SONG JONG-HWAN
In January this year, the World Economic Forum released the results of a survey of 1,300 experts worldwide. Half of the respondents described the current international situation as “extremely dangerous,” while another 40 percent regarded it as “dangerous.” Commenting on the findings, professor Kim Jung-ho of Sogang University observed that although we may not call it World War III, localized wars with global implications are already unfolding across different regions of the world.
The evidence is all around us. The Russia-Ukraine war continues with no clear end in sight. Tensions in the Middle East have persisted between Israel and Iran. Meanwhile, strategic rivalry between the United States and China is intensifying in the South China Sea and across the Taiwan Strait. Some non-nuclear states, feeling increasingly insecure, are seeking nuclear capabilities of their own, thereby weakening the global nonproliferation regime. Terrorism directed against civilians has also become an increasingly common feature of modern conflicts.
The international order established under American leadership after World War II — often referred to as Pax Americana — is visibly weakening. At the same time, the United Nations Security Council has become increasingly ineffective in maintaining international peace and security because of the veto power exercised by major powers.
A striking example of growing geopolitical tension emerged during the US-China summit on May 14. According to US President Donald Trump, Chinese President Xi Jinping directly asked him whether the United States would defend Taiwan if China decided to use force against the island. Whether viewed as a diplomatic signal or a strategic warning, the exchange underscored the reality that competition between Washington and Beijing has entered a more direct and confrontational phase.
Against this backdrop, the war between the United States and Iran, which began on Feb. 28, came to a halt after 106 days of fighting. The United States and Israel sought to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions and regional military influence, while Iran responded through threats to close the Strait of Hormuz and by relying on proxy forces across the region. The conflict contributed to rising oil prices, disruptions in global supply chains and renewed uncertainty in the world economy.
On June 14, Washington and Tehran announced an agreement to suspend military operations and begin the process of ending the war. A formal peace memorandum is expected to be signed in Switzerland on June 19. If the agreement is implemented successfully, the Strait of Hormuz will remain open, energy supplies will stabilize and global markets will benefit from reduced uncertainty. South Korea, whose economy depends heavily on energy imports and maritime trade routes, stands to gain directly from such developments.
Yet the most important lesson of this conflict lies elsewhere. International politics remains a world governed by power. The United States employed military force when it judged that its security interests were at stake. Most other countries, however, limited themselves to diplomatic statements or cautious observation. The conflict demonstrated once again that collective security mechanisms often fail to function effectively when major crises occur.
South Korea should draw the appropriate conclusions. If a nuclear-armed North Korea were to launch a sudden military provocation or attack, who would come to our defense, and in what manner? It is difficult to expect a response comparable to that of the Korean War, which began with North Korea’s invasion of South Korea in 1950, when a broad international coalition mobilized under the United Nations flag. During the recent US-Iran conflict, Washington sought support from its allies, yet only a limited number responded in a meaningful way.
National security must be built upon a realistic assessment of the international environment rather than wishful thinking. South Korea should strengthen its self-defense capabilities while maintaining and deepening the US-South Korea alliance. Discussions regarding the transfer of wartime operational control should proceed with caution until South Korea possesses stronger strategic deterrent capabilities, including nuclear-powered submarines and other advanced deterrent and counterstrike capabilities.
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's persistent diplomatic engagement and mediation efforts played a significant role in facilitating the suspension of hostilities between the United States and Iran. His contribution to peace deserves international recognition. In my view, Prime Minister Sharif’s achievement is sufficient to merit serious consideration for nomination for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize. The Government of the Republic of Korea should also consider supporting such a nomination.
- - -
Song Jong-hwan
Song Jong-hwan, former Ambassador of the Republic of Korea to Pakistan, is a visiting chair professor a…
Read the full article at The Korea Herald →
KR