• Strategy21
• /
• s.46
• /
• pp.5-28
• /
• 2020

In 2019, the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of State issued two reports to announce their plan to fulfill "free and open Indo-Pacific". Two reports commonly insisted on the support and participation from allies and partners to maintain security and stability in the Indo-Pacific. In response to this, neighboring states in the Indo-Pacific, including Japan, Australia, India, ASEAN, and Taiwan have different perspectives and stances based on their national interests. South Korea, too, has not clearly announced its position because they need to consider the alliance between the U.S. and South Korea as well as relationships between South Korea and China. This report focuses on the stances of neighboring states to the Indo-Pacific strategy and expected pros and cons of the participation of the strategy. In addition, when considering the name of strategy, the Indo-Pacific, naval power will be a main instrument to implement the strategy. Thus, this study also investigates the role of naval power in the Indo-Pacific strategy.

• 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.