Steering a middle path in Sino-US rivalry: contending middlepowerism and South Korea’s challenges

Abstract Deepening Sino-US rivalry is motivating Cold War-style bloc diplomacy, undermining post-1945 institutionalism. This presents extensive challenges to states at the crossroads where the interests of Beijing and Washington collide. How do those states—loosely, ‘middle powers’—maintain their relevance in a changing order? Can a middle-power strategy outweigh the risk of being side-lined by US-China rivalry? Is the middle-power concept still relevant today? The concept evolved from initial formulations of ‘good international citizen’ committed to multilateral institution-building. But a new bifurcated world requires redefinition of middlepowerism. This article proposes a comparative analytical template to interrogate middle-power diplomacy. It empirically examines how South Korea defines national interest and how it seeks a compelling diplomatic edge at a time of great power politics. The article concludes by examining South Korea’s future international challenges.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lcae013
Citations
4
Primary Topic
International Relations and Foreign Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
8.92

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Steering a middle path in Sino-US rivalry: contending middlepowerism and South Korea’s challenges

Soon-ok Shin
4 citations
International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
International Relations and Foreign Policy
8.92
article

Steering a middle path in Sino-US rivalry: contending middlepowerism and South Korea’s challenges

Soon-ok Shin
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract Deepening Sino-US rivalry is motivating Cold War-style bloc diplomacy, undermining post-1945 institutionalism. This presents extensive challenges to states at the crossroads where the interests of Beijing and Washington collide. How do those states—loosely, ‘middle powers’—maintain their relevance in a changing order? Can a middle-power strategy outweigh the risk of being side-lined by US-China rivalry? Is the middle-power concept still relevant today? The concept evolved from initial formulations of ‘good international citizen’ committed to multilateral institution-building. But a new bifurcated world requires redefinition of middlepowerism. This article proposes a comparative analytical template to interrogate middle-power diplomacy. It empirically examines how South Korea defines national interest and how it seeks a compelling diplomatic edge at a time of great power politics. The article concludes by examining South Korea’s future international challenges.

International Relations of the Asia-PacificVol. 25(2)
European University Institute (IT)
Academy of Korean Studies
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
International Relations and Foreign Policy
8.92
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.