UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY
SOSH PAPER
SS307
SECTION J2
MS. AMELIA CANTER
BY
C87839700
WEST POINT, NEW YORK
13 APRIL 2023
___IF___ MY DOCUMENTATION IDENTIFIES ALL SOURCES USED AND ASSISTANCE
RECEIVED IN COMPLETING THIS ASSIGNMENT.
______ I DID NOT USE ANY SOURCES OR ASSISTANCE REQUIRING
DOCUMENTATION IN COMPLETING THIS ASSIGNMENT.
SIGNATURE: ________________________________________________________________
WORD COUNT EXCLUDING BIBLIOGRAPHY AND FOOTNOTES: 2512
C87839700 1
For decades, the relationship between North and South Korea have been characterized by
both tension and conflict. North Koreas military threats and nuclear ambitions continue to pose a
significant threat to both South Korea and its allies. In President Moon Jae-in’s address to the
National Assembly of South Korea in 2019, he emphasizes the importance of a strong defense for
which they can maintain peace and stability within South Korea.1 This notion of a strong defensive
posture emphasizes the critical role that deterrence plays in South Korea’s relations with North
Korea. While focusing on strengthening its military capabilities and engaging in political
diplomacy, South Korea’s main goal is security. South Korea’s comprehensive response of
increasing military spending and political cooperation can be explained through the tenets of
balance of thereat and distribution of power within realism as well as through the ideas of
institutionalism and trade expectations within liberalism. Realism, however, offers a better
explanation due to the causal nature of North Korea and the uncertainty that they present. Though
this lens, I believe that South Korea’s response will lead to further conflict because of the security
dilemma. Despite this, I recommend that South Korea stay on their current path to secure enough
power for survival.
The North Korean military poses a substantial danger to Northeast Asia. Over one million
soldiers are in the nation, and 6% of the inhabitants serve on active duty.2 These numbers make it
the fourth-largest army worldwide; hence it is a continuous threat to South Korea. The capabilities
of striking South Korea have increased because the people’s army is mainly deployed along the
“Adress by President Moon Jae-in at National Assembly to Propose Government Budget for 2021,”
Korea.net, Oct 28, 2020, https://www.korea.net/Government/Briefing-Room/PresidentialSpeeches/view?articleId=191290
1
“Military and Security Developments Involving the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” U.S.
Department of Defense, 2018, https://media.defense.gov/2018/May/22/2001920587/-1/-1/1/REPORT-TOCONGRESS-%20MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-DEMOCRATICPEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-KOREA-2017.PDF, 9.
2
C87839700 2
demilitarized zone (DMZ) near Seoul, the capital of South Korea.3 Although North Korea’s
military tactic is developed to defend the leader’s regime, it has continually endangered other
nations. In addition to this, North Korea's ongoing nuclear development poses a significant threat
to neighboring countries.4 The North Korean regime has conducted numerous nuclear and missile
tests, raising regional tensions and posing a significant threat to the security of neighboring
countries such as South Korea and other states as well.5. For example, the short-and medium-range
missiles (SRBMs) like the KN-25 threaten South Korea and the US.6 The country is committed to
creating missile programs that significantly intimidate enemy states. However, the progress of
these technological advances depends on how many resources other countries are willing to aid.
Consequently, the series of tests and increased personnel have proved that the North Korean
nuclear strategy has the potential to strengthen.
The comprehensive response by South Korea is multifaceted which can be broken down
into two main lines of effort: bolstering their own defenses and engaging in political diplomacy.
First, South Korea can be seen bolstering their own defenses through their increase in defense
spending as South Korea’s defense budget in 2022 reached a record high of 54.61 trillion South
Korean won, which is equivalent to 41 billion US dollars.7 This budget has allowed South Korea to
invest in military personnel and defensive tools such as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
3
“Military and Security Developments,” 9.
Shane Smith, “North Korea’s Evolving Nuclear Strategy,” US-Korea Institute at SAIS, August 2015,
https://www.38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/NKNF_Evolving-Nuclear-Strategy_Smith.pdf
4
5
Smith, 14
6
Mary Beth D Nikitin, “North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons and Missile Programs,” Congressional Research
Service, January 23, 2023, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/IF10472.pdf.
“South Korea’s National Defense Budget from 2006 to 2002,” Statista, December 2022,
https://www.statista.com/statistics/745747/south-korea-national-defense-expenditure/
7
C87839700 3
(THAAD) system, which is designed to intercept incoming missiles from North Korea.8 South
Korea’s extensive defense budget shows a preparedness on their behalf to defend themselves
against North Korean aggression and nuclear armament. In addition to this, South Korea placed an
importance in political diplomacy to promote cooperation amongst the peninsula and to reduce the
existing tensions. As a result of this diplomacy, there are multiple initiatives that include the
establishment of a joint liaison office in the border city of Gaeseong and inter-Korean summits
between 2018 and 2019.9 Despite the challenges outlined in the previous paragraph, South Korea’s
actions represents a concerted effort to ensure their own security while promoting cooperation and
peace within the peninsula. In this paper, the responses mentioned will be analyzed through the
lenses of neorealism and liberalism.
Realism, specifically neorealism, is a theory of international relations that explains global
politics. It contends that political constraints emerge from people's egoistic characteristics and are
characterized by anarchy, in which states seek power to ensure their survival.10 In a zero-sum
game, realists believe that when one state gains power, other states lose power.11 States are in
perpetual competition with one another, and their actions can be explained by their primary
objective of survival. Alliances are formed through either balancing or band wagoning. Balancing
occurs when a country allies with other states to counter a potential threat, whereas band wagoning
Ian E. Renehart, “Ballistic Missile Defense in the Asia-Pacific Region: Cooperation and Opposition,”
Congressional Research Service, April 3, 2015, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/R43116.pdf
8
9
“An Audacious Initiative,” Korean Culture Center, https://www.koreanculture.org/korea-informationinterkorean-relations
10
Kenneth N. Waltz, "The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory," in International Politics: Classic and
Contemporary Readings 2nd Edition, edited by Robert T. Person and Scott P. Handler, (Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press,
2022), 65.
John Mearsheimer, “Anarchy and the Struggle for Power,” in International Politics: Classic and
Contemporary Readings 2nd Edition, edited by Robert T. Person and Scott P. Handler, (Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press,
2022), 69.
11
C87839700 4
occurs when a country aligns with the threat itself.12 Threats are defined as states with high
aggregate power, proximity, and offensive capabilities and intentions.13 South Korea's decision to
balance is motivated by North Korea's high aggregate power, proximity, and offensive intentions.
In terms of aggregate power, North Korea has military capabilities that include a large
standing army that consists of over a million personnel armed with an extensive stockpile of
conventional weapons.14 In addition to the large standing force, nuclear weapons have been
valuable asset to North Korea in the sense that it is capable of deterring potential adversaries and
providing a sense of security. Throughout the years, North Korea was able to build an arsenal that
consists of about 60 nuclear warheads that are designed with the ability to mount these warheads
on ballistic missiles with improved mobility and survivability.15 These capabilities support the fact
that North Korea has high aggregate power that pose a threat to South Korea.
Subsequently, the Korean peninsula has been a source of contention for decades, with
North and South Korea both having a long history of border disputes. The two countries share a
heavily fortified and militarized border known as the demilitarized zone (DMZ), which is only 35
miles from South Korea’s capital city Seoul. The DMZ's proximity to South Korea's capital city,
Seoul, only adds to the danger, making it easier for North Korea to launch attacks and potentially
Stephen Walt, “Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power,” in International Politics: Classic and
Contemporary Readings 2nd Edition, edited by Robert T. Person and Scott P. Handler, (Thousand Oaks, CA: CQ Press,
2022), 83.
12
13
Walt, 84-86
14
“Military and Security Developments Involving the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” U.S.
Department of Defense, 2018, https://media.defense.gov/2018/May/22/2001920587/-1/-1/1/REPORT-TOCONGRESS-%20MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTS-INVOLVING-THE-DEMOCRATICPEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-KOREA-2017.PDF, 9.
Mary Beth D Nikitin, “North Korea’s Nuclear Weapons and Missile Programs,” Congressional Research
Service, January 23, 2023, https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/IF10472.pdf.
15
C87839700 5
cause significant damage to the city. The unpredictability of surprise attacks on the capital adds to
the uncertainty and risk of conflict. The proximity of South Korea coupled with their high
aggregate power, makes North Korea much more of a threat.
Finally, the offensive intentions of North Korea portrayed through propaganda and the
media contribute to the security challenge it poses for South Korea. The regime constantly portrays
South Korea and the United States as its enemies in which the leadership has repeatedly threatened
military strikes upon both states.16 Furthermore, the numerous nuclear and ballistic missile tests in
which they demonstrate their arsenal raises tensions within the peninsula.17 These actions
demonstrate that North Korea is willing to use any means to achieve their goals. Thus, South
Korea's decision to increase their military spending as a deterrent is explained by North Korea's
superior aggregate power, proximity, and offensive intentions.
The distribution of power in the international system further explains South Korea’s
response. Under this lens, there are three power structures: bipolarity, balanced multipolarity, and
unbalanced multipolarity. A bipolarity, ruled by two great powers, is the most stable system
whereas multipolarity, ruled by three or more great powers, is less stable due to more dyads and
higher chances of miscalculation amongst many states.18 Within a multipolarity, an unbalanced
distribution of power—meaning there is a potential hegemon—is the least stable because fear is
increased amongst all states.19 Hence, an unbalanced multipolarity is the least stable amongst the
16
Hyung-Jin Kim, “North Korea Unprecedented Response to South-US Drill,” AP News, February 17, 2023,
https://apnews.com/article/politics-united-states-government-south-korea-north-b53bf46a0995407143a62b38e5a17c8b
Cid Standifer, “ Timeline: A Brief History of North Korea’s Nuclear Weapon Development,” United States
Naval Institute, September 1, 2017, https://news.usni.org/2017/09/01/timeline-brief-history-north-korean-nuclearweapon-development
17
John Mearsheimer, “The Causes of Great Power War” in Foundations of International Relations, ed.
Robert Pearson, Michael Robinson, and Hannah Smith (California: SAGE, 2022), 43-44.
18
19
Mearsheimer, 47-48.
C87839700 6
three distributions of power. Under these distributions, weaker states are likely to “form a
balancing coalition against their dangerous opponent” as well as strengthen their own
capabilities.20 The current structure in Asia can be classified as an unbalanced multipolarity—
meaning it is unstable. North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear armament and ballistic missiles is a
violation of numerous United Nations Security Council Resolutions, and their repeated military
escapades continue to disturb the international system within the region. As theorized by
Mearsheimer, weaker countries will gang up against the hegemon and increase their own
capabilities. South Korea has increased their capabilities by modernizing their military equipment
and technology. Throughout the years, South Korea’s forces has evolved by investing into new
weapon systems such as stealth fighters, submarines, and air defense systems used to mitigate
North Korea’s use of ballistic missiles.21 In addition to the increased capabilities due to equipment,
South Korea has also focused on the development of their personnel through improved training
and coordination amongst the different branches within their military. In addition to this, South
Korea increased their capabilities within the cyber domain to further mitigate North Korea’s
unconventional warfare tactics.22 As a whole, North Korea has the comparative advantage when it
comes to power, as their increased nuclear and ballistic weapons continue to threaten states within
the region. South Korea’s response to bolster their defenses was triggered by their status of a
relatively weak state in an unbalanced multipolarity caused by North Korea’s armament.
The political engagement between South Korea and North Korea can be explained by
liberalism. Unlike realist theory, liberalism believes that states can break the cycle of competition,
20
Mearsheimer, 48.
Dr. Hyun Ji Rim, “Emerging Technologies: New Threats and Growing Opportunities for South Korean
Indo-Pacific Strategy,” Air University, April 1, 2022,
https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/2979680/emerging-technologies-new-threats-and-growingopportunities-for-south-korean-in/
21
22
Dr. Hyun Ji Rim, “Emerging Technologies.”
C87839700 7
which is evident in anarchic interpretations of realism.23 There is a major difference between
liberal theory and realism in that liberal theory contends that we do not live in a zero-sum world.
Rather, states can achieve their economic and security interests by cooperating with other states
that share those interests.24 The role that institutions play in establishing stability is a key tenet of
liberalism. The term "institution" is used in international relations to refer to the rules that govern
the world's politics and are often enforced and implemented by organizations.25 State interaction
and stability can be greatly impacted and stabilized by institutions that provide clear guidelines
about accepted behavior. As Robert Keohane explains, institutions reduce uncertainty by making
other states' actions more predictable and by reducing the transaction costs involved in negotiating
agreements; these benefits result in collective gains for all states involved.26 The decision of South
Korea to engage in political diplomacy with North Korea can therefore be explained in terms of
the South Korean government's interest in promoting peace and increasing cooperation within the
peninsula.
The Korean peninsula faces several challenges that South Korea can address through
diplomacy and dialogue. As a result of these interactions between the two states, international
institutions, and agreements can be created between them that promote trust, cooperation, and
resolution. As an example, the Panmunjom Declaration for Peace, Prosperity, and Unification of
Scott Silverstone, “The Liberal Tradition and International Relations,” in International Politics: Classic and
Contemporary Readings, ed. Scott Handler and Robert Pearson (California: SAGE, 2022), 105.
23
24
Silverstone, 106
Robert Keohane, “International Institutions” in International Politics: Classic and Contemporary Readings,
ed. Scott Handler and Robert Pearson (California: SAGE, 2022), 110.
25
26
Keohane, 112.
C87839700 8
the Korean Peninsula was signed by the two Koreas on April 27, 2018.27 With an emphasis on
denuclearization, the declaration aimed to ease military tensions and promote economic
cooperation.28 Immediately after the declaration was signed, a joint liaison office was established
in Gaeseong as part of efforts to enhance inter-Korean communication.29 It is possible that these
actions will contribute to a more stable and predictable environment on the Korean Peninsula by
fostering trust and confidence between the two Koreas, facilitating further cooperation, and
encouraging further cooperation between the two Koreas. Nonetheless, these initiatives will only
succeed if North Korea is willing to engage in meaningful dialogue and take concrete actions
toward denuclearization and peace.
Furthermore, when considering the theory of liberalism in international relations, the trade
expectations theory can be extremely helpful for analyzing South Korea's approach to combating
North Korean aggression. According to the theory of trade expectations, the level of trade between
states at present and its expected level in the future can predict the likelihood of a conflict in the
future.30 As a result of the political tensions on the Korean Peninsula, North Korea and South
Korea have had strained economic relations. Apart from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex, very
little trade takes place between the two Koreas except for the Gaeseong Industrial Complex.
Further straining economic ties between South Korea and North Korea has been caused by
“Panmunjom Declaration on Peace, Prosperity, and Reunification of the Korean Peninsula,” General
Assembly Security Council, April 27, 2018,
https://kls.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/content/pics/Panmunjom%20Monitor/Panmunjom%20Declaration.pdf
27
28
“Panmunjom Declaration,” 4
“An Audacious Initiative,” Korean Culture Center, https://www.koreanculture.org/korea-informationinterkorean-relations
29
30
Dale C. Copeland, “Economic Interdependence and War: A Theory of Trade Expectations,” In Classic and
Contemporary Readings, ed. Scott Handler and Robert Person (SAGE Publications, 2022), 121-126.
C87839700 9
sanctions imposed on North Korea in response to its nuclear and missile programs.31 As a result of
applying the trade expectations theory to the current situation, we determine that the probability of
a potential conflict between North Korea and South Korea is high, thus validating South Korea's
preparations to combat North Korean aggression.
Based on the two theories of international relations discussed - realism and liberalism realism provides the most accurate explanation for South Korea's decision to increase its defenses
militarily and politically because it was a clear response to the North Korean threat. Understanding
the context of the relationship between the two Korean states is critical here. There has been a
history of political tensions between North and South Korea, as well as military threats. There has
been no formal peace treaty signed between the two Koreas since the end of the Korean War in
1953.32 A liberal tradition credits South Korea's response to North Korea's intentions as a means of
increasing cooperation and peace between the two countries. South Korea, however, continues to
strengthen its defenses not because it hopes for a change of heart in North Korea, but because it
fears for its survival. It was clear from North Korea's demonstration of its nuclear warheads and
ballistic missiles that they pose a serious threat due to their offensive intentions. As a result, a
strong defense posture aims to enhance South Korea's power as a stronger deterrent against North
Korea rather than engaging them politically.
The outlook for South Korea indicates that it will have more conflict in the future due to its
strong defensive posture; however, it should continue to follow its current path as it is the best way
to ensure its survival. According to John Mearsheimer's work, an unbalanced multipolarity will
result in conflict because of heightened fears among all states of the system if the distribution of
“What to Know About Sanctions on North Korea,” Council on Foreign Relations, July 27, 2022,
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/north-korea-sanctions-un-nuclear-weapons
31
“Armistice Negotiations,” United Nations Command, https://www.unc.mil/History/1951-1953-ArmisticeNegotiations/
32
C87839700 10
power is unbalanced.33 South Korea will experience this in practice if they continue to build up
their defensive capabilities because North Korea will have heightened fears as South Korea
balances its efforts in the region. There is a security dilemma here where South Korea's fears of
North Korea have caused them to balance against North Korea, which increases North Korea's
fears as a result. As power gains are relative, it is impossible for a state to increase its survival
chances without threatening the survival of other states in a security dilemma.34 This is why I
believe that South Korea's response to the threat will likely spark a security dilemma and result in
additional conflict in the future.
In conclusion, neorealism best explains South Korea's response to North Korean aggression
since they are primarily concerned with survival in anarchic society. Liberal theory, and in
particular institutional theory, and trade expectations offer convincing arguments in support of a
change in relations between South Korea and North Korea. Nevertheless, North Korea's
capabilities and offensive intentions demonstrate that South Korea made its decision considering
the balance of threat and power distribution. It is clear from this perspective that we can expect
future conflict because of an unbalanced multipolarity and the security dilemma that follows.
Despite this, it is important that South Korea continues to bolster its own power because survival is
their primary concern, and they must accumulate enough power to ensure that objective - in
accordance with defensive realism.
33
John Mearsheimer, “The Causes of Great Power War,” 49.
34
John Mearsheimer, “Anarchy and The Struggle for Power,” 70
C87839700 11
Bibliography
“Adress by President Moon Jae-in at National Assembly to Propose Government Budget for
2021.” Korea.net, Oct 28, 2020, https://www.korea.net/Government/BriefingRoom/Presidential-Speeches/view?articleId=191290
“An Audacious Initiative.” Korean Culture Center. https://www.koreanculture.org/koreainformation-interkorean-relations
“Armistice Negotiations,” United Nations Command, https://www.unc.mil/History/1951-1953Armistice-Negotiations/
Copeland, Dale. “Economic Interdependence and War.” In International Politics: Classic and
Contemporary Readings, edited by Scott Handler and Robert Pearson, 121-126. California:
SAGE, 2022.
Mearsheimer, John. “Anarchy and The Struggle for Power.” In International Politics: Classic and
Contemporary Readings, edited by Scott Handler and Robert Pearson, 67-81. California:
SAGE, 2022.
Mearsheimer, John “The Causes of Great Power War.” In Foundations of International Relations,
edited by Robert Pearson, Michael Robinson, and Hannah Smith, 41-59. California: SAGE,
2022.
“Military and Security Developments Involving the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,” U.S.
Department of Defense, 2018, https://media.defense.gov/2018/May/22/2001920587/-1/1/1/REPORT-TO-CONGRESS-%20MILITARY-AND-SECURITY-DEVELOPMENTSINVOLVING-THE-DEMOCRATIC-PEOPLES-REPUBLIC-OF-KOREA-2017.PDF, 9.
Keohane, Robert. “International Institutions.” In International Politics: Classic and Contemporary
Readings, edited by Scott Handler and Robert Pearson, 110-114. California: SAGE, 2022.
Kim, Hyung-Jin “North Korea Unprecedented Response to South-US Drill.” AP News. February
17, 2023, https://apnews.com/article/politics-united-states-government-south-korea-northb53bf46a0995407143a62b38e5a17c8b
“Panmunjom Declaration on Peace, Prosperity, and Reunification of the Korean Peninsula,”
General Assembly Security Council, April 27, 2018,
https://kls.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/content/pics/Panmunjom%20Monitor/Panm
unjom%20Declaration.pdf
Rinehart, Ian “Ballistic Missile Defense in the Asia-Pacific Region: Cooperation and Opposition.”
Congressional Research Service. April 3, 2015. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/nuke/R43116.pdf
Silverstone, Scott A. “The Liberal Tradition and International Relations.” In International Politics:
Classic and Contemporary Readings, edited by Scott Handler and Robert Pearson, 105-109.
California: SAGE, 2022.
C87839700 12
Smith, Shane “North Korea’s Evolving Nuclear Strategy.” US-Korea Institute at SAIS, August
2015, https://www.38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/NKNF_Evolving-NuclearStrategy_Smith.pdf
“South Korea’s National Defense Budget from 2006 to 2002.” Statista. December 2022,
https://www.statista.com/statistics/745747/south-korea-national-defense-expenditure/
Standifer, Cid “Timeline: A Brief History of North Korea’s Nuclear Weapon Development.”
United States Naval Institute. September 1, 2017.
https://news.usni.org/2017/09/01/timeline-brief-history-north-korean-nuclear-weapondevelopment
Rim, Hyun Ji “Emerging Technologies: New Threats and Growing Opportunities for South
Korean Indo-Pacific Strategy.” Air University. April 1, 2022,
https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/2979680/emerging-technologiesnew-threats-and-growing-opportunities-for-south-korean-in/
Walt, Stephen. “Alliance Formation and the Balance of World Power.” In International Politics:
Classic and Contemporary Readings, edited by Scott Handler and Robert Pearson, 41-59.
California: SAGE, 2022.
Waltz, Kenneth N. “The Origins of War in Neorealist Theory,” In International Politics: Classic
and Contemporary Readings, edited by Scott Handler and Robert Pearson, 63-66.
California: SAGE, 2022.