The ongoing dispute over the South China Sea is posing a tricky diplomatic challenge to South Korea as the U.S. appears to be increasing pressure on its ally to take its side in the name of “freedom of navigation.”

Public opinion is divided over how Seoul should handle the issue: Some argue that Seoul should keep a low profile and prevent itself from falling into a situation in which it has to choose between the U.S. and China. Others argue that Seoul should present a clear position against China’s maritime assertiveness given its national interests in keeping major shipping lanes out of China’s hands.

Mindful of the complexities of the issue, which has developed geopolitical overtones with the U.S. launching a freedom-of-navigation naval campaign, Seoul had maintained a cautious stance. It had argued that the issues should be resolved peacefully through dialogue in accordance with the existing international rules.

But Defense Minister Han Min-koo went a step further this week, appearing to take the side of the U.S.

“The South China Sea is a crucial maritime traffic route where 30 percent of South Korea’s exports and 90 percent of energy imports pass through, and where South Korea has great interests,” Han said during a meeting of defense ministers from the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations, South Korea, the U.S., China and Japan.

“The government of the Republic of Korea’s position is that the dispute involving the South China Sea should be resolved peacefully, and that the freedom of navigation both at sea and in the air should be guaranteed.”

The pressure on Seoul to take a clear position over the South China Sea dispute has been ratcheted up in recent months with the leaders of the U.S. and Japan touching on the need for Seoul to raise its voice on the issue during their summits in October and earlier this week, respectively.

During a joint press conference following their summit in Washington on Oct. 16, President Barack Obama asked Seoul to speak up “when China fails to follow international rules and standards.”

Opinions in Korea are sharply divided.

Chun Young-woo, former presidential security adviser, criticized the Park Geun-hye administration for its “silence” on the issue.

“Given that Korea imports a vast majority of its energy through the South China Sea route, the route is a lifeline for Korea. In this respect, the issue of securing the freedom of navigation is a more crucial security issue for Korea than for Japan,” he said in an interview with the local daily Munhwa Ilbo.

“It is quite a shame that a situation has taken place where Obama had to ask Seoul’s position over the South China Sea (during the summit), because the Park Geun-hye government has remained silent over it.”

But some others have argued that it is better for Seoul to maintain strategic ambiguity over the issue rather than taking the side of any major power not to get unnecessarily embroiled in a war of nerves between Washington and Beijing.

“There is no reason for South Korea to speak up when it is not a direct claimant like Vietnam and the Philippines,” said Kang Jun-young, political science professor at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies.

“It would be better for Seoul to just maintain its hitherto position that the maritime disputes should be resolved peacefully among the claimants in accordance with international rules rather than appearing to be siding with anyone.”

By Song Sang-ho (sshluck@heraldcorp.com)