In the middle of the United States growing border with various allies in Europe and even Indo-Pacific, such as Japan and Australia, South Korea must reassess its national security. With North Korea increasingly embracing, South Korea must prepare concrete contingencies to defend the country against future war. As large -scale threats develop in Europe, in the Middle East and Indo -Pacific – in particular on the Korean Peninsula – should adopt a new foreign policy of strategic ambiguity towards Pyongyang, keeping the North to guess what the future movements of the Republic could be.
The invasion of Russia on a large scale of Ukraine in 2022 changed foreign relations for better and the worst, because many world military powers have reassessed national security problems. Under the Biden administration, relations have improved with South Korea and historical summits between Washington, Seoul and Tokyo took place. However, the slow rhythm of military aid in Ukraine and the lack of concrete strategy of Biden, the president of the time, made countries worry if America really supported its allies. Until now, these fears have materialized under President Trump, who has not only cut military aid in Ukraine indefinitely, but whose cabinet has engaged in diplomatic incidents in Europe and Asia. The administration went so far as to question the will of other countries that fought and bled alongside Americans, such as Great Britain, France and Japan.
Already suffering from political turbulence in the aftermath of the coup d’etat and the martial law of former President Yoon, Seoul should also be wary of the absence of American indecision towards his allies, even when the American-Rok alliance remains firm. While the United States and its allies remain in the fluctuation of firm support and diplomatic conflicts, its adversaries become more embraced by the day, and one of the main beneficiaries of American indecision is North Korea. Not only has Pyongyang self-saboted reunification efforts with Seoul, but Kim’s regime is also actively preparing for an armed conflict. Over the past two years, North Korea has increased ballistic missile tests and drone production and has ordered the Corean People’s Army (KPA) to have war capacities. In addition, Pyongyang is now a direct belligerent in the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, both by logistics and boots on the ground.
At the end of the fall of 2024, North Korea sent several thousand KPA teachers to Russia to use their operations to take over the Kursk region, in which Ukraine has established the same summer. Wanting a combat experience and precious data, KPA rushed to any occasion during assaults, although strong victims due to a lack of experience and linguistic barriers with the Russian forces. Despite significant losses, KPA troops have sufficiently helped the Russian forces to find the Kursk region, and the RPDC forces could participate in new operations within Ukraine if they are requested. In addition, the North Korean troops will return with a combat experience against South Korea – which will ring the alarms in Seoul.
In the midst of the growing capacities and political disorders of North Korea in the South and the United States, Seoul must prepare for possible provocations of Pyongyang, which could test the waters of American commitments towards its allies, which have fractured in recent months. However, South Korea could counter a potential surprise attack from the North by potentially advancing with nuclear deterrence plans. Initially, in the 1970s, South Korea began to develop nuclear weapons, and historically, the company saw their use in a positive way which ended the Imperial brutal Japanese rule. Under American pressure, Seoul fully ceased nuclear ambitions under the 1992 summit, but Pyongyang continued to proliferate secretly until it reached nuclear weapons in the late 90s.
The tide of the world has since changed, Russia, Russia has strongly armed the world in recent years with nuclear threats, that its new security partner, North Korea, would try to reproduce the Korean peninsula. Suppose that Ukraine had to be forced to sell the territory to the threat of Russian nuclear weapons hitting Europe and America. What could stop the same if China directed the same strategy towards Taiwan, Japan or the Southern China Sea and North Korea in South Korea?
The increasing alliance changes could ensure that Seoul re-evaluates if Washington would protect the Republic with a counterattack if the North launched a first strike. For this reason, arguments are made for a potential independent proliferation program. However, if the Rok government is advancing with a program, there will be questions and concerns. First, if the production of nuclear weapons takes place, North Korea would realize that it would lose its advantage on the weapons of mass destruction. Due to these fears, Pyongyang can be inclined to carry out military and clandestine operations to stop a new program in Seoul. The South Korea Government could also face international pressure and additional diplomatic coercion in the United States to hinder a program. Finally, the actions of former president Yoon have shown the need for additional controls and counterweights, because his actions almost led not only to a military dictatorship renewed in the history of South Korea, but also to a potential total war. The fears of another thug and despotic government, this time with nuclear weapons, could stir up fears and the planning of contingency towards proliferation.
Despite the interior challenges, growing regional threats and turbulence among Allied partners, South Korea can maintain its advantage in defense and deterrence by officially adopting strategic ambiguity as its foreign policy is progressing. Pyongyang and a large part of the world see Seoul as a rational actor who never commits the unthinkable. Even when Yoon tried to promulgate martial law, South Korean citizens and parliament retaliated, but if the government has capitalized on this with the North? North Korea and Russia directly benefit from the reluctance of various nations to face their belligerent actions with empty words and a hollow rhetoric – in which South Korea has been intertwined while KPA has acquired a major combat experience in Kursk. With strategic ambiguity, Seoul could make Pyongyang to guess if he will decide or decide to continue his independent nuclear program. However, this type of foreign policy should include rupture standards.
South Korea is expected to open its long taboo on arms exports to Ukraine while North Korea becomes more linked to war. The South Korean government should clearly indicate that the RPDC will face their choice at any time. While maintaining high -level diplomacy and a soft power, Seoul should carry a foreign policy equivalent to that of Teddy Roosevelt, with an ambiguity concerning future movements. This could dislodge the Kim diet from the plans as it tries to decipher what the Rok provides. In a world of constantly evolving alliances, regional wars in Europe and the Middle East, and the brewing of conflicts in Indo-Pacific, South Korea should prioritize strategic ambiguity as a foreign policy priority. By matching or eclipizing the unpredictability of North Korea, Seoul can match its main existential threat while restaurants the national democratic order.
Read more in -depth on international relations