Author Seongho Sheen is an associate professor at the Graduate Schools of International Studies, Seoul National University.         Abstract Following the rapid economic development of Asian countries in the footsteps of Japan, there has been much controversy on the future political-military order of the region. Disputes on history and territory and the rise of nationalism in the region, combined with the lack of any inter-state conflict-mediating mechanism have created an environment of intense security competition. In particular, the rise of China and an emerging arms race will further deepen the security dilemma among China, Japan, and South Korea. Northeast Asian international politics in the twenty-first century though will remain susceptible to both the existent power and new factors. Among these new factors, the rapidly changing population structure in the twentieth century will influence society and culture as well as political and military relations. The increasing low birth rate and rapid aging population demographics in China, Japan, and South Korea will slow economic growth while placing a great burden to provide social welfare. A side effect of this will be the slowing down of the arms race in the region. China, Japan, and South Korea will be so financially burdened by the increasing social welfare costs that they will not be able to sustain any increases in funding military expenditures. Although the impact of an aging population will not automatically guarantee security in Northeast Asia, it will remain a powerful drive by which the three countries could work toward a political compromise that will guarantee their security.       The full text in Korean is available here

Author Dongho Jo, Ewha Womans University; East Asia Institute Sung-bae Kim, Institute for National Security Strategy         Abstract The Kim Jong-un regime is, for the short term, considered stable and perceived to be closely imitating the leadership style of his grandfather Kim Il-sung. The Leap Day Deal and the subsequent satellite launch in April 2012 were two contradicting signals that show the regime is still undecided in its foreign relations. For the long term, the regime will likely side with China while at the same time maintaining its equidistant diplomacy regarding bilateral relations between China-U.S., China-Russia, and China-South Korea. Considering the incompatibility of China’s primary focus on economic development with North Korea’s military-first politics, the Kim Jong-un regime will likely experience difficulties in upholding its nuclear politics. Therefore, South Korea and neighboring states need to pursue a strategy of convolution for the long run to facilitate the transition of the Kim Jong-un regime from military-first politics reliant upon nuclear weapons to a denuclearized economy-first politics. South Korea, in particular, needs to plan for a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula in response to the regional mechanism initiated by the China and the United States. Above all, the future policy toward North Korea should included elements of realism, defensive and offensive liberalism, and constructivism which will contribute toward formulating a complex policy.         The full text in Korean is available here  

Author Dong Ryul Lee, Dongduk Women’s University Bonggyo Seo, DongDuk Women’s University     Abstract Under the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), political reforms in China are expected to be very gradual and limited and it is unlikely that there will be significant changes or an abrupt transformation in Chinese politics. Instead, China will continue to maintain its flexible authoritarianism while defending the “fragile stability” for a period of time. In other words, China will be justified in maintaining its flexible authoritarianism so long as it provides economic growth, social welfare, administrative efficiency, and strong performances in its foreign affairs. The CCP must also boost nationalism at home while at the same time sustain its rule through strict internal surveillance.   Such gradual reforms though reveal the limitations in fundamentally tackling the current internal difficulties facing China. Despite the unlikely chance of any imminent threat to the regime, social turmoil and instability are likely to become worse since laborers, farmers, and the underprivileged have no outlet for any grievances they hold. Furthermore, delaying discussions on political reforms because economic growth has remained steady will only place a greater burden on the Party in the future.   The Chinese economy will unlikely face the risk of economic slowdown, but it still must confront the task of enlarging domestic consumption, reducing social polarization, and regulating inflation to a reasonable level. In addition, variables in foreign relations remain a potential for crisis. Despite these immense challenges, China possesses a diverse pool of potential, and if it overcomes such difficulties successfully will experience significant economic growth for a period of time.   China is in the midst of a number of political and economic challenges, the root cause of which will continue to remain unresolved for the next ten years. However, the CCP has demonstrated a strong capability to prevent them from the emerging as regime-threatening factors. The CCP’s strong will to meet the challenges they are facing and continued effort to accomplish a peaceful rise will be maintained for at least the next ten years. The question is how the South Korean government will make best use of this crucial period to enhance its strategic value not only for Washington but also for Beijing.         The full text in Korean is available here   

Author Min Gyo Koo is an assistant professor in the Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University.         Abstract The oceans are a complex multi-layered space where traditional and non-traditional security challenges meet. They are also an important focus for policy making where South Korea’s new diplomatic paradigm, “complex diplomacy” will experience current and future challenges. Maritime issues in East Asia have seen a multi-layered structure of challenges including territorial disputes, disputes over natural resources, border line disputes, and the environmental issues. In the context of issues, institutional framework, and trends, this study focuses on the impact of the changing balance of power in the region upon the maritime strategy of East Asia, particularly in regards to China's rise and the relative decline of United States. With this new balance of power in East Asia, this paper also looks at the relevance of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as the symbol of maritime norms and as a normative arbitrator. Furthermore, this paper analyzes the principle of deciding maritime boundaries and baselines among the three East Asian countries of China, Japan, and South Korea as well as discusses the benefits and limits of “bilateral provisional measures” as a means for establishing regional maritime governance. Based upon this research, the author argues that it will be crucial to freeze the current territorial disputes before seeking multilateral arrangements on non-traditional security issues such as the joint development of natural resources, the protection of the regional maritime environment, and the safety of navigation. Discussions on the implication and limitations of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) should also follow. Finally, this study forecasts the future of the East Asian maritime order and asses its policy implications.       The full text in Korean is available here    

Author Dong Sun Lee is an associate professor at the Department of Political Science and International Relations, Korea University.         Abstract This paper presents prospects on the future orientation of the security order in Asia and proposes a security strategy for South Korea. By 2025 it is likely that four dominant powers will exist in the Asia region. As the primary great powers in the region, China and the United States would form their own spheres of influence, compete with each other in a limited way, and lead the regional politics. The United States has a decisive advantage in maritime regions having both superior air and naval forces whereas China will exercise its stronger land power on the continent. Other powers such as India and Russia will be unable to compete for hegemonic power. Instead, they will play a supplementary role as moderators while maintaining their own independence. Japan will actively support the United States by seeking to restrain China's rise. Given this expected future political outcome, the most feasible security strategy for South Korea would be to take on a balancing policy toward the neighboring continental countries of China and North Korea. In this regard, South Korea should engage in military cooperation with other maritime countries such as Japan and the United States in terms of naval forces and to further concentrate on the reinforcement of its own ground and air forces. It would also be beneficial for South Korea to strengthen militarily cooperation with India or Russia depending on the situation.         The full text in Korean is available here

The special report Post-Crisis World Order by the East Asia Institute’s National Security Panel has now been released (Committee Chair Young-Sun Ha, Seoul National University). Launched in September 2009, the National Security Panel’s “Post-Crisis World Order” project has focused on assessing how the world order will change in the post-Global Financial Crisis era where the United States is changing its strategic agenda and China is growing as an emerging power in global governance. This project is focused on changes in four main areas, Security, Economy, Energy and Climate Change, and Culture. The policy recommendations from this report aims to help the South Korean government to find the right strategy for this changing period.   This EAI NSP Report is based upon the working paper series on Post-Crisis World Order originally published in Korean. The following are the abstracts of each paper in English.         Security   Post-Crisis Change in International Security: The Reaction of the United States and its Security Implications Sang Hyun Lee (the Sejong Institute)   The Prospects for East Asian Security in the Post-Crisis Era Bong-Jun Ko (Chungnam National University)   The Post-Crisis Era and Change in the Korean Peninsula’s Security Order Jihwan Hwang (University of Seoul)   Economy   ‘Complex Network Period’: Global Financial Crisis and Change in the World Economic Governance Chi Wook Kim (Sejong Institute)   Change in Structure of Global Trade Following the Crisis Yul Sohn (Yonsei University)   Post-Crisis Financial Governance in East Asia Seungjoo Lee (Chung-Ang University)   Energy and Climate Change   Post-Crisis International Energy Governance Jae-Seung Lee (Korea University)   Post-Crisis World Order and International Environmental Politics: Current and Future Climate Change Regime Beom-Shik Shin (Seoul National University)   Culture   The Twenty-First Century Global Culture Order in the Post-Crisis Era Jun-seok Kim (Catholic University of Korea)   Post Crisis Globalization, and Citizenship, Multiculturalism, Democracy, and Religion Sung-Woo Park (Chungang University)         About the National Security Panel Since 2004, the East Asia Institute’s National Security Panel of foreign policy and security experts have been providing policy recommendations for South Korea to set the agenda on international security and foreign policy issues. The NSP has published four books: Korea’s Grand Strategy for a New Century: Weaving a Network State (2006), North Korean Nuclear Crisis and Peace on the Korean Peninsula (2006), East Asian Community: Myth and Reality (2008), The Emergence of Complex Alliances in the 21st Century (2010).

Abstract Today we are faced with the unprecedented expansion, strengthening, and acceleration of global networks of capital, labor, population, information and technology covering various areas of politics, military, economy, and culture. Among all these, what changes in culture were brought about in the globalization process and how will its future be shaped? There are four areas where this impact is noticeable: citizenship, multiculturalism, democracy, and religion.   In terms of citizenship, cosmopolitanism stands out theoretically but it is not easy to expect a groundbreaking change to occur in the existing citizenship theory, unless the modern principle of sovereignty is completely given up. Nevertheless, a conflict emerged where the notion of nation-state is challenged and strengthened at the same time due to the new reality of a globalized world. Democratic solidarity and room for activities of democratic organization have surely expanded not only at the state or local level but also at the transnational level. Still, it does not directly mean that the modern institution of citizenship has been completely substituted but rather, there are the two practices of citizenship coexisting.   The future of multiculturalism is similar to that of citizenship. If it is too difficult for modern states to abandon the concept of nation state, it casts then certain limitations on the collective rights of new minority groups and this restricts multiculturalism so that it does not harm the identity or solidarity of a nation state. In general, the political values modern states pursue are based on liberalistic values. Therefore multiculturalism should be adopted not as an alternative to liberal values but as a supplement to them.   Globalization has revealed the inherent contradiction of democracy and presented specific issues that need to be dealt with in order to enhance the further development of democracy. The process of globalization has also pushed for the redefinition of “demos,” both at that national and international level, but a new principle replacing it is not likely to emerge so long as democracy maintains “self-domination” as its fundamental political value. Rather, the values embodied within democracy needs to be reassessed and the question of how these values could coexist considered.   Lastly about religion, it is notable that post-secularization is becoming increasingly violent due to globalization. While globalization contributes to cultural homogeneity, post-secularization is abandoning cultural links creating difficult challenges for religion especially compared to the other cultural issues. At least citizenship or multiculturalism somehow shows how re-religionization and post-secularization could be refined in the domestic political level. Still, in the international political level where post-secularization is becoming violent, a framework for theoretical analysis is required in order to resolve the problem.       The full text in Korean is available here

Abstract After the Global Financial Crisis, the United States and China have been in competition over a “standard of civilization” which not only affects the relationship between the two powers but also the interactions between the cultures of the West and the East. Since World War II, particularly in the post-Cold War era, the United States has been emphasizing democracy as the global “standard of civilization.” For Washington the “civilization” or “advancement” of a state is judged by its level of adopting democratic values and system. Naturally for the United States, the spread of democracy is regarded as a major diplomatic goal while it also helps to preserving its cultural dominance. In recent days, the United States has even tried to maintain the cultural hegemony of the West through new “alliances.” China has seen a growth in interest of Chinese or East Asian ‘standard of civilization’ due to its steady economic growth. Particularly the goal of establishing a “Harmonious World” which the Chinese government has set as its main foreign policy agenda contains an aspect of countering the Western “standard of civilization.” It is also notable that academia and intellectuals in China are working to strengthen the foundation and legitimacy of a “harmonious world” by connecting it with China’s Confucius tradition.       The full text in Korean is available here