In the Catholic Peace Weekly, Diagnosis of the Times column, a Catholic University professor gives the readers his thoughts on a recent statement from the government.
On December 28, the government announced a report titled “Indo-Pacific Strategy for Freedom, Peace, and Prosperity,” and held a briefing session hosted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The report declared that “Korea is an Indo-Pacific country” and emphasized that “regional stability and prosperity are directly related to the national interest of the Republic of Korea.
The name Indo-Pacific is still unfamiliar to ordinary citizens. Rather, the term Asia-Pacific is more familiar. Why bother to let go of a familiar name and use a new, unfamiliar name? For this reason, it is necessary to point out that the concept of Indo-Pacific has rapidly become internationally accepted and universalized over the past few years.
Indo-Pacific, a geopolitical concept encompassing the Indian and Pacific Oceans, has been used as an official strategic concept in the United States since the end of 2017. Before that, Japan and Australia first actively reflected the concept of Indo-Pacific in their respective diplomatic strategies. In particular, Japan actively introduced the concept of Indo-Pacific to the United States. Since then, ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) has published an Indo-Pacific outlook report, and major European countries such as the European Union (EU), Germany, France, and the United Kingdom have also announced their own Indo-Pacific policies.
The fact that China's foreign behavior has changed aggressively has served as a background factor for the generalization of the name Indo-Pacific. In other words, several countries in the region felt the need to respond to the perception and prospect that the rising China was trying to revise the existing liberal world order. In this respect, the check against China's revisionism can be said to be the hidden purpose of the concept of Indo-Pacific.
The announcement of the Indo-Pacific Strategy Report by the Korean government this time has the greatest significance in keeping pace with many Indo-Pacific countries. Among them, it seems that the core of the concern was how to cooperate with the US while being highly conscious of the Indo-Pacific strategy.
However, the government's Indo-Pacific report suggested inclusiveness as one of the principles of cooperation within the region, leaving open the possibility of cooperation with China to the extent possible. In this respect, there is a certain difference from the US Indo-Thai strategy, which has a strong character of containing China, but it is an unavoidable setting for Korea, which cannot sever economic relations with China at once.
However, there is no strategic concern beyond positioning between the US and China. The report presents the vision of “the Indo-Pacific of freedom, peace and prosperity” and the cooperative principles of “inclusion, trust and mutual benefit”, “establishing a regional order based on norms and rules, cooperation in promoting the rule of law and human rights, and counter-terrorism and non-proliferation nine key tasks are also presented, including strengthening cooperation and expanding comprehensive security cooperation. However, it is regrettable that there is no sufficient explanation on how to promote and achieve these visions, principles, and tasks.
The geopolitical concept of the Indo-Pacific emerged and became common against the background of competition between the US and China, but the role of major countries other than the two countries is also important for the development of regional order. Of course, the ups and downs of US-China relations will primarily determine the nature of the regional order. However, since both the US and China are actively seeking solidarity and alliances with other countries, how other major countries in the region respond and what role they play is a variable that cannot be ignored.
In this respect, there is room for middle powers such as Korea to actively exercise leadership and to do so, they need their own meticulous strategies. Although the government's Indo-Pacific strategy report was virtually a vision declaration, it is expected that the government will prepare and implement more specific strategies for regional freedom, peace, and prosperity through follow-up work.
