The three major presidential candidates appear to be committed to similar foreign policy lines centering on peninsular peace, regional harmony and Korea’s greater role in line with its middle power status.

Whoever wins the Dec. 19 election will face tough challenges: defrosting inter-Korean relations; adjusting policies to the rivalry between the U.S. and China; managing historical and territorial feuds with Japan; and engaging in multilateral efforts to tackle climate change, development and other global brainteasers.

Campaign platforms of the three contenders trumpet grand plans to achieve the goals. But they largely lack substance and detailed programs and enumerate sometimes conflicting plans, rather than elaborate on how to overcome long-festering hurdles to reach the goals, experts say.

With economic justice and welfare topping the campaign agenda, they shy away from foreign affairs and security issues which are all-important but do not interest ordinary voters, they said.

The politicians tend to avoid grave and sensitive issues in which radical stances and gaffes could alienate voters.

“They’re trying to address their positions in a way that would not stir public sentiment but because of that they end up being somewhat obscure in terms of content,” said Yoon Pyung-joong, a political philosophy professor at Hanshin University in Gyeonggi Province.

“Foreign policy or security gets easily put on the back burner in elections unless they’re under special circumstances such as North Korean provocations or major diplomatic clashes with the U.S., China or Japan, since it’s usually not a topic that comes home to the people’s heart compared with bread-and-butter issues.”

The ruling Saenuri Party’s Park Geun-hye has sketched out her roadmap for “trustpolitik” and a peaceful Northeast Asia. Her package touches on denuclearizing the North, national reunification, Eurasia-wide cooperation, economic diplomacy and climate change action.

Moon Jae-in of the main opposition Democratic United Party has set four principles ― peace, balance, international cooperation and public diplomacy. He aims to rally Washington, Beijing and other regional partners behind his “Peace Process on the Korean Peninsula.”

A political novice, independent Ahn Cheol-soo is seeking to boost the country’s diplomatic clout based on a long-term vision, shaking off its “passive posture and stitch-in-time strategy.” With peace being the focal point, he envisions Korea as a bridge between the two world powers and pledges to work more with other emerging economies and middle powers.

Traditionally, foreign policy and security served as a yardstick to measure any candidate’s political inclination. This time, all the three are seen as converging to the center to woo swing voters, moderates and the younger generations, said Park Cheol-hee, a professor at Seoul National University’s Graduate School of International Studies.

“In the past, candidates have tended to veer to either end of the political spectrum in order to consolidate their royal supporter base rather than target those in the middle,” he told The Korea Herald.

“But now no one really wants to make any foreign policy issue a hot potato by articulating it, because everyone is scrambling to court more moderate voters.”

Despite an envisioned Moon-Ahn merger proving a major variable, the two liberal-minded contenders are expected to iron out the kinks and details through a joint policy consultation team. 

Sino-U.S. rivalry

Among the biggest diplomatic challenges faced by the next president is how to position Korea in a new reality shaped by the rivalry between the U.S. and a rising China.

With its strategic “pivot” to Asia, Washington is Seoul’s longtime ally and the mainstay of national security and deterrence against the North. Beijing is already one of the South’s top trade, tourism and investment partners and a key stakeholder in multilateral talks aimed at disarming Pyongyang.

Saenuri Party presidential candidate Park Geun-hye aims to launch a three-way security dialogue with the two world powers, and an additional two trilateral consultations involving the two Koreas and China, and Russia, respectively. Her “Northeast Asian Peace and Cooperation Initiative” added an Asian twist to the Helsinki process in Europe.

Moon Jae-in of the main opposition Democratic United Party, unwrapping his foreign policy last week, emphasized the importance of balanced thinking and greater multilateral cooperation in heading off a “new Cold War structure” He promised a “more stable and mature” alliance with the U.S. and an “economy-driven quantum leap” in ties with China.

Independent Ahn Cheol-soo’s “harmonious” diplomacy envisages a true “strategic cooperative partnership” with Beijing based upon a closer, multifaceted alliance with Washington. While conducting a regular, integrative bilateral strategic dialogue with the U.S., he plans to set up a highest-ranking hotline and comprehensive security and economic talks with China.

Preserving sound relations with both powers has proven difficult, however. Former President Roh Moo-hyun failed in his attempted balancing act between them and the U.S.-friendly President Lee Myung-bak has sometimes estranged Chinese policymakers.

No drastic change in their respective policy toward the peninsula is forecast under U.S. President Barack Obama, now with his second term assured, or Xi Jinping, China’s new leader. Still, the two countries’ raging rivalry may yet again put Seoul’s top brass in a double bind, analysts say.

“China’s rise puts South Korea in a strategic dilemma between the U.S. and China,” Han Suk-hee, a professor at Yonsei University’s Graduate School of International Studies, wrote to the Council on Foreign Relations last week.

Their successor will have to craft smart diplomatic tactics so as to defy the either-or fallacy and avoid the past administrations’ mistakes, he said.

“South Korea has to dually manage its security, which is grounded in the ROK-U.S. alliance, and its economic well-being, which is dependent on the ROK-China strategic cooperative partnership.”

Japan

The checkered history shared by Korea and Japan has been a perennial thorn in their bilateral relations.

Tokyo’s decades-long claim over Dokdo, wartime sex slavery and historical misrepresentations in school textbooks have strangled efforts by virtually all presidents to foster a “future-oriented” partnership. 

With less than a month left before elections, uncertainty is looming large over the outlook of the ties. Japan is forecast to elect a more nationalist prime minister on Dec. 16 to replace Yoshihiko Noda.

In Seoul, the three candidates have promised to continue to safeguard the country’s sovereignty over Dokdo and resolve the so-called comfort women and other historical issues.

While Moon is expected to have a tougher line in territorial and historical rows with Japan, Park and Ahn underline the need to decouple the historical animosity from vibrant economic and cultural exchanges between the two countries.

“Koreans have bitter memories that Korea’s colonization started from Japan’s seizure of Dokdo in 1905. I hope Japan will look straight at this for a sound Korea-Japan relationship,” Park told foreign journalists on Nov. 8.

“But close cooperation between Korea and Japan contributes to not merely the two countries’ development and but also regional development and stability, which is extremely important.”

Moon, a close confidant to Roh who maintained rocky relations with Japan, has repeatedly called on Tokyo to come clean about its atrocities during 1910-1945 colonial rule.

After Japan released its annual defense paper describing the East Sea outcrops as its territory in August, his campaign put forward five issues to be addressed: Dokdo, comfort women, forced labor, school textbook distortions and return of stolen cultural assets.

During a visit to weekly protests before the Japanese Embassy in Seoul that month, he also pledged to “correct history” and “hold the Tokyo government accountable.”

Ahn, meanwhile, promised to put the bilateral relationship back on track. His strategies include promoting regular shuttle diplomacy between the two countries’ leaders and devising an institutional framework to work out territorial and historical conflicts.

“I will carry out sincere dialogue with Japanese leaders to improve the relations and make utmost efforts to advance talks between Korea, China and Japan,” he told a news conference on Monday,

“I will strive to form a Korea-Japan partnership that contributes to peace and stability in the peninsula and Northeast Asia.”

Global player

The three candidates have unanimously pledged to beef up the country’s role in global issues and expand its diplomatic forays beyond Northeast Asia.

Park plans to hold trilateral development consultations involving the two Koreas and Russia, which is a member of the six-party denuclearization forum and pushing to lay pipelines through North Korea to transport its natural gas to South Korea.

Her “Eurasian,” “Silk Road” initiatives are designed to link the transportation grid between Northeast Asia and Europe. She also seeks to expand strategic partnerships with members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, India and Australia.

To build an “attractive Korea,” Park is promoting public participation in foreign affairs. She calls on the government to take the leadership in cooperation between middle powers on planet-wide subjects such as climate change, poverty, peacekeeping, terrorism and human rights.

In addition, Park aims to host at least five more international organizations in major cities, promote public diplomacy and expand official development assistance.

Moon also sees Moscow as a core future partner. The envisioned “East Sea Economic Bloc” stretches from Mount Geumgang and Gaeseong Industrial Complex in North Korea to the western part of Russia to Japan. Other projects include a regional multilateral security cooperation scheme based on six-party talks.

With his campaign prioritizing job creation, Moon plans to support at least 20,000 Korean youngsters to serve international bodies and non-governmental organizations as trainees, interns and fellows over the five-year presidential term.

As for ODA, he vowed to increase the funding scale and revamp the current scheme to better reflect the needs of beneficiaries.

Ahn, meanwhile, largely concurs on the significance of soft power.

He promised to deepen partnerships with Russia, ASEAN and India; build a network with middle powers; step up cooperation with international organizations; intensify commitments to the global agenda; and formulate various forms of public diplomacy.

But above all things, a long-term vision and strengthening diplomatic capabilities are key to nailing down the complex set of tasks, Ahn says.

As part of efforts to improve the country’s diplomatic infrastructure, he aspires to nurture experts on Latin America, the Middle East, India and Africa, foster cooperation with civil society and the private sector, and adopt a policy, strategy-driven approach from the focus on administrative duties and events.

“It may be difficult for the government to draw up a very long-term international relations strategy in light of the large size of the country. But it will be helpful to lay down principles, set up a strategy over a term of at least 10 years and make minor adjustment as time goes on. We haven’t quite done it so far,” said Lee Dae-woo, a security and foreign relations expert at Sejong Institute.

By Shin Hyon-hee (heeshin@heraldcorp.com)