuring a multi-faceted approach, thereby enhancing the completeness and achievement of policies.

In this context, analyzing the relationship between the system (structure) and procedures (process) (the relationship between the system and its operation) is also required. A detailed review of the entire policy decision-making and execution process, including information gathering, situation analysis and evaluation, goal setting, development of implementation strategies, securing means and methods, execution, and review and supplementation, is necessary. It is important to determine which system can ensure a smooth implementation process. This study aims to present a desirable foreign affairs and security policy decision-making system that reflects the policy decision-making flow by considering not only the structural system but also the operational methods and examining ways to ensure the linkage between the system and operational methods.

2. Research Methods

This study aims to present a desirable foreign affairs and security policy decision-making system suitable for our circumstances by comparatively reviewing past cases. The past cases include the Kim Dae-jung administration (a parallel operational system of the secretariat and the NSC), which introduced a new operational system and methods such as the standing committee, working-level coordination meetings, and situation assessment meetings by establishing a secretariat for the National Security Council; the Roh Moo-hyun administration, which further expanded and strengthened the NSC (an NSC-centered system); and the Lee Myung-bak administration (a secretariat-centered system), which can be seen as a return to the form prior to the Kim Dae-jung administration. The Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun administrations, having significant similarities, can be collectively referred to as a 'staff' type organization, while the Lee Myung-bak administration can be called a 'secretary or liaison' type organization. The Kim Dae-jung administration, upon its inauguration, reviewed foreign cases and, based on them, introduced an NSC-centered foreign affairs and security policy decision-making system, establishing a form that coexisted with the secretariat. Routine daily affairs were handled primarily by the Foreign Affairs and Security Secretariat, while the NSC was tasked with mid-to-long-term policy planning and crisis management. The Roh Moo-hyun administration integrated the secretariat and the NSC, transitioning to an NSC-centered system that was responsible for planning, coordination, and even execution functions. Conversely, the Lee Myung-bak administration abolished the NSC Secretariat and reverted to the previous system, shifting to a system centered around the Senior Secretary for Foreign Affairs and Security (maintaining only the Information and Situation Room under the Chief of Staff to the President). The first model faced criticism for the Blue House's unilateralism and overreach, while the second model was criticized for the absence of a control tower and policy confusion. More specifically, each model is assessed to have had the following advantages and disadvantages:

[Table 1] Comparison of Advantages and Disadvantages of Staff-Type and Secretariat-Type Organizations

In conclusion, the objective of this study is to present a suitable system for Korea by analyzing and evaluating the different forms of foreign affairs and security policy decision-making systems we have experienced over the past 15 years, while also examining foreign cases.

II. Past Government Cases

The National Security Council (NSC), since the enactment of the National Security Council Act on December 14, 1963, following President Park Chung-hee's directive in 1962, has been operated in a nominal capacity, failing to meet the demands of the times despite two revisions to the Act. In the 35 years from its establishment until the inauguration of the Kim Dae-jung administration, only 51 meetings were held, and from 1993 until just before the launch of the Kim Dae-jung administration in 1998, only three meetings took place. The Kim Dae-jung administration set the revitalization and strengthening of the National Security Council as one of its 100 national projects and established the foundation for the NSC system by amending the 'National Security Council Act' and the 'Regulations on the Operation of the National Security Council,' thereby regularizing the NSC standing committee and establishing a secretariat... (continued)