External Instability and Domestic Vulnerability: The Evolution of South Korea’s Discourse on Nuclear Weapons
Open Access DepositedThe debate in South Korea regarding whether and how the country should acquire nuclear weapons reached new momentum and activity under the Moon Jae-in and Yoon Suk-yeol administrations. While mainstream understanding of South Korea’s nuclear debate has highlighted the impact of external threat and U.S. credibility, this thesis examines the role of domestic politics and its interaction with the external threat environment to shape the nuclear discourse among South Korean elites. A comprehensive analysis of the interplay between the external threat environment (North Korean capabilities and behavior and the role of the United States) and domestic politics (the degree of the president’s political vulnerability and the effectiveness of the government’s security policies) finds that the nature of South Korea’s nuclear debate fluctuated in response to changing internal and external conditions. The nuclear debate under the Moon administration is divided into three periods based on various levels of external threat and domestic political conditions. The first period (July 2017 to January 2018) involved growing tensions on the Korean Peninsula, which shaped perceptions of an unstable and uncertain external environment. Domestically, President Moon enjoyed high public support as he pursued numerous reform policies and a balanced approach toward security challenges. Thus, the nuclear debate was active but unable to influence or undermine the government’s political agenda. The second period (January 2018 to June 2019) was characterized by high-level summitry between the leaders of South Korea, North Korea, and the United States. The relatively stable external environment and continued domestic support for the Moon administration’s security policies led to a dormant nuclear debate. However, the third period (June 2019 to May 2022) was marked by a stalemate in inter-Korean relations, a resumption of North Korean missile tests, and growing domestic vulnerability for President Moon as his government faced various public scandals. In response, the nuclear debate was revived, and nuclear proponents used the nuclear issue as a tool of criticism against the government’s policies toward North Korea. The nuclear debate under the Yoon administration is divided into two periods. The first period (May 2022 to March 2023) was shaped by escalating North Korean provocations and geopolitical fragmentation as the Yoon administration pursued various deterrence-focused measures alongside the United States. However, President Yoon faced declining public approval ratings within a month of entering office and several domestic challenges that complicated the government’s political priorities. The nuclear debate was active as proponents used the issue of nuclear armament as a tool of advocacy, but the debate was unable to induce shifts to the government’s security policies. The second period (April 2023 to January 2024) occurred in the aftermath of the announcement of the Washington Declaration between Presidents Biden and Yoon. Despite rising instability in South Korea’s external environment, the nuclear debate was relatively inactive due to the government’s continued vulnerability in domestic politics. This thesis argues that analysis of South Korea’s nuclear debate should incorporate both external threat perception and domestic politics to accurately and comprehensively understand the variables at play.
- All rights reserved
Notice to Authors
If you are the author of this work and you have any questions about the information on this page, please use the Contact form to get in touch with us.