imiМеждународная аналитикаJournal of International Analytics2587-84762541-9633MGIMO University10.46272/2587-8476-2021-12-2-49-73imi-366Research ArticleИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬСКИЕ СТАТЬИRESEARCH ARTICLESСтратегическая автономия Республики Корея: интеллектуальная химера или политическая реальность?Strategic Autonomy for ROK: Intellectual Pipe Dream or Political Reality?https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1584-2748АсмоловК. В.AsmolovK. V.

Константин Валерианович Асмолов, к.и.н., в.н.с. Центра корейских исследований Института Дальнего Востока РАН и Международного учебно-научного центра корееведческих исследований Института стран Азии и Африки при МГУ

ResearcherID: G-5161-2019; IstinaResearcherID (IRID): 5857994

117997, Москва, Нахимовский пр-т, 32

Konstantin V. Asmolov, PhD in History, Leading Researcher at the Center for Korean Studies, Institute of the Far East, Russian Academy of Sciences, and the International Center for Korean Studies, Institute of Asian and African Studies, Moscow State University

ResearcherID: G-5161-2019; IstinaResearcherID (IRID): 5857994

32 Nakhimovsky pr., Moscow, 117997

asmolov@ifes-ras.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2897-0909СоловьевА. В.SolovievA. V.

Александр Валерьевич Соловьев, заместитель главного редактора журнала «Россия в глобальной политике»; приглашенный преподаватель департамента международных отношений факультета мировой экономики и мировой политики НИУ ВШЭ

ResearcherID: Y-6177-2018

119049, Москва, А/Я 623, ФИМП

Alexander V. Soloviev, Deputy Editor-in-Chief, “Russia in Global Affairs,” Visiting Lecturer, Department of International Relations, Department of World Economy and World Politics, National Research University Higher School of Economics

ResearcherID: Y-6177-2018

119049, Moscow, A/Y 623, FIMP

soloviev@gmail.ruИнститут Дальнего Востока РАНРоссияInstitute of Asian and African StudiesRussian FederationНИУ ВШЭРоссияNational Research University Higher School of EconomicsRussian Federation2021260720211224973Copyright © Асмолов К.В., Соловьев А.В., 20212021Асмолов К.В., Соловьев А.В.Asmolov K.V., Soloviev A.V.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.interanalytics.org/jour/article/view/366

Набравший в последние годы в Республике Корея популярность дискурс о «стратегической автономии» до сих пор остается без серьезной теоретической актуализации. Данная статья пытается восполнить этот пробел на основе изучения южнокорейского дискурса о «средних державах», из которого вырос дискурс о «стратегической автономии», и социально-исторического анализа представлений корейцев о политической субъектности, развивавшихся под мощным влиянием как западных идей начала ХХ в., так и политических реалий военного альянса с США. В первом разделе статьи авторы рассматривают особенности использования Южной Кореей понятия «стратегическая автономия» применительно к ее внешнеполитической стратегии. Данный концепт рассматривается с использованием конструктивистской парадигмы. Во втором разделе авторы рассматривают дискурс «средней державы», вокруг которого и выстраивается концепция «стратегической автономии». По сравнению с первым, данный концепт довольно подробно разработан в западном и корейском политических дискурсах. Наконец, третий раздел статьи посвящен изучению эволюции этих концептов в южнокорейском дискурсе. Исключительно важную роль в этой эволюции играют обстоятельства формирования и развития военно-политического союза с США, а дискурс вокруг его перспектив во многом определяет особенности внутренней политики страны. Авторы приходят к выводу о том, что с академической точки зрения понятие «стратегическая автономия» может считаться лишь дискурсивной категорией, близкой к понятию «хеджирование» (hedging), но оно является важным элементом политической идентичности Южной Кореи и существенным фактором внутриполитической борьбы.

The discourse of “strategic autonomy,” which has gained popularity in the Republic of Korea in recent years, has yet to undergo serious theoretical revision. This article attempts to fill the gap by examining the South Korean discourse of “middle powers,” from which the discourse of “strategic autonomy” grew, and the socio-historical analysis of Korean perceptions of political subjectivity, which developed under the powerful influence of both Western ideas from the early 20th century and the political realities of the military alliance with the United States. In the first section the authors examine the specifics of South Korea’s use of the concept of “strategic autonomy” in relation to its foreign policy strategy. This concept is examined using a constructivist paradigm. In the second section, the authors examine the discourse of “middle power,” around which the concept of “strategic autonomy” is built. Compared to the former, this concept is quite elaborated in Western and Korean political discourses. Finally, the third section of the article examines the evolution of these concepts in South Korean discourse. The circumstances of the formation and development of the military-political alliance with the United States play an extremely important role in this evolution, and the discourse around its prospects largely determines the features of the country’s domestic policy. The authors conclude that from the academic point of view the concept of “strategic autonomy” can only be considered as a discursive category close to the concept of “hedging,” but it is an important element of South Korea’s political identity and an essential factor of internal political struggle.

стратегическая автономиясредняя державахеджированиеальянс РК и СШАсистемное воздействиедискурсгибкие коалицииstrategic autonomymiddle powerhedgingthe ROK–U.S. alliancesystemic impactdiscourseflexible coalitionsАвторы выражают искреннюю признательность анонимным рецензентам за конструктивную критику и замечания, а также А. Ланькову и А. Цыганкову за ценные советы и комментарии.The authors thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive criticism and comments, as well as A. Lankov and A. Tsygankov for their valuable advice and comments.ReferencesАлексеева, Т. Мыслить конструктивистски: Открывая многоголосый мир // Сравнительная политика. – 2014. – 5 (1(14)). – С. 4–21. https://doi.org/10.18611/2221-3279-2014-5-1(14)-4-21.Alexeyeva, T. A. “Think Like Constructivist: Discovering a Polyphonic World.” Comparative Politics (Russia) 5, no. 1(14) (July 8, 2015): 4–21 [In Russian]. https://doi.org/10.18611/2221-3279-2014-5-1(14)-4-21Воронцов, А., Понька, Т., Варпаховскис, Э. Концепция «средней силы» (Middle Power) во внешней политике Республики Корея // Mеждународные процессы. – 2020. – 18(1). – С. 89–105. https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2020.18.1.60.5.Vorontsov, A., T. Ponka, and E. Varpahovskis. “Middlepowermanship in Korean Foreign Policy.” International Trends / Mezhdunarodnye Protsessy 18, no. 1 (January 26, 2021): 89–105 [In Russian]. https://doi.org/10.17994/IT.2020.18.1.60.5.Дьячков, И. Российско-южнокорейские политические связи: 30 лет спустя // Корейский полуостров: история и современность. – М.: ИДВ РАН, 2020а. – 456 с.Dyachkov, I. “Rossijsko-yuzhnokorejskie politicheskie svyazi: 30 let spustya.” In Korejskij poluostrov: istoriya i sovremennost’. Moscow: IDV RAS, 2020A [In Russian].Дьячков, И. Остров Токто в южнокорейскояпонских отношениях: история, память, политика // Электронный научно-образовательный журнал «История». – 2020b. – Tом 11. – Выпуск 12 (98). – Часть I.Dyachkov, Ilya. “Ostrov Tokto v yuzhnokorejskoyaponskih otnosheniyah: istoriya, pamyat’, politika.” Elektronnyj nauchno-obrazovatel’nyj zhurnal “Istoriya” 11, no. 98 (2020B) [In Russian].Истомин, И., Байков, А. Динамика международных альянсов в неравновесной мировой системе // Мировая экономика и международные отношения – 2019. – Том 63, № 1. – С. 34–48. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-1-34-48.Istomin, I., and A. Baykov. “Dynamics of International Alliances in an Unbalanced World Structure.” World Economy and International Relations 63, no. 1 (2019): 34–48 [In Russian]. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-1-34-48Лукин, А. Россия и Корейский полуостров: политический реализм и эмпатия // Полис. Политические исследования – 2021. – № 3. – С. 182–191. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.03.12.Lukin, A. “Russia and the Korean Peninsula: Political Realism and Empathy.” Polis. Political Studies, no 3. (2021): 182–191 [In Russian]. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.03.12Лукин, А. Теория комплексов региональной безопасности в Восточной Азии // Ойкумена. Регионоведческие исследования. – 2011. – № 2. – C. 7–19.Lukin, A. “The Regional Security Complex Theory and East Asia.” Ojkumena. Regionovedcheskie issledovaniya, no. 2 (2011): 7–19 [In Russian].Юнгблюд, В Садаков, Д. Дипломатическое обеспечение вмешательства США в корейскую войну. Опыт кризисного реагирования // Вестник МГИМО-университета. – 2018. – № 4 (61). – С. 241–261. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2018-4-61-241-261.Yungblud, V., and Sadakov, D. “Diplomatic Support of US Involvement in the Korean War June 25 – July 6 1950: Crisis Response Experience.” MGIMO Review of International Relations 4, no. 61 (September 1, 2018): 241–61 [In Russian]. https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2018-4-61-241-261.Сафранчук И., Лукьянов Ф. Современный мировой порядок: структурные реалии и соперничество великих держав // Полис. Политические исследования. – 2021. – № 3. – С.57–76.Safranchuk, Ivan A., and F. Lukyanov A. “The Modern World Order: Structural Realities and Great Power Rivalries.” Polis. Political Studies, no. 3 (2021): 57–76 [In Russian].Asmolov, Konstantin V. “Lessons of Korean Democratization for Modern Russia.” Russia in Global Affairs 17, no. 2 (2019): 174–200. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2019-17-2-174-200.Asmolov, Konstantin V. “Lessons of Korean Democratization for Modern Russia.” Russia in Global Affairs 17, no. 2 (2019): 174–200. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2019-17-2-174-200.Bong, Y. “Continuity Amidst Change: The Korea – United States Alliance.” In Global Allies: Comparing US Alliances in the 21st Century, edited by M. Wesley, 45–58. ANU Press: Australia, 2017.Bong, Y. “Continuity Amidst Change: The Korea – United States Alliance.” In Global Allies: Comparing US Alliances in the 21st Century, edited by M. Wesley, 45–58. ANU Press: Australia, 2017.Carr, Andrew. “Is Australia a Middle Power? A Systemic Impact Approach.” Australian Journal of International Affairs 68, no. 1 (January 31, 2014A): 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2013.840264.Carr, Andrew. “Is Australia a Middle Power? A Systemic Impact Approach.” Australian Journal of International Affairs 68, no. 1 (January 31, 2014A): 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2013.840264.Carr, A. “Is Australia a Middle Power?” Australian Outlook. Australian Journal of International Affairs. March 07, 2014B. https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/is-australia-a-middle-power/.Carr, A. “Is Australia a Middle Power?” Australian Outlook. Australian Journal of International Affairs. March 07, 2014B. https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/is-australia-a-middle-power/Cha, V. “America’s Alliances in Asia: The Coming ‘Identity Crisis’ with the Republic of Korea?” In: Jr. Boose, W. Donald, Y. Balbina, M. Hwang, P. Morgan, and A. Scobell, eds. Recalibrating the U.S.-Republic of Korea Alliance. Strategic Studies Institute (SSI), 2003.Cha, V. “America’s Alliances in Asia: The Coming ‘Identity Crisis’ with the Republic of Korea?” In: Jr. Boose, W. Donald, Y. Balbina, M. Hwang, P. Morgan, and A. Scobell, eds. Recalibrating the U.S.-Republic of Korea Alliance. Strategic Studies Institute (SSI), 2003.Chapnick, Adam. “The Middle Power.” Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 7, no. 2 (January 1999): 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.1999.9673212.Chapnick, Adam. “The Middle Power.” Canadian Foreign Policy Journal 7, no. 2 (January 1999): 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.1999.9673212.Chapnick, Adam. “The Canadian Middle Power Myth.” International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis 55, no. 2 (June 25, 2000): 188–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/002070200005500202.Chapnick, Adam. “The Canadian Middle Power Myth.” International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis 55, no. 2 (June 25, 2000): 188–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/002070200005500202.Choe Wongi. “ ‘New Southern Policy’: Korea’s Newfound Ambition in Search of Strategic Autonomy.” Asie.Visions, No. 118, Ifri. January 2021. www.ifri.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/choe_new_southern_policy_korea_2021.pdf.Choe Wongi. “ ‘New Southern Policy’: Korea’s Newfound Ambition in Search of Strategic Autonomy.” Asie.Visions, No. 118, Ifri. January 2021. www.ifri.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/choe_new_southern_policy_korea_2021.pdf.Choi, Y. “South Korea’s Regional Strategy and Middle Power Activism.” Journal of East Asian Affairs 23, no. 1 (2015): 47–67.Choi, Y. “South Korea’s Regional Strategy and Middle Power Activism.” Journal of East Asian Affairs 23, no. 1 (2015): 47–67.Chun, Chaesung. “Theoretical Approaches to Alliance: Implications on the R.O.K.–U.S. Alliance.” Journal of International and Area Studies 7, no. 2 (2000): 71–88.Chun, Chaesung. “Theoretical Approaches to Alliance: Implications on the R.O.K.–U.S. Alliance.” Journal of International and Area Studies 7, no. 2 (2000): 71–88.“Chapter Two: Comparative Defence Statistics.” The Military Balance 121, no. 1 (January 1, 2021): 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/04597222.2021.1868791.“Chapter Two: Comparative Defence Statistics.” The Military Balance 121, no. 1 (January 1, 2021): 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/04597222.2021.1868791.Cooper, A., R. Higgott, and K. Nossal. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. UBC Press: Vancouver, 1993.Cooper, A., R. Higgott, and K. Nossal. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. UBC Press: Vancouver, 1993.Cox, Robert W. “Middlepowermanship, Japan, and Future World Order.” International Journal 44, no. 4 (1989): 823. https://doi.org/10.2307/40202638.Cox, Robert W. “Middlepowermanship, Japan, and Future World Order.” International Journal 44, no. 4 (1989): 823. https://doi.org/10.2307/40202638.Dyachkov, Ilya. “Collective Memory And Politics: ‘Comfort Women’ In Current Relations Between South Korea And Japan.” Russian Japanology Review, no. 2. (2020): 68–87.Dyachkov, Ilya. “Collective Memory And Politics: ‘Comfort Women’ In Current Relations Between South Korea And Japan.” Russian Japanology Review, no. 2. (2020): 68–87.Easley, Leif-Eric, and Kyuri Park. “South Korea’s Mismatched Diplomacy in Asia: Middle Power Identity, Interests, and Foreign Policy.” International Politics 55, no. 2 (March 19, 2018): 242–63. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0073-5.Easley, Leif-Eric, and Kyuri Park. “South Korea’s Mismatched Diplomacy in Asia: Middle Power Identity, Interests, and Foreign Policy.” International Politics 55, no. 2 (March 19, 2018): 242–63. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-017-0073-5.Green, M. J. “Is the Era of Korean Middle Power Diplomacy Over? A Realist Perspective.” Korean Journal of Defense Analysis 31 (2019): 1–20.Green, M. J. “Is the Era of Korean Middle Power Diplomacy Over? A Realist Perspective.” Korean Journal of Defense Analysis 31 (2019): 1–20.Jackson, Robert H. Quasi-states: Sovereignty, International relations and the Third World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.Jackson, Robert H. Quasi-states: Sovereignty, International relations and the Third World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.Jordaan, Eduard. “The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers.” Politikon 30, no. 1 (May 30, 2003): 165–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/0258934032000147282.Jordaan, Eduard. “The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers.” Politikon 30, no. 1 (May 30, 2003): 165–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/0258934032000147282.Jordaan, Eduard. “The Emerging Middle Power Concept: Time to Say Goodbye?” South African Journal of International Affairs 24, no. 3 (July 3, 2017): 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2017.1394218.Jordaan, Eduard. “The Emerging Middle Power Concept: Time to Say Goodbye?” South African Journal of International Affairs 24, no. 3 (July 3, 2017): 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/10220461.2017.1394218.Kim, S. “South Korea’s Middle-Power Diplomacy: Changes and Challenges.” Chatham House Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2016. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/publications/research/2016-06-22-south-korea-middle-power-kim.pdf.Kim, S. “South Korea’s Middle-Power Diplomacy: Changes and Challenges.” Chatham House Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2016. https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/publications/research/2016-06-22-south-korea-middle-power-kim.pdf.Kim, Sung-Mi, Sebastian Haug, and Susan Harris Rimmer. “Minilateralism Revisited: MIKTA as Slender Diplomacy in a Multiplex World.” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 24, no. 4 (2018): 475–489. https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02404001.Kim, Sung-Mi, Sebastian Haug, and Susan Harris Rimmer. “Minilateralism Revisited: MIKTA as Slender Diplomacy in a Multiplex World.” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 24, no. 4 (2018): 475–489. https://doi.org/10.1163/19426720-02404001.Korhonen, Pekka, and Tomoomi Mori. “North Korea as a Small Great Power.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 17, no. 5 (2019): 1–25.Korhonen, Pekka, and Tomoomi Mori. “North Korea as a Small Great Power.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus 17, no. 5 (2019): 1–25.Leonard, Mark, and Jeremy Shapiro. “Strategic Sovereignty: How Europe Can Regain the Capacity to Act.” European Council on Foreign Relations, 2019. https://ecfr.eu/archive/page/-/1_Empowering_EU_member_states_with_strategic_sovereignty.pdf.Leonard, Mark, and Jeremy Shapiro. “Strategic Sovereignty: How Europe Can Regain the Capacity to Act.” European Council on Foreign Relations, 2019. https://ecfr.eu/archive/page/-/1_Empowering_EU_member_states_with_strategic_sovereignty.pdf.Morrow, James D. “Alliances and Asymmetry: An Alternative to the Capability Aggregation Model of Alliances.” American Journal of Political Science 35, no. 4 (November 1991): 904. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111499.Morrow, James D. “Alliances and Asymmetry: An Alternative to the Capability Aggregation Model of Alliances.” American Journal of Political Science 35, no. 4 (November 1991): 904. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111499.Morrow, James D. “Arms versus Allies: Trade-Offs in the Search for Security.” International Organization 47, no. 2 (1993): 207–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027922.Morrow, James D. “Arms versus Allies: Trade-Offs in the Search for Security.” International Organization 47, no. 2 (1993): 207–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300027922.Myers, B. North Korea’s Juche Myth. Sthele Press, 2015.Myers, B. North Korea’s Juche Myth. Sthele Press, 2015.Ping, Jonathan H. Middle Power statecraft: Indonesia, Malaysia and the Asia Pacific. London: Ashgate, 2005.Ping, Jonathan H. Middle Power statecraft: Indonesia, Malaysia and the Asia Pacific. London: Ashgate, 2005.Robertson, Jeffrey. “South Korea as a Middle Power: Capacity, Behavior, and Now Opportunity.” International Journal of Korean Unification Studies 16, no. 1 (2007): 151–174.Robertson, Jeffrey. “South Korea as a Middle Power: Capacity, Behavior, and Now Opportunity.” International Journal of Korean Unification Studies 16, no. 1 (2007): 151–174.Robertson, Jeffrey. “Middle-Power Definitions: Confusion Reigns Supreme.” Australian Journal of International Affairs 71, no. 4 (July 4, 2017): 355–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2017.1293608.Robertson, Jeffrey. “Middle-Power Definitions: Confusion Reigns Supreme.” Australian Journal of International Affairs 71, no. 4 (July 4, 2017): 355–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2017.1293608.Saxer, Carl J. “Capabilities and Aspirations: South Korea’s Rise as a Middle Power.” Asia Europe Journal 11, no. 4 (December 18, 2013): 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-013-0361-7.Saxer, Carl J. “Capabilities and Aspirations: South Korea’s Rise as a Middle Power.” Asia Europe Journal 11, no. 4 (December 18, 2013): 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-013-0361-7.Shin, Gi-Wook, and Hilary Jan Izatt. “Anti-American and Anti-Alliance Sentiments in South Korea.” Asian Survey 51, no. 6 (November 1, 2011): 1113–33. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2011.51.6.1113.Shin, Gi-Wook, and Hilary Jan Izatt. “Anti-American and Anti-Alliance Sentiments in South Korea.” Asian Survey 51, no. 6 (November 1, 2011): 1113–33. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2011.51.6.1113.Shin, Soon-ok. “South Korea’s Elusive Middlepowermanship: Regional or Global Player?” The Pacific Review 29, no. 2 (March 14, 2016): 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2015.1013494.Shin, Soon-ok. “South Korea’s Elusive Middlepowermanship: Regional or Global Player?” The Pacific Review 29, no. 2 (March 14, 2016): 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2015.1013494.Shin, D.M. “The Concept of Middle Power and the Case of the ROK: A Review.” In: F. Rüdiger, J. Hoare, P. Köllner, and S. Pares, eds. Korea 2012: Politics, Economy and Society. Leiden: Brill, 2012.Shin, D.M. “The Concept of Middle Power and the Case of the ROK: A Review.” In: F. Rüdiger, J. Hoare, P. Köllner, and S. Pares, eds. Korea 2012: Politics, Economy and Society. Leiden: Brill, 2012.Snyder, Glenn H. “The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics.” World Politics 36, no. 4 (July 13, 1984): 461–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010183.Snyder, Glenn H. “The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics.” World Politics 36, no. 4 (July 13, 1984): 461–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/2010183.Snyder, S. South Korea at the Crossroads: Autonomy and Alliance in an Era of Rival Powers. New York: Columbia University Press, 2018.Snyder, S. South Korea at the Crossroads: Autonomy and Alliance in an Era of Rival Powers. New York: Columbia University Press, 2018.Sohn, Y. “Searching for a New Identity: South Korea’s Middle Power Diplomacy.” Fride Policy Brief 212, (2015): 1–6.Sohn, Y. “Searching for a New Identity: South Korea’s Middle Power Diplomacy.” Fride Policy Brief 212, (2015): 1–6.“South Korea’s Security And Autonomy Of The United States Regarding The Recognition And Behavioral Research.” Korean Strategy Reform Institute 23, no. 3 (2016): 91–125. https://www.dbpia.co.kr/Journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE07047774 [In Korean].“South Korea’s Security And Autonomy Of The United States Regarding The Recognition And Behavioral Research.” Korean Strategy Reform Institute 23, no. 3 (2016): 91–125. https://www.dbpia.co.kr/Journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE07047774 [In Korean].Soo Hyung Lee. “The Linkage Between South-North Korean Politics and Great Power Politics in Northeast Asia.” World Politics 16, no.0 (2012): 141–170 [In Korean].Soo Hyung Lee. “The Linkage Between South-North Korean Politics and Great Power Politics in Northeast Asia.” World Politics 16, no.0 (2012): 141–170 [In Korean].

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.