[Smart Q&A: Lee Dong-ryul · Lee Sang-hyun] China's ADIZ Declaration and Korea ②: From the Perspective of US-China Relations

YouTube Link: video.eai.or.kr/131212_Sqa.flv

Professor Lee Dong-ryul holds a Ph.D. in Political Science from Peking University, China, and is currently a professor in the Department of Chinese Studies at Dongduk Women's University and the Chairman of the EAI China Research Panel.

Senior Research Fellow Lee Sang-hyun is the Director of the Security Strategy Research Office at the Sejong Institute. Senior Research Fellow Lee Sang-hyun received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and previously served as the Director of Policy Planning for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

The East Asia Institute (EAI) recently conducted a series of Smart Q&A interviews on the issue of Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ), which has become a point of contention among countries in the East Asian region. On December 10, EAI interviewed Professor Gu Min-kyo of Seoul National University to analyze the issue from the perspective of international norms, and on December 12, EAI interviewed Professor Lee Dong-ryul of Dongduk Women's University and Senior Research Fellow Lee Sang-hyun of the Sejong Institute to discuss how the issue can be understood from the perspective of US-China relations and what regional diplomacy Korea should pursue going forward. The main points are as follows.interview.

Differences in US and Chinese Positions on ADIZ and Their Background

"China: ① Aims to actively defend its gradually expanding core interests in the maritime domain ② Simultaneously pursuing follow-up measures to stably manage relations with neighboring countries to foster an environment for sustained national power growth."

"United States: Views China's actions as a test of US resolve as part of its anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategy, and fears that yielding early will necessitate concessions on more issues in the future."

Q. How can the official positions of the US and China regarding the ADIZ issue be summarized?

Lee Dong-ryul Regarding the declaration of the ADIZ, China has officially stated that first, it is a measure to secure China's sovereignty and airspace safety, and second, it is an action in accordance with international law and practice, and therefore hopes that neighboring countries and the US will respect it. China's emphasis on international law and practice this time can be seen as a response to the international community's criticism of China in 2010 concerning the South China Sea dispute, when the US centrally raised the issue of the norm of "freedom of navigation."

Lee Sang-hyun The United States has officially stated that it cannot recognize China's unilateral declaration of an ADIZ. In a broad sense, the US raises concerns that China's action is inconsistent with the behavior of a "responsible stakeholder." As China has emerged as a key actor alongside the US in the current international order, the US has consistently demanded that China act in accordance with international norms and rules. While the unilateral declaration of an ADIZ is not legally problematic, China's declaration of its zone overlapping with the ADIZs of South Korea and Japan without prior consultation, and its use of threatening language implying possible military action, have raised US concerns. This is not the behavior of a responsible stakeholder, and the US is concerned that China's overly aggressive actions, while not yet fully recognized as a mature actor in the international community, are increasing regional instability. This can be understood in the context of the US's show of force with reconnaissance aircraft, fighter jets, and bombers immediately after China declared its ADIZ. Although the perception that the interests of both countries can coexist in the US-China era is widespread, their strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region still have a zero-sum character.

Q. What is the background behind China's raising the ADIZ issue in a "unilateral" and "provocative" manner, while maintaining the principle of "new type of major power relations" (新型大国关系)?

Lee Dong-ryul There is much debate about the background of China's sudden raising of the ADIZ issue at an unexpected time. Some interpret this action as stemming from the Xi Jinping administration's adoption of a hardline foreign policy to overcome domestic political instability and enhance regime legitimacy, but it is difficult to find supporting evidence for this. Rather, China has a tradition of seeking to manage its external environment stably when facing internal instability. This is because China has experienced crises of regime facing internal and external threats (內憂外患) simultaneously, such as during the Great Leap Forward in 1958 or after the Tiananmen Square incident in 1989. It is worth remembering past cases where China sought to maintain stable relations with neighboring countries after these events. Indeed, prior to this incident, at a "Symposium on Diplomacy with Neighboring Countries" attended by all seven members of the Politburo Standing Committee on October 25, Chinese leadership emphasized the critical importance of maintaining stable relations with neighboring countries to realize the "Chinese Dream" (中国梦), or the "great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation."

China's ADIZ declaration clearly demonstrates two policy directions. First, the defense of core interests, emphasized since 2010. China's core interests are now gradually expanding in the maritime domain in conjunction with its growing national power. While the expansion of the ADIZ may be perceived as a threatening move by neighboring countries, from China's perspective, it has a defensive aspect considering the expansion of its core interests. However, it is noteworthy that China, which was previously reactive and defensive, has now taken a proactive and leading stance. In the future, China may take preemptive measures on issues involving its core interests. Second, simultaneously, China is making efforts to maintain stable relations with the US and neighboring countries to sustain its rise. In the case of the ADIZ issue, China has taken a gradual approach, preemptively raising the issue, closely observing the responses of neighboring countries, and then taking follow-up actions to manage the situation.

Q. What do you believe is the background for the US's strong response to China's ADIZ declaration, including the deployment of strategic bombers from the outset?

Lee Sang-hyun The US is concerned not so much about the ADIZ issue itself as it is about the judgment that this is a precursor (前兆) to more aggressive actions by China in the future. China is currently pursuing an anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategy in the Western Pacific to block US strategic projection. The US believes that China is testing US resolve on individual issues like the current ADIZ situation as part of this strategy. If this action is the starting point for more comprehensive "driving out the US" moves in the future, the US fears that yielding early will lead to demands for concessions on more issues. Furthermore, given the current regional instability and the possibility of accidental clashes, if the US does not adequately respond to China's attempts to check its influence in the region, it will fail to sufficiently demonstrate its resolve to regional allies. The US's show of force with reconnaissance aircraft, fighter jets, and bombers immediately after China declared its ADIZ can be understood in this context. Although the perception that the interests of both countries can coexist in the US-China era is widespread, their strategic interests in the Asia-Pacific region still have a zero-sum character.

US-China Relations in 2014 and Outlook for East Asian Affairs

"While the possibility of direct conflict between the US and China is low, the likelihood of accidental clashes and miscalculations increases in a tense situation."

"If Japan adopts an exclusively offensive stance, the possibility of Sino-Japanese conflict escalating into a US-China conflict exists."

"Ultimately, the key to long-term changes in the East Asian regional dynamics lies with the United States."

Q. Considering the strategic calculations of both the US and China that can be inferred from their recent actions, what is your outlook for US-China relations in 2014?

Lee Sang-hyun Given that China has deployed the ADIZ card, tensions between the US and China are likely to persist for the time being. The situation is unfolding in a complex manner with the US's Asia-Pacific Rebalancing strategy and China's "assertive rise" leading to ongoing military, diplomatic, and economic competition between the two countries. Amidst this, various potential conflict points are emerging, such as the ADIZ, collective self-defense, the Senkaku dispute, the North Korean nuclear issue and the Six-Party Talks, and Missile Defense (MD).

Ultimately, the key lies in the level at which the US and China manage crises. While the possibility of direct conflict between the two countries over various issues is low for the time being, it is important to note that in the current tense situation, uncertainty inevitably increases. The likelihood of accidental clashes and miscalculations rises, thereby increasing regional instability.

Lee Dong-ryul This ADIZ incident could mark a significant turning point in US-China relations in the long term. China has been concerned that its expanding core interests, in line with its rise, and its actions to defend them might provoke the US. However, by not effectively responding to China's ADIZ declaration, the US has empirically confirmed that China's assertive actions do not necessarily face strong US resistance as feared. Consequently, I believe China has gained confidence to take action in more areas in the future. Going forward, China will likely strive to expand its core interests incrementally while managing its relations to avoid direct conflict with the US, thereby maintaining its upward trajectory of rise.

Q. What are the key issues that require particular attention when forecasting and preparing for future East Asian dynamics?

Lee Sang-hyun In the short to medium term, Japan is the key variable in the unfolding dynamics of US-China relations. As China expands its strategic defense perimeter in the South China Sea and East China Sea, the exclusive influence Japan has historically enjoyed in the region's maritime domain is being offset. The current ADIZ declaration can be interpreted as China's attempt to achieve a balance in the air, following the partial success of its balancing strategy against Japan in the maritime domain. While both the US and China currently have a strong desire to manage their relations to avoid escalation into conflict, Japan's future actions, which perceive China's rise as a serious threat, are likely to act as a significant independent variable.

Lee Dong-ryul I agree. In fact, China's ADIZ declaration can be seen as significantly influenced by the suspicion that the US-Japan alliance is attempting to contain China's rise, following the US's approval of Japan's pursuit of collective self-defense.

This incident has led Japan to perceive China as an even greater threat, while also fostering distrust in the US's regional influence. This increases the possibility that Japan may exacerbate the situation through more aggressive responses. If Japan adopts an aggressive stance, China is also likely to respond more assertively, thus creating significant room for escalation of Sino-Japanese conflict.

Lee Sang-hyun In this context, the most concerning issue is the Sino-Japanese dispute over the Senkaku Islands (China's name: Diaoyu Islands). In particular, Japan's assertion that the Senkaku Islands are Japanese territory and are covered by the US-Japan Security Treaty opens the possibility for Sino-Japanese conflict to escalate into a US-China conflict. Whether this will lead to a regional crisis or be managed stably remains uncertain and depends on the active crisis management will of the involved parties in the current uncertain phase. If the US and China decide to escalate the issue, the situation could spiral out of control. However, this would be a lose-lose choice for both countries, so they will likely avoid direct conflict, and thus, it is relatively more probable that the US, China, and Japan will handle this issue cautiously for now.

Q. If the strategic interests of the US and China in the East Asian region are bound to be zero-sum, is a conflict between the two countries inevitable in the long run?

Lee Dong-ryul Despite China's rise, the key to changes in East Asian dynamics still lies with the United States. The core of what China calls "new type of major power relations" is, as President Xi Jinping stated, that the Pacific Ocean is wide enough to accommodate the interests of both the US and China, allowing for coexistence and common prosperity while respecting each other's core interests. If the US's rebalancing policy is pursued in a way that contains China's rise and undermines China's core interests, a direct conflict between the two countries will inevitably occur. However, peaceful coexistence is also possible if both countries respect each other's interests. China has learned from the history of the rise and fall of great powers and is known to have given considerable thought not only to how to rise as a great power but also how to stably maintain its great power status after rising. China is likely to continue seeking a path of coexistence with the US rather than seeking sole hegemony in the region. This is why China is taking proactive and preemptive measures while closely observing the US's response, and therefore, the US's reaction to China's actions will be a crucial determinant of regional dynamics.

Lee Sang-hyun I agree. The long-term future of East Asia depends, above all, on whether the US can demonstrate its firm resolve to implement its "pivot to Asia" strategy for countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Currently, due to the Syrian crisis and domestic political issues such as "Obamacare" (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), the US is unable to translate its stated strategic direction into concrete capacity building in the Asia-Pacific region. This implies that the US may not be able to adequately respond to China's assertive and proactive actions, which naturally leads to a lack of trust among regional allies.

Korea's Response Strategy

"Bold Leadership Needed for Korea: Elevate Korea's Diplomatic Standing Amidst US-China-Japan Confrontation"

"More Strategic and Flexible Diplomacy Needed: Move beyond mere reactive measures, operate based on a pre-prepared strategic blueprint, and strive to improve ROK-Japan relations."

Q. How do you assess the South Korean government's announcement of an expanded ADIZ?

Lee Sang-hyun Regarding the ADIZ incident, South Korea's expansion of the Korea Air Defense Identification Zone (KADIZ) was an unavoidable measure due to the issue concerning airspace over Ieodo, and can be assessed as having done what was necessary.

Lee Dong-ryulIn conclusion, this can be assessed as such. However, it is necessary to note that while the current administration's attempt to expand the KADIZ was resolved without significant conflict due to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' efforts, other international variables also played a role. For China, Japan's backlash was far more prominent than Korea's, and as the discussion direction was set towards the United States not directly confronting China, Korea's announcement of KADIZ expansion became a less sensitive issue. It is important to recognize that this phenomenon, where Korea's actions in the regional context are increasingly becoming a dependent variable rather than an independent one, is not advantageous for Korea in the long term.

Q.Based on the outlook for East Asian affairs, please offer recommendations for the Park Geun-hye administration's foreign and security policy as it enters its second year.

Lee Sang-hyunThe foreign policy directions currently set forth by the Park Geun-hye administration—such as the Korean Peninsula Trust-Building Process, the Northeast Asia Peace and Cooperation Initiative, middle power diplomacy, and the Eurasian Initiative—are generally evaluated as sound. However, entering its second year from 2014, the administration will face the challenge of demonstrating concrete achievements beyond mere policy directions or principles. To date, the administration's foreign policy directions have remained at the level of setting a direction, with no concrete action plans yet developed.

While the current situation, with increasing risks of conflict in relations between regional powers, may narrow Korea's room for maneuver, it conversely presents an opportunity for regional powers to listen attentively when Korea makes bold proposals. Building upon the experience of the Lee Myung-bak administration, which garnered significant attention through its proactive engagement on the international stage by advocating for a "Global Korea," the Park Geun-hye administration can significantly broaden Korea's diplomatic standing by proposing creative solutions for building a regional order.

It is necessary to improve relations with Japan, with whom we share significant strategic interests. Until last summer, the U.S. public opinion largely sided with the Korean stance emphasizing historical issues, and the dominant sentiment was that Japan's responsibility was hindering ROK-U.S.-Japan security cooperation. However, the atmosphere has changed considerably recently. Voices criticizing the Park Geun-hye administration are growing louder. Among policy researchers in the U.S., the concept of "federated defense," where countries sharing security interests cooperate to strengthen integrated defense capabilities, is being actively discussed. This demonstrates that strengthening cooperation with regional allies has become a critical issue for the United States amidst large-scale defense budget cuts. In this context, the rising criticism within the U.S. policy expert community that Korea is hindering the promotion of ROK-U.S.-Japan cooperation by emphasizing historical issues is a significant problem that could narrow Korea's standing in the long term.

Lee Dong-ryulI agree. Amidst rapidly changing circumstances, Korea's diplomacy must become more strategic and flexible. Diplomacy based solely on situational logic, responding only as issues arise, will struggle to navigate the high waves of the current regional dynamics. We must prepare a strategic blueprint that can protect Korea's national interests with a longer-term perspective. It is crucial to soberly observe the recent trend in Japanese public opinion surveys indicating a perception that Korea is leaning excessively towards China. We must carefully examine the possibility that Korea could become a victim of conflict between China and Japan, or even between the U.S. and China, regardless of Korea's intentions or actual actions, and prepare strategically to manage this. ■

The East Asia Institute (EAI) receives financial support from The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation for its research on middle power diplomacy. EAI conducts smart Q&A sessions in video interview format with domestic and international experts, aiming to provide timely and in-depth analysis of current issues through question-and-answer sessions with experts in relevant fields. This manuscript was compiled from interview content by an EAI researcher at the 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 the Smart Q&A.