Abstract
Over the past 615 years since the Mongols were expelled from the land, Korea has experienced 500 years of dependence on China, 40 years of dominance by Japan, 60 years of divided reliance on the United States in the South and mostly on the Soviet Union in the North, and just a few decades when it was even possible to search for autonomy through a balance of powers.1 The concept of sada recalls how Koreans work with a hegemonic power to keep control of their own destiny or, if unavoidable, just to achieve partial autonomy. When deterring war with the North at last no longer seemed necessary, the goal of expanding national independence or even ending sada rose to the fore but with disappointing results. Many see the United States trying to retain its dominance, China inclined to reassert its, Japan eyeing ways to reimpose its, and Russia not to be ignored.2 Hopes endure, however, of seizing a rare opportunity to work with all of these countries to find a balance conducive to reunification, more sovereign control, and regional influence.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Charles K. Armstrong, Gilbert Rozman, Samuel S. Kim, and Stephen Kotkin, eds., Korea at the Center: Dynamics of Regionalism in Northeast Asia (2006).
Sangwoo Rhee, “Introduction,” in Sangwoo Rhee and Taehyo Kim, eds., Korea-Japan Security Relations: Prescriptive Studie (Seoul: New Asia Research Institute, 2000).
Hong Nack Kim, “The Kim Dae-Jung Government’s North Korea Policy,” Korea & World Affair, Vol. 29, No. 2 (2005), pp. 520–40.
Kohari Susumu, “Roh Moo-hyun seiken wa naze ‘tainichi kyoko’ ni natta noka?” Sekai shuh, 2005, pp. 50–51.
Yu-hwan Koh, “Roh Moo-hyun Administration’s North Korea Policy and Nuclear Crisis Management,” Korea & World Affair, Vol. 30, No. 1 (2006), pp. 6–7.
Chung Min Lee, “China’s Rise, Asia’s Dilemma,” The National Interes, No. 81 (2005), pp. 88–94.
Lee Wook Yon, “Korea-China Cultural Relations and a ‘Communal House,’” Korea Focu, Vol. 13, No. 1 (2005), pp. 125–38.
Yang Giho, “Ilbuk gwangye oe jonchi gyongjejok,” in Chong Jinoe, ed., Saeroun Dongbuka jilso oa Hanband (Seoul: Homansha, 1998), pp. 502–21.
David Kang, “Japan: U.S. Partner or Focused on Abductees,” The Washington Quarterl, Vol. 28, No. 4 (2005), pp. 107–17.
Scott Snyder, “South Korea’s Squeeze Play,” The Washington Quarterly, Vol. 28, No. 4 (2005), pp. 93–106.
Chung Taeik, “Bukhan haekmunje taihan Roshia oe ipjang mit shisajom” Oigy (2003), pp. 26–33.
Kuon Oguk, “Kuraedo 6jahoidam oe yuilhan haebop,” Tongil Hanguk (2005), pp. 27–29.
Cho Hanbom, “Bukhan oe taehan yonghyangryok jisok ul tonghan tae Hanbando palongwon kanghwa rul uido,” Bukha (2005), pp. 53–56.
Chong Huisok, “Dongbuka dajaanbo hyopryok goa Roshia,” Hanguk jongji oigyosa ronchon, Vol. 27, No. 2 (2006), pp. 429–63.
Yon Hyonshik, “Roshia yonbang oigyo jongchaek goa Hanbando tongil,” Jongsuyong, (2005), pp. 152–63.
Lee Chulkee, “Strategic Flexibility of U.S. Forces in Korea,” 2006, http://www.nautilus.org/fora/security/0619Lee.html.
Copyright information
© 2011 Gilbert Rozman
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rozman, G. (2011). The South Korean Response: The Regional Context. In: Strategic Thinking about the Korean Nuclear Crisis. Strategic Thought in Northeast Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230116399_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230116399_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-0-230-10847-9
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-11639-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)