CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION
6.2 THEORETICAL REFLECTION
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Leadership X X X
Table 1: Results of the analysis of ROK’s behaviors in three bilateral disputes with Japan.
6.2 Theoretical Reflection
Based on the results of this study, there are several conclusions that can be drawn about the middle power theory generally, and more specifically as it relates to South Korea’s situation.
First, about Korea more specifically, it is well established that Seoul is both willing and able to act on its self-proclaimed middle-power status at the global level. In just a few brief examples, Korea has undertaken initiatives to achieve and promote the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and Millennium Development Goals, spearheaded MIKTA, and has funded and established multiple organizations dedicated to promoting democracy, human rights denuclearization, anti-terrorism, foreign aid and international peace. Korea’s participation in these middle power endeavors, as well as the global recognition that it achieves for doing so, are all great sources of pride for Korean people (Green 2017: 20, 28; Hermanns 2013: 74-76;
Robertson 2016: 127-136) the national government is focused on promoting itself as a middle power at the global level and has the enthusiastic support of its people behind them.
But at the bilateral level in its territorial disputes with Japan, Korea is severely constrained by frequent inability, and many times an unwillingness, to apply the theory to its foreign policy. The three most important limiting factors, as discussed in the previous section and throughout this thesis, are (1) fervent Korean nationalism that is rooted in anti-Japanese attitudes; (2) the ROK’s decision to incorporate ROK-Japan bilateral disputes into national symbols of resistance against colonial oppression, thereby reinforcing anti-Japanese sentiment as
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
a central aspect of Korean national identity; as well as (3) Japan ‘bashing,’ which has become a politically rewarding strategy for Korea’s leaders. All three of these factors reinforce one another, ultimately inhibiting leaders from adopting middle power values to resolve conflicts with the Japanese.
This puts South Korea in an awkward position of confidently declaring itself a middle power but frequently stepping back in the face of compromise and cooperation to solve territorial and historical disputes with Japan, either through the force of domestic opposition, or simple reluctance to do so at the state level. This is not consistent with a nation willing and able to follow a middle power foreign policy to solve bilateral problems.
Secondly, this research has important implications for the understanding of middle power theory more broadly. As the case study of Korea has shown, middle powers excel in following a virtuous foreign policy agenda in areas where it is relatively easier to do so, such as in promoting peace, cooperation and conflict resolution at the global level. In these sorts of cases, middle powers are usually not themselves involved disputes, so it is not difficult for them to uphold the image of being good international citizens.
However, in areas where it is relatively more challenging to adhere to middle power ideals, like when a middle power is itself a participant in an international conflict - as in the example of ROK-Japan disputes - in this case it can be much harder to maintain their commitment to middle power values. As a result, also becomes much harder for them to sustain their image as good international citizens. The behavior of two classical middle powers -- Canada and Denmark -- in handling a similar territorial dispute provides additional corroboration for this idea.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
For the past three decades, Canada and Denmark have been contesting each other’s sovereignty over a barren, uninhabited rock known as Hans Island. The problem is that the island is technically located within both Danish and Canadian waters, since it lies within 12 miles of legally claimable territory between Canada and Greenland16. Denmark's Minister of Greenland Affairs visited the island in 1984 to plant the Danish flag along with a bottle of whisky and a note reading “Welcome to the Danish Island.” Since then, according to Peter Takso Jensen, former Danish Ambassador to the US, "when Danish military go there, they leave a bottle of Schnapps. And when [Canadian] military forces come there, they leave a bottle of Canadian Club and a sign saying, 'Welcome to Canada' (Bender 2016). Although the two countries signed a joint statement in 2005 committing to continued negotiations and promising to inform one another in advance of any planned activities related to the island (Mackrael 2012), as of March 2017 the sovereignty dispute is yet to be resolved. Relations remain good despite the fact that
"every now and then it crops up as an issue between the two parties, [but] they just simply try to put aside because [neither] side is interested in dealing with it" (Mackrael 2012).
It is apparent that Hans Island is not a flashpoint the way Dokdo is for Korea and Japan.
Nevertheless, Canada and Denmark are two classical middle powers who have tethered their national identities and foreign policies for more than 50 years to the idea of conflict resolution, compromise and multlilateralism, and yet they have succeeded no more than Korea has in resolving its own historical and territorial conflicts with Japan.
The middle power theory indicates that certain nations who strive to uphold an image of good international citizenship will tend to rely on multilateralism, compromise and peacebuilding to resolve international problems. Scholars have arrived at this description based
16 Greenland is an autonomous territory of Denmark.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
on observing middle powers’ response to conflicts at the global level. However, the literature has not looked closely enough at middle powers’ behavior at bilateral conflicts. This is important because, as this thesis demonstrates, there is new perspective to be gained when analyzing alleged middle powers’ response to bilateral conflicts in which they are personally involved. In this situation, middle powers struggle to settle the disputes and it is much more difficult for them to uphold their images as responsible international citizens. This insight must be added to the current literature in order to provide a more comprehensive picture of the nature of middle powers’ foreign policies.