China’s Role in Inter-Korean Relations
Author: Gordon G. Chang
With substantial leverage over both Koreas, Beijing should be able to greatly influence inter-Korean relations, but it appears its power has reached its zenith. China, the country that is supposed to dominate the 21st century, is on the verge of losing influence on one of its borders. Relationships on the Korean peninsula have always been complex, and in recent years they look to have become more so, increasingly to the detriment of China. Both the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea are trying to unify the Korean nation, and the drive for union substantially reduces the role of outside powers. Moreover, America’s moves to disarm North Korea have undermined Chinese influence. Finally, China, due to increasingly provocative policies, is triggering growing opposition to its aims, limiting its own power.
(Pages 1 – 15)
South Korean Defense Budgets 2017-2019: Paying More Despite a Reduced Threat?
Author: Todd B. Boese
This article analyzes the defense budgets of the Republic of Korea for 2018, 2019, and 2020 in order to determine if the requirements and objectives articulated in government policy rhetoric are receiving increased fiscal resources. Funding for programs associated with policy objectives indicates the political importance of those objectives. Determination of funding levels for budget programs is based on analysis of documents published by the ROK National Assembly, while identification of defense requirements and objectives is based on a review of statements made by the South Korean government. This research concludes that increases to the defense budget are not driven by changes in the security environment or security policy, but rather are a function of government expansionary fiscal policy. However, increased funding for aircraft programs in conjunction with decreased funding for maneuver and firepower programs does reflect the government’s objective to build a more balanced military force.
(Pages 16 – 42)
Freeze and Advance: How North Korea Maneuvered to Get the Bomb and Prospects for Its Nuclear Future
Author: George A. Hutchinson
U.S. administrations have opted to negotiate with North Korea in an attempt to curb its nuclear ambitions. Rather than producing their intended effect, past negotiations have inadvertently served as a vehicle for North Korea to methodically achieve its nuclear objectives. This paper presents evidence of North Korea’s decades-old drive to maneuver through negotiations while also advancing its nuclear development, including its resistance to sign the IAEA safeguards agreement and its subsequent demands under the Agreed Framework which allowed Pyongyang to advance the clandestine portions of its nuclear program. The paper also explains, more specifically, how North Korea has used the negotiating process with the U.S. to achieve its objectives. Nuclear negotiations have followed a repeating cycle, with North Korea: (1) getting to the negotiating table; (2) agreeing to a freeze under a system of verification; (3) obstructing the verification process intended to monitor the freeze and then (4) blaming the U.S. for the ultimate collapse of the agreement while continuing to advance its weapons program.
(Pages 43 – 63)
Can Memories of the Japan-Korea dispute on “Comfort Women” Resolve the Issue?
Author: Gabriel Jonsson
About 80 percent of the estimated 70,000 to 200,000 ”comfort women” Japan took by coercion from 1932 to 1945 were Korean. The issue was long neglected by both countries for pragmatic reasons. When Korean women raised the issue around 1990 and the former comfort woman Kim Hak-sun came out in 1991, it emerged as a point of dispute. Solidarity organizations in both countries have contributed to raise the visibility of the issue. Museums in Seoul and Tokyo educate the public on victims’ suffering. However, increased awareness has not succeeded in producing a solution to the issue that satisfies both countries given their fixed positions. Japan has given no official apology to the victims. The crucial issue of legal responsibility remains unresolved. On December 28, 2015, Japan expressed an apology and agreed to provide $8.3 million for a foundation to be established by South Korea to support the victims. However, the issue remains unresolved since the victims were not consulted in advance of the agreement, as well as disagreement also on other issues.
(Pages 64 – 80)
The U.S.-ROK Alliance and its Discontents: Investigating the Effects of the Alliance on Civil-Military Relations in South Korea
Author: Trisha Ray
Until the late 1980s, the Republic of Korea was under de facto military rule. Accordingly, South Korea’s uniformed military had an outsized influence on domestic and foreign policy for much of the nation’s history. When the military regime gave way to civilian rule, scholars chronicled the emergence of democratic ideals in South Korea, including the cornerstone: civilian control of the military. As civil-military relations evolved, the uniformed military continued to influence areas of defense policy that are reserved for civilian leaders in other liberal democracies. This paper analyzes the United States-Republic of Korea Alliance’s influence on civil-military relations in South Korea using institutional and alliance legitimacy theories of organization. It proposes a triangular relationship between the uniformed military, civilian government, and military alliance with the United States. Institutional biases influence the uniformed military’s interactions with the alliance, while public opinion shapes the civilian government’s relationship with the alliance. In turn, how military officers and elected civilians view and relate to the alliance affects their relationship with one another.
(Pages 81 – 119)
The 10th Special Measures Agreement between the U.S. and South Korea: Analysis and Implications for Northeast Asia
Author: Elton J. Chun
The United States and the Republic of Korea concluded the 10th Special Measures Agreement on February 10, 2019. The two countries agreed to a one-year agreement after difficult negotiations in which Washington demanded that Seoul increase the amount paid to offset the costs of stationing American forces in Korea. Since 1991, Washington and Seoul have concluded 10 Special Measures Agreements. Unlike the previous five-year agreement, the 10th SMA was a “stopgap deal” that covered a one year of bilateral defense budgets with an option of extending the agreement for an additional year; it was the first SMA negotiated by the Trump administration. This article examines the 10th Special Measures Agreement, exploring the history of defense cost sharing between the two countries, effects on South Korea, implications for coordinating policy on North Korea, and influences on Japan, Russia, and China. The article concludes with an assessment on how the 10th Special Measures Agreement and other factors will affect future agreements.
(Pages 120 – 143)
