Korea? NATO? Are you smoking crack, Marmot?
No, but don’t expect to see Korea intervening in the Balkans anytime soon, either. According to the JoongAng Ilbo, the United States and Great Britain have invited South Korea, Japan and Australia to associate with the alliance as “global partners.” While this does not mean NATO would go global—the three “global partners” would not participate in purely military affairs of the alliance, and the partnership would have no relevance to inter-Korean security issues—Seoul could be asked to lend a hand in peacekeeping and disaster relief.
If Korea were to accept the invitation, it could become a global partner of NATO by 2008.
10 Comments
You gotta love [sic] the JI’s perspective on this as revealed in the headline claim that it is “NATO [that is] poised to affiliate with Seoul”.
So, no, it’s not you Marmot; it’s the JI that’s smoking rock candy.
I guess instead of the UN, with which the US has tricky relations, it chose its rather malleable allies to push ahead with its ‘global mission’ more easily.
Does this mean that someone, somewhere in Washington still has some faith in the future of the relationship with South Korea?
I guess now that the regional elections have shown clearly which way the popular wind is blowing, it’s safe to look beyond 2007 and not throw up one’s hands just yet.
In Europe, NATO is being used mostly to bring former Eastern Bloc states into the ‘Western’ security arrangement, and to squeeze Russia. Extending membership to friendly East Asian nations is a sign that the U.S. is looking to NATO as a framework for managing its security relations. Possibly as a consequence of the “coalition-building” fiasco in the run-up to the Iraq war.
Does this mean that someone, somewhere in Washington still has some faith in the future of the relationship with South Korea?
Particularly if there are chances to be involved in peacekeeping and disaster relief, this gives Korea a chance to show that it’s on the side of the US and get some international prestige — it’s in league with Japan and Australia in this regard — while doing something that would be palatable to most Korean voters.
A double-win.
If’n it’s all true.
The better headline might be; “NATO Seeks to Join South Korea”
JI isn’t smoking anything. Ban Ki-moon gave a speech the NATO NACouncil last December. First time for an SK official to do so, and only second time for a non-NATO member to do so. His speech was followed by Taro Aso’s on May 4th. December speech got wheels in motion. Senior NATO officials aside from Sec. Gen. talking about it as well… Would definitely be a big shift to even join as a “partner” but there’s not doubt it’s being talked about.
P.S. but you’re right, at least the headline writers are smoking something. “poised?” hardly.
It sounds like this might be merely an “information-sharing” strategy similar to the REL AUS-CAN-UK intel agreement, using the NATO label as a cover. After all, what does countering China have to do with NATO?? The NATO purpose, on paper, is outdated but it can certainly evolve to take on other roles.
Somehow though, I think the inclusion of Korea in that mix is a formal gesture that won’t amount to any beneficial information exchange. I could be wrong there but as long as personalities like Ban, Ki-Moon are in the limelight nothing serious in US-ROK relations will evolve. Only external appearances seem to matter with him.
Militarily, the relation with the Ozzies and Japanese is already well on its way to an in-depth information exchange program. Using NATO as an umbrella for their participation I think is a means of including them knowing that an East Asian equivalent of NATO is currently hopeless…