Muslim World Report

Lee Jae-myung's Presidency: A Challenge for Taiwan-South Korea Relations

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 15, 2025 10:16 AM | 8 min read | 1697 words

TL;DR: Lee Jae-myung’s potential presidency could significantly alter South Korea’s foreign policy, leaning towards China and away from U.S. interests, which may raise tensions with Taiwan and reshape regional alliances. His approach may either escalate militarization or foster neutrality and economic collaboration, impacting regional stability and U.S.-South Korea relations.

The Consequences of a Lee Jae-myung Presidency on Taiwan-South Korea Relations

As geopolitical tensions escalate in the Indo-Pacific, the candidacy of Lee Jae-myung in South Korea’s upcoming presidential elections signals a potentially transformative shift in regional dynamics, particularly in relation to Taiwan. Lee’s inclination toward a more China-friendly foreign policy starkly contrasts with the hardline stance of his predecessor, Yoon Suk-yeol, who dutifully aligned South Korea with U.S. foreign policy directives. This potential pivot is crucial not only for South Korea but also for the broader Indo-Pacific region, which is currently experiencing an arms race and increasing military confrontations (Yul Sohn, 2019).

Diverging Paths: Lee Jae-myung vs. Yoon Suk-yeol

Under Yoon’s leadership, South Korea closely adhered to U.S. interests, particularly regarding the Taiwan Strait, perceiving any potential Chinese aggression as a direct threat—a viewpoint that aligns with the U.S. narrative of containing China (Kang, 2009). In stark contrast, Lee’s remarks questioning the relevance of Taiwan’s status to South Korean interests suggest an opening for dialogue with Beijing. This shift could significantly alter the U.S.-South Korea alliance, presenting both opportunities for diplomacy and risks of miscalculation.

What If: A Shift Away from U.S. Policy?

If Lee Jae-myung’s administration opts not to endorse U.S. policy regarding Taiwan, the repercussions could be profound for regional security and U.S.-South Korea relations. Potential consequences include:

  • Diplomatic Shift: A refusal to militarily support Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion could be seen as a considerable diplomatic shift away from Washington’s influence.
  • Military Strategy Reassessment: The U.S. might reassess its military strategy in East Asia, potentially increasing its military presence in Japan or other allied states.
  • Increased Tensions: This escalation could result in heightened tensions in an already volatile region, with nations resorting to military buildups to safeguard their interests against an assertive China.

Moreover, a shift in South Korea’s stance could embolden China, interpreting neutrality as tacit support for its territorial claims over Taiwan. This reaction could trigger a cascading effect among regional players like Japan and the Philippines, prompting them to reevaluate their alignments based on South Korea’s new position. The broader narrative regarding U.S. reliability as an ally could also be compromised, leading other nations to reconsider their partnerships with Washington, especially if they observe a key ally engaging more openly with Beijing.

Regional Implications of Lee’s Presidency

The implications of Lee’s presidency could prompt a recalibration of South Korean foreign policy amidst rising tensions. Should Lee advance a less confrontational approach to China, it risks undermining U.S. ambitions in the region. The potential hazards are considerable; in the event of armed conflict over Taiwan, South Korea’s involvement—or its willingness to support U.S. military action—will largely depend on Lee’s strategic calculations and perceptions of national interest. As U.S. hegemony faces challenges, so too do the sovereignty and agency of regional players like South Korea (David Dollar, 1989).

The Risks of a U.S. Response

If the U.S. reacts aggressively to any perceived shift in South Korea’s foreign policy under Lee Jae-myung, the consequences could be far-reaching. An escalatory response might manifest through:

  • Increased Military Drills: This could lead to heightened military activities in the region.
  • Stronger Diplomatic Efforts: The U.S. might attempt to compel South Korea back into alignment with a firm pro-Taiwan stance (Dumbaugh, 2008).
  • Economic Pressure: Economic measures, leveraging trade agreements, could exacerbate tensions and inadvertently push South Korea closer to China as it seeks to assert its sovereignty and maintain a degree of independence in foreign policy.

Furthermore, the U.S. may bolster military alliances with Japan and Australia in response to a perceived South Korean defection. While this pivot could enhance military cooperation, it may also create a more militarized environment in East Asia, increasing the risks of miscalculations and accidents that could lead to rapid escalations into conflict, particularly in the Taiwan Strait (Harold, 2012).

Domestic Considerations for Lee’s Administration

Domestically, Lee’s policies, particularly his focus on universal basic income (UBI), may resonate with the electorate, potentially reinforcing his mandate. However, he must navigate a complex landscape of public opinion that remains deeply influenced by national security concerns and the historical legacy of South Korea’s relations with the U.S. and China (Chung, 2012). Any backlash against a perceived abandonment of U.S. alliances may incite domestic unrest or demands for a more assertive national defense strategy.

If Lee Jae-myung further aligns South Korea with China, the consequences could drastically reshape regional dynamics. Potential impacts include:

  • Enhanced Economic Partnerships: This alignment may lead to closer trade and technology cooperation, benefiting both nations.
  • Thrive in Technology Sector: South Korea’s technology sector could thrive under such an alignment, gaining access to Chinese markets while reducing its dependence on U.S. technology and investment.
  • Increased Strategic Importance: Such a pivot could also position South Korea as a significant player in the China-led Belt and Road Initiative, enhancing its strategic importance in global trade routes (Yin-wah Chu, 2019).

What If: Closer Ties with China?

Enhanced Economic Partnerships

If Lee pursues closer ties with China, several potential outcomes could reshape the economic landscape in East Asia:

  • Growing Trade and Technology Collaboration: Enhanced economic partnerships could bring significant benefits, particularly in the technology sectors where South Korea excels.
  • Boost to South Korean Economy: Improved access to Chinese markets could give a substantial boost to South Korea’s technological sector, fostering innovation and potentially decreasing reliance on U.S. investment (Feenstra, 1998).
  • Role in Global Trade Dynamics: This scenario might not only enhance South Korea’s economic stability but could also position it as a pivotal player within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative.

However, such a pivot would likely provoke skepticism and hostility from the U.S. and its allies. Historically, Washington has interpreted any shift towards Beijing as a challenge to the existing international order, which could result in punitive measures, such as economic sanctions or political isolation (Harold, 2012). Moreover, the prospect of a more militarized response from Japan could further exacerbate historical tensions and reshape security dynamics in the region (Sutter, 2011).

Internal Scrutiny and Domestic Reactions

Internally, Lee’s administration would face considerable scrutiny. While certain segments of the population might welcome a realignment with China, strong pro-U.S. sentiments could lead to significant opposition, complicating Lee’s governance and ambitions for economic revitalization. Balancing economic necessities with national security imperatives will become increasingly critical, pressing Lee to effectively manage both foreign policy and domestic sentiment.

As Lee Jae-myung navigates the complexities of foreign policy, strategic maneuvers warrant consideration by all involved parties. For Lee, establishing a diplomatic framework that emphasizes dialogue with both the U.S. and China will be crucial. South Korea could position itself as a mediator rather than a participant in escalating tensions, advocating for peace and stability through a balanced approach. By fostering cooperation over confrontation, South Korea can safeguard its economic interests while minimizing the risks associated with entanglement in great power conflicts (Yoo, 2017).

For the U.S., recalibrating its approach to alliances in East Asia could yield strategic benefits. Instead of exerting pressure on South Korea to conform to a pro-Taiwan policy, the U.S. could endorse a comprehensive strategy that acknowledges South Korea’s security concerns and aspirations for regional stability (Kang, 2008). This could involve promoting joint security initiatives emphasizing collaboration rather than confrontation, thereby supporting South Korea’s economic development in a way that aligns with broader U.S. interests.

China, for its part, should consider how its actions impact regional perceptions. A stance of restraint regarding Taiwan would alleviate fears among its neighbors and reduce pressures for militarization and alliance formation against it. Engaging constructively with South Korea—emphasizing mutual benefits while addressing historical grievances—could enhance China’s image as a responsible regional power (Lee & Kim, 2020).

Future Scenarios for Regional Relations

The implications of Lee Jae-myung’s presidency extend far beyond bilateral ties; they signify a potential reshaping of alliances and rivalries in East Asia. The complex interplay of U.S.-China relations, South Korean domestic politics, and regional security dynamics could lead to several outcomes based on Lee’s strategic decisions:

  1. Increased Militarization: Should Lee adopt a more confrontational stance toward China, this could lead to an intensified militarization of the region, with South Korea increasing its defense capabilities and the U.S. ramping up military support.

  2. Neutrality and Economic Focus: Conversely, if Lee emphasizes neutrality while promoting economic collaboration with both the U.S. and China, South Korea could emerge as a diplomatic bridge between the two powers.

  3. Alliance Realignment: Should South Korea fully pivot towards China, it would necessitate a significant restructuring of U.S.-South Korea relations, potentially leading to a loss of South Korea’s status as a key U.S. ally in the region.

  4. Domestic Stability vs. External Pressures: Lee’s administration will face internal pressures as balancing a pro-China policy with strong pro-U.S. sentiments within South Korea may prove challenging. If public opinion shifts sharply against closer ties with China, Lee could face domestic unrest.

As South Korea approaches its electoral decision, the opportunity for a transformative shift in foreign policy awaits; one that aims to navigate the complexities of a multipolar world rather than merely choosing sides in a binary conflict. The future of South Korea’s stance on Taiwan will not only shape regional dynamics but could redefine international relations across the Indo-Pacific.

References

  • Yul Sohn. (2019). South Korea under the United States–China rivalry: Dynamics of the economic-security nexus in trade policymaking. The Pacific Review.
  • David C. Kang. (2008). China rising: peace, power, and order in East Asia. Choice Reviews Online.
  • David Dollar. (1989). South Korea-China trade relations: Problems and prospects. Asian Survey.
  • Scott W. Harold. (2012). U.S.-Chinese relations: Perilous past, pragmatic present. Choice Reviews Online.
  • Timothy Savage. (2008). U.S.-Chinese relations: Perilous past, pragmatic present. Choice Reviews Online.
  • Jae Ho Chung. (2012). Introduction: South Korea–China relations. Asian Perspective.
  • Hyun Chung Yoo. (2017). Moon Jae-in government’s management strategy for the South Korea-China relations. Journal of Peace and Unification.
  • Yul Sohn & Won-Taek Kang. (2013). South Korea in 2012. Asian Survey.
← Prev Next →