• Strategy21
• /
• s.45
• /
• pp.5-32
• /
• 2019

The paper introduces US Indo-Pacific Strategy and discusses its meanings and implications for international security and our strategy. It tries to look at the Indo-Pacific strategy(IPS) through the lenses of international political theories. The paper provides three important observations. First, the US Indo-Pacific strategy is a declaration of the national identity of the US as an Indo-Pacific nation. The paper argues that the IPS reflects the US leadership that would facilitate the formation of, so called, the Indo-Pacific community. In arguing these points, the paper notes that the IPS has rich elements of constructivist approaches including norms and national identity. Second, the paper observes that the IPS report serves as an effective deterrent strategy. The IPS does not call out China as an enemy. But, it tries to deter against a range of actors including China by warning that whoever violates the rules-based order in the region would have consequences. Third, the paper maintains that the IPS is an effort by the US to mitigate the risk of a great power war between the US (an established power) and China (a challenging power) because the IPS articulates the United States's willingness to work with China as long as it plays by the rules. There will be challenges to the US and other countries in the region including South Korea particularly because of economic interdependence. However, the paper argues that the IPS stands for an optimistic sign of the future security in the Indo-Pacific region because it is a manifestation of the US for its national will to defend the status quo characterized as Pax Americana which has been maintained since the end of the Second World War. It also argues that South Korea also can, and should make the most of this opportunity by enhancing our capacity in national defense.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.71-123
• /
• 2021

Seoul is under increasing pressure to choose between the US-led IndoPacific Strategy (IPS) and China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Accordingly, this paper undertakes a detailed appraisal of the IPS and the BRI in the context of Korea's national policy imperatives. Based on a study of network structure by Daniel Nexon and Thomas Wright (2007), the present study seeks to identify a particular network structure within the IPS and the BRI. Through this analysis, the relationship between the core and the participant states will be addressed. Awareness of specific configurations of the IPS and the BRI is important as these reveal what participant states can expect from each network. According to Nexon and Wright, there are four types of network structure: unipolar anarchy, hegemonic order, constitutional order, and imperial order. Based on this, we argue that the IPS has a constitutional order and the BRI has an imperial order. Therefore, we suggest to Seoul that participating in the IPS may make more room for an independent foreign policy than would a BRI partnership with China. South Korea would benefit by participating in the IPS in terms of its national security, striking a favourable regional balance of power.