27
Oct
The Republic of Korea, or South Korea as it is often referred to, enjoys a long-standing bilateral relationship with the Republic of Turkey; hence, it is only timely that past, present and future policy-making topics of concern to either party are discussed both behind closed doors as well as in public, and the afternoon event held at the International Strategic Research Organization (USAK) was one such very welcome occasion.
There is bilateral trade, of course, and the current figure stands at just over $6.3 billion per annum — impressive to say the least. On top of that, and if seen from a political commentator’s viewpoint, the anticipated re-definition of South Korea’s foreign policies in line with what Professor Lee Dong-Hwi told us makes it even more appropriate to analyze.
First, there are the five BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Then there is the G7, comprising Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States. And third, there is the G20, a grouping that besides all BRICS and all G7 further consists of Argentine, Australia, Indonesia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, the European Union as an individual entity and of course the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Turkey.
And exactly these three multilateral forms of cooperation are what would merit closer scrutiny. Normally focusing on economic items only (it is the finance ministers and central bankers who would come together) a rethink of agenda is required. If what Professor Lee told us is correct, the G20 as such will one day in the near future lose its raison d’être unless new issues, new topics are presented. Thus said, in order to reach more serious levels of working with on another, merely discussing economic matters would no longer break the ice. Whether climate change, environmental protection, cyber-security or terrorism, what started as economic forums would be well placed to approach these and many other pressing questions of global concern, too.
And then South Korea could emerge as one of the leading middle powers, or in other words as a leading “constructive” power. This necessitates embracing change — change as is visible when the BRICS come together as opposed to during meetings of the G7, which according to the speaker more or less represent the status quo, a status quo which overlooks that economies as well as world politics are different from how they were a decade ago.
Hence, an alliance of BRICS and those further states, who qualify as potentially leading middle powers active in the G20 (he would argue those countries are in particular South Korea and Turkey) could become the engine for a complete overhaul of how states cooperate cross-border. It would result in an axis shift away from the “usual suspects,” i.e., the perceived as dominating (I would say dominating both in positive as well as less positive terms) superpowers towards a more balanced world economy, and perhaps a more balanced world in principal. Would this mean a break-up of the United Nations? Not on the cards at all, if I understood Professor Lee correctly.
What really made me think about the viability of the arguments put forth on Wednesday was what Lee Dong-Hwi said about the rising threat of nationalism. He argued that not simply disputes over remote islands (Japan-China as one example) underline his thesis that nationalism is on the rise almost everywhere, but how (nation) states cooperate (or refrain from doing so) in general terms. And middle powers would have the capacity to stem this unwanted tide. Economic isolation or full-fledged political nationalism — change is what the world would need to avoid both.
It will be interesting to see how his country, as well as Turkey, too, can become leading actors in this regard.
Source: http://www.todayszaman.com/columnist/klaus-jurgens/middle-power-diplomacy-brics-g7-g20_362643.html