For any international power, such as the United States, foreign policy is cyclical. Developments in one conflict, and subsequent reactions from major global powers often create ripple effects within geopolitical circles that result in inadvertent change in other unassociated conflicts. The development of political tensions on the Korean peninsula exemplifies this. With recent developments in the Middle East and within Ukraine, reactions from the rest of the world provide a fascinating perspective on how foreign policy has shaped the diplomatic and militaristic progress of both North and South Korea. Specifically, historical American intervention in the Korean Peninsula, as well as current American reactions to global tensions, give us a clear understanding of the cyclical politics of foreign relations. On the basis of this analysis, this article seeks to explore what US global foreign policy will mean for the Korean peninsula in the future.  

History of the US’s Involvement in the Korean Peninsula

Historically, the Korean Peninsula has been a source of interest for US foreign policy not only with respect to establishing  security against North Korea but also with regards to the US’  long-running bid to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. While the US and South Korea have been on mutually beneficial terms since 1953, beyond the 1953 Mutual Defense Treaty little has been done to establish formal alliances, making South Korea, in essence, a new ally. This position as an informal ally of North America has made South Korea wary of progressing with any moves to demilitarize the Korean peninsula. North Korea’s new alliances with Russia and neighboring China indicate a state equally reluctant to demilitarize. Exactly how have we arrived at this current state of the Korean conflict? What is in store for the future? 

Context of Denuclearisation Efforts 

The most recent efforts to denuclearize the Korean peninsula began back in 2018, when then-South Korean President Moon Jae-in and Chairman Kim Jong-Un met in the neutral village of Panmunjom and signed a treaty pledging to denuclearize the Korean peninsula and begin to open peaceful ties again. It was around this time that several talks between the US and North Korea took place between 2018 and 2019. However, these yielded minimal results. Relations on the peninsula deteriorated further with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. By 2023, all remnants of the 2018 treaty and diplomatic talks had given way to military aid and economic backing to the countries’ respective allies in the shadow of the war in Ukraine and the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Shift Away from Denuclearisation 

With the onset of the Ukraine war, early on North Korea established itself as a strong ally of Russia, sending arms and troops to the warring country and establishing a new alliance in the process.2 Likewise, South Korea has continued to develop stronger ties with the United States and the Western powers supporting Ukraine. In addition, responding to increased North Korean nuclear testing, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol rolled back peace talks with North Korea during his first months in office. All in all these growing alliances have resulted in a deterioration of peace negotiations, with South Korea formally ending the military d'etant on the peninsula this year.2

Allies and Indicators

So what can we expect from the future? Is this proxy war for Asian powers likely to persist? Ultimately alliances will serve as a clear indicator of mounting tension within the region. 

Within North Korea, there is a key underlying ambition to establish strong ties with Russia and China, as both countries have expressed their willingness to aid North Korea. Most notably, developments in North Korean technology and Russian military movements have suggested that a stronger political alliance could mean a greater impact on the Ukrainian front. North Korea has been sending military hardware such as firearms to Russia since early on in the war. New intelligence reports, however, suggest that a more proactive stance by North Korea in the conflict may occur in the coming months, with unconfirmed intelligence reports from agencies such as Ukrainian Military Intelligence (HUR) and the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), suggesting that there may be anywhere between 10-11,000 North Korean soldiers standing by on Russian soil. While some Ukrainian military officials have taken the reports of North Korean soldiers as an indicator of Russia's failing battle strategy, unclear pathways to peace talks and a clear interest in North Korea to see a Russian victory could indicate strong military alliances persisting on the Korean peninsula in the future. In contrast to the North Korean dictatorship, South Korea has made it evident to East Asia and the rest of the global community that it stands with the US and Western interests. While the 1953 Mutual Defense Treaty is the only formal alliance that South Korea has with the US, which offers mutual protection to South Korea through the presence of US military personnel on and around the Korean Peninsula, numerous political actions and economic plans jointly drafted by the US and South Korea justify South Korea's intention to side itself strongly with the US.

South Korea has taken the war in Ukraine as an opportunity to present itself as an unconditional ally to the US and Western nations, sending in humanitarian aid, and even beginning to open proposals within the government to directly supply Ukraine with arms. With increased tensions along the Korean divide, and North Korea's amassing of allies such as Russia, South Korea is seeking to ensure steadfast US support should politics in the region turn hostile. To gauge this support, Korea has begun to observe conflicts in Ukraine and within Israel and Palestine to see exactly how the US prioritizes new democratic nations and longstanding allies respectively. Moreover, with strong US alliances within Israel and an interest in the maintenance of a democratic government in Ukraine, South Korea is well aware that Ukraine stands to be the best representation of how the US divides resources amongst allies at times when there are other conflicts playing out. This is valuable to South Korea as any standoff with North Korea is an overarching concern of the American government. This is exemplified by continuous coverage of tensions between North and South Korea in US news cycles; yet these tensions often are pushed to one side when more pressing issues such as the war in Ukraine and the Israel-Palestine conflict develop. Overall, actions clearly indicate that South Korea, unsure whether the US will provide the level of force necessary to maintain security on the ever-unstable peninsula, is seeking to strengthen alliances amid tensions in Ukraine and in Israel and Palestine. 

Conclusion 

Considering the current amassing of allies within the Korean Peninsula, and a lack of communication between the two governments, at this moment current geopolitical tensions suggest  that one should not expect to see denuclearisation in the near future. Whether or not Ukraine wins the war, how much aid the US is willing to devote to South Korea, and whether or not lasting peace can be reached in other areas of conflict such as Israel and Palestine will all indicate to the peninsula exactly where they stand with their allies and exactly what they can accomplish. It is my opinion that neither country, at this moment in time, is prepared to enter into any level of conflict; they do not have strong enough political backing to do so without incurring the wrath of the global community. However, conflict, while not a certainty, is an ever likely possibility; continued endeavors by either side to establish strong alliances with global powers is a clear indicator that both countries are aware of this. Neither Koreas, nor their allies, are willing to be the first to put down the gun.