[Smart Q&A: Son Byong-kwon] Obama's Second Term Foreign Policy and Korea's Challenges

YouTube Link: video.eai.or.kr/121109_smart.flv

Professor Son Byong-kwon holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Michigan and is currently a professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Chung-Ang University.

Obama's Second Term Foreign Policy and Domestic Political Constraints

“The 'pivot to Asia' policy is likely to face some setbacks as the U.S. will inevitably continue to focus on the Middle East.”

“The conflict between the Democratic and Republican parties over defense spending cuts could have significant repercussions on foreign policy.”

As evidenced by the intense debates during the election campaign, which largely centered on economic issues, the second term administration of President Barack Obama will inevitably focus on meeting voters' expectations for economic recovery through job creation and reducing the federal deficit.

The 'pivot to Asia' policy was announced in September 2011, after the Middle East situation was expected to be resolved. Conversely, when the Middle East issues resurface, the U.S. 'pivot to Asia' policy is bound to face certain constraints. The series of events following the Arab Spring, particularly the Syrian issue, which has reached a stalemate due to the uncooperative stance of China and Russia, the terrorist attack on the consulate in Benghazi, Libya, which resulted in the death of Ambassador Christopher Stevens, the escalating anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, and the Iranian nuclear issue, all compel the U.S. to maintain its focus on the Middle East. Therefore, it is anticipated that the smooth implementation of Obama's second-term 'pivot to Asia' policy will be difficult.

A severe partisan deadlock persists between the Democratic and Republican parties. Domestically, the most significant confrontation is expected to revolve around the issue of reducing government spending, and the conflict between the two parties over defense spending cuts, in particular, could have significant repercussions on foreign policy. The Democratic Party advocates for defense spending cuts to reduce the fiscal deficit. They emphasize the need to reduce the enormous defense expenditures of the past and instead invest in the welfare of returning soldiers, including their education and employment after their service in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, the Republican Party criticizes defense spending cuts, arguing that they have undermined America's global leadership and led to events like the Benghazi terrorist attack and China's assertive actions. The Republican Party proposes reducing social security programs, including elderly healthcare, to alleviate the national fiscal deficit. In response, the Democratic Party argues that cuts to welfare programs, which are considered fundamental rights, are unacceptable. However, there is a possibility of compromise between the Democratic and Republican parties, as some military buildup in Asia may be necessary to ensure the credibility of the 'pivot to Asia' policy, and the current healthcare system may be unsustainable due to fiscal burdens.

Sino-U.S. Relations and ROK-U.S. Relations in Obama's Second Term

“Sino-U.S. Relations: ① Demand that China act as a responsible stakeholder ② Demand that China act according to rules.”

“China policy will continue its pendulum motion between containment and engagement, but will emphasize engagement for the time being.”

“ROK-U.S. Relations: ① Demand active role from South Korea in defense of the Korean Peninsula ② Renegotiation of the ROK-U.S. FTA is unlikely.”

The U.S. emphasis on the 'pivot to Asia' policy has a dual purpose. First, it aims to secure Asian markets for expanded trade. Second, it seeks to protect U.S. security interests amidst China's growing military power, concerns about transparency, and the increasing need for maritime security due to territorial disputes with neighboring countries. This fundamentally entails pursuing a friendly engagement policy toward China to expand trade, but it also implies that the U.S. will not tolerate China's overly assertive actions if they are perceived to undermine U.S. security interests.

Recent developments in Sino-U.S. relations clearly illustrate this duality. In March, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emphasized in a speech at the U.S. Institute of Peace that the U.S. has no intention of containing China and that China's rise is consistent with U.S. interests. At the same time, she criticized China's behavior as a "selective stakeholder" that shifts between developing and developed country status based on convenience, urging China to assume a responsible role commensurate with its enhanced national power. Furthermore, she stressed the need for China to act according to rules, which is understood to mean adhering to World Trade Organization (WTO) norms and resolving maritime territorial disputes multilaterally.

Chinese President Hu Jintao's congratulatory address at the opening ceremony of the 4th U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue also reflects a similar stance. President Hu primarily emphasized creative steps for the development of U.S.-China relations, mutual respect and trust, and expanding people-to-people exchanges. However, a closer examination reveals that regarding Secretary Clinton's call for responsible great power behavior, China clearly asserted its status as a 'developing country.' Furthermore, in response to the demand for rule-based U.S.-China relations, China countered by calling for the "elimination of interference" in each other's affairs.

Currently, it is assessed that the U.S. is continuing a phase of cooperation with China to resolve Middle East issues. In September, Secretary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta visited China, making successive conciliatory gestures. Ultimately, the U.S. is exhibiting a pendulum motion between containment and engagement toward China, and is currently in an engagement phase. Of course, if China takes assertive actions that infringe upon vital U.S. interests or the important interests of its allies in the future, the U.S. will take firm measures from a security perspective.

U.S. fiscal constraints will serve as a factor demanding a more active role from South Korea in future ROK-U.S. relations, particularly concerning the cost-sharing of defense expenses. Simultaneously, it will create difficulties for renegotiating the Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The current Obama administration is in a position where it cannot pursue any policy that could reduce exports or hinder job creation. Moreover, renegotiating the FTA would require the bill to pass through Congress again, which would be an immense burden for the Democratic Party in the U.S. midterm elections scheduled for 2014.

Korea's Challenges

“Actively explain the difficulties Korea faces between the U.S. and China.”

“Given the U.S.'s policy of oscillating between containment and engagement, South Korea should also pursue a flexible policy toward China.”

“Be cautiously prepared for the U.S. to request active cooperation from South Korea.”

“With diminished U.S. attention on North Korean issues, South Korea's active role is crucial.”

The United States, a traditional ally with whom South Korea has maintained close relations since the Korean War, remains a crucial partner for continued strong ties. Realistically, however, China is the country with which relations are bound to become closer than ever. China is not only South Korea's largest trading partner but also holds the most significant influence on North Korean issues as the leading participant in the Six-Party Talks. Therefore, South Korea must strive to actively explain the difficulties it faces between the U.S. and China, thereby ensuring that both powers understand the unique circumstances of Korea's situation.

The U.S. policy toward China moves freely between containment and deterrence on one hand, and engagement and dialogue on the other. In this context, if South Korea were to blindly follow the U.S. in pursuing strong pressure policies against China, it could face a very difficult situation when the U.S. shifts its direction. Therefore, it is necessary for South Korea to adopt a flexible approach to its foreign policy, ensuring that the path for normalizing relations with China is always kept open.

Regardless of whether a conservative or progressive government comes to power in South Korea after the December 2012 presidential election, the U.S. is likely to request active roles from South Korea in various areas. While there will be instances where cooperation is necessary to accommodate U.S. requests, South Korea may also face demands that could lead to severe domestic political difficulties. Therefore, it is essential to be mindful of these possibilities and prepare cautiously in advance.

North Korean issues were not a significant topic in the recent U.S. presidential election. While the Iranian nuclear issue was discussed, the North Korean nuclear issue received almost no attention. For the North Korean issue to re-emerge as a major topic in U.S. foreign policy, two conditions must be met: first, North Korea must come to the negotiating table with a sincere attitude; second, the U.S. government must find itself in a situation where it needs diplomatic achievements due to domestic political considerations, similar to the second term of the Bush administration, and thus turn its attention to the North Korean issue. However, neither of these scenarios appears highly probable at present. Therefore, South Korea's active role is crucial for resolving the North Korean issue. Particularly considering that President Obama's declaration of 'a world without nuclear weapons' and his Nobel Peace Prize have not yet yielded concrete results, South Korea should proactively express its commitment to resolving the North Korean nuclear issue and persuade the U.S. to that end.■

The East Asia Institute (EAI) has been selected as a core research institution for the MacArthur Foundation's 'Asia Security Initiative' program and receives financial support. EAI has been conducting Smart Q&A, a video interview series with domestic and international experts, aiming to provide timely and in-depth analysis of current issues through Q&A sessions with experts in relevant fields. This manuscript is a compilation of interview content by Researcher Kim Yang-gyu (EAI Center for Asian Security Studies) and represents the personal opinions of the expert, not the official stance of the East Asia Institute. Please cite the source when quoting from Smart Q&A.