On ROK cooperation with NATO cyber defense center

Only 5 states in Asia support sanctions against Russia, those are Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Australia, and New Zealand. ASEAN is opposed. India is opposed, among others. With Indian opposition, the poor efficacy of the Quad as a new cold war mechanism against China and Russia is highlighted. This is why the AUKUS arrangement was developed. Japan, is not really committed to oil and gas sanctions on Russia, not wishing to lose its position in the international consortium with Russia in the Sakhalin gas project. Chevron and Exxon pulled out, Japan didn’t.

South Korea tends to view intelligence cooperation agreements, such as that with the US and Japan, as necessary to its security needs particularly against North Korea, but not as provocative to China as commitments as “boots on the ground” or other hard military asset commitments.

It is true that with the election of Yoon Suk-yeol who represents the legacy Japanese collaborator and military dictatorship elites in the conservative party, South Korea will become more compliant with Japanese and US anti-China initiatives. The fact is that this will hurt South Korean national interests which are similar to those of ASEAN countries who need to maintain a more ambivalent posture toward the new cold war in order not to damage their trade relations and security interests vis a vis their largest trading partner China.

With the election of Yoon Suk-yeol as president of South Korea, it is more likely to take unwise positions damaging its relationship with China. These would include abandoning the “three noes policy” adopted by the Moon Jae-in administration. No further disposition of any ABM system designed to be used against China, no participation in an anti-China alliance anti ballistic system, and no participation in a military alliance directed against China. The other trip wire for South Korea-China relations would be for it to make some statement of commitment to the security or independence of Taiwan that goes beyond its recent boilerplate and vague commitment to security in the Taiwan Strait which can be taken as merely a statement of support for freedom of navigation in the East China Sea region.


The publicized announcement of a NATO military commitment against China is a substitute for a failed effort by the US to raise an actual regional block against China that goes further than Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, the so called “white countries.”