|
American Korea experts read the Roh Moo-hyun administration¡¯s ambition for Korea to become a stabilizer in Northeast Asia as a barely concealed attempt to quit the alliance with the U.S. and call the plan unrealistic.
Georgetown University professor Bob Sutter said the concept could only mean an end to the Korea-U.S. alliance. It was also impossible to understand what the government meant by its stated aim of simultaneously strengthening the alliance and playing a stabilizing role in Northeast Asia. He said if Korea wants to leave its U.S.-alliance, it can do so, but there will be a price to pay later.
Heritage Foundation fellow Larry Wortzel said Korea lacks the economic, political and military strength to play a balancing role in the region, whereas Great Britain in the past and India now were able to play a balancing role because they had the national clout. Wortzel said Roh¡¯s arguments were likely intended to strengthen Korea¡¯s diplomatic leverage and get on a more equal footing with Washington. He added the U.S. and China resolved their diplomatic differences in a friendly manner without major conflicts since 1972 -- it was therefore unlikely they would become mired in Cold War-like tensions, as Roh appears to assume.
The Cato Institute's vice president Ted Carpenter, who has called for a ¡°friendly parting¡± between Korea and the U.S., said if tensions erupted in Northeast Asia between the U.S. and China or Japan and China, far from playing a stabilizing role Korea would find itself in very hot water. He said Korea's regional ambition was ultimately unattainable. He added Korea should now end its security dependence on the U.S. and make a mature decision to take charge of its own security.
The Asia Foundation¡¯s Scott Snyder said it could be a natural choice for Korea to pursue multi-level and multi-faceted diplomacy, but just as the U.S. cannot play a unilateral role in Northeast Asia, it would be difficult for Korea, too, to exert a decisive influence in the region.
(englishnews@chosun.com )
|
