In the Diagnosis of Current Events column of the Catholic Peace Weekly a university professor provides his thoughts on the current crisis.
The writer has contributed to this page since June of last year, and looking at the articles there is some consistency. First, he tried to emphasize that today's world situation faces a complex crisis. Additionally, South Korea's diplomacy should avoid simple solutions based on partisan perspectives as much as possible.
To paraphrase German Chancellor Scholz, the world is at a turning point (Zeitenwende). The era of post-Cold War and globalization, in which optimism for peace and prosperity prevailed, is over and the ‘return of geopolitics’ is taking place. Strategic competition between the US and China is accelerating, and the war that started with Russia's invasion of Ukraine continues. On the Korean Peninsula, the risk of conflict is growing as North Korea is preoccupied with nuclear and missile development and South Korea's dialogue with North Korea has been cut off for years
The global economy, which was viewed from the perspective of globalization, interdependence, and international cooperation, now tends to be approached from the standpoint of security. So-called "economic security" has emerged as a significant area of contention in international politics. In particular, in key industries such as semiconductors and batteries, which will determine future national competitiveness and the world's balance of power, the global supply chains are being reorganized according to political logic. For the same reason, strategic competition surrounding cutting-edge science and technology, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computers, has also intensified.
Climate change and pandemics require international cooperation, but cooperation is slow and insufficient. Climate experts agree that a climate catastrophe cannot be avoided if global temperatures rise by 1.5 °C, but the prevailing view is that the 1.5 °C Maginot Line cannot be maintained.
Indeed, a complex crisis is something that we have to deal with presently. However, it was said that it was a transition of the times, but where it is headed is close to clueless. So some say it's an era of hyper-uncertainty. The need for a complex response has grown amid signs of crisis and challenges being raised simultaneously.
Of course, complex responses are not as easy to find. The logic of politics favors clarity. Politics is composed of the ruling party and the opposing party. Policy, including diplomacy, is often presented as a matter of choosing between two opposing sides. Public opinion knows this dichotomy. Even the problem of each choice is recognized as a matter of goodness and evil in connection with moral justice. In this framed question, an intermediate answer that is neither this nor that is immediately treated as a politically incorrect answer.
However, various gray areas cannot be grasped through clarity alone. Today's world situation is especially challenging for there are many shades of gray between black and white. While the escalating 'cold war' confrontations continue. The lack of clarity in foreign policy causes us to obsess over simplistic prescriptions.
However, this only hinders complex searches for solutions. Of course, it takes a lot of effort to find a combination of method and formulas. Not all good things are attainable, and some things must be sacrificed to get something. Therefore, it is critical to set goals and priorities through public debate and opinion gathering and establish and implement strategies to achieve them. Living in a period of uncertain transition requires patience and care.
