Northeast Asian politics is an intriguing but bitter pot of jambalaya for scholars, journalists, and pundits in and across the region. Problems, concerns, disputes, conflicts, and procrastination on various kinds of bilateral and multilateral issues have made the situation in this region a good case study for diplomatic balancing among states, including great, middle, and small powers. This diplomatic balancing does not necessarily refer to the classic “Balance of Power” theoretical approach, rather it emphasizes the diplomatic efforts of certain states to maximize their economic and political gains from several (typically two) important partners. So “balancing” here does not mean to “balance against,” but to seek gains from two partners in a “balanced” way.
For example, as the relationship between North Korea and China becomes more complex and hard to predict, various analyses have argued that Pyongyang is seeking closer ties with Russia. Earlier this year, North Korean official Kim Yong-il, secretary and director of international affairs for the Korean Workers’ Party, claimed that the friendly bilateral relationship between the DPRK and Russia has reached a “higher level.” As Paul Haenle and Anne Sherman pointed out in a recent piece for The Diplomat, North Korea’s diplomatic outreach to other powers (including Russia) is Pyongyang’s way of counterbalancing China’s tougher stance.
Meanwhile, China intends to achieve a diplomatic balance in the Korean Peninsula. China may view certain North Korean behaviors as provocative while closer ties with South Korea are a necessity both economically and geopolitically. Lastly, striking a balance between China and the United States obviously has always been on the top of South Korea’s agenda. This diplomatic approach does run the risk of Seoul facing growing concerns or even suspicions from both China and the United States, particularly on issues like the role of the Seoul-Washington alliance and the deployment of the THAAD system.
Read Full Article HERE