[Defense Brief] The New Cold War Structure and the Time for Choice

The Russia-Ukraine War: A Turning Point
Western Bloc Led by the US vs. China and Russia
Choosing Between Alignment with the West and Pragmatic Diplomacy

It has been one year since Russia invaded Ukraine. The damage has been immense, marking the largest scale since World War II. Eight million people, accounting for 30% of the Ukrainian population, have become refugees, and 6.5 million have been internally displaced. Fortunately, neighboring countries have stepped up. Poland has provided basic welfare services and labor opportunities to refugees for 18 months and offers 40 zlotys per day (about 11,600 KRW) to citizens who take refugees into their homes. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has also pledged to raise funds necessary to support displaced Ukrainians. However, limitations are becoming apparent. As refugee accommodation facilities become scarce, countries have begun to engage in tensions. This mirrors last year's conflicts between Italy and France over handling ships carrying African refugees and others from international aid organizations, with both sides claiming difficulty in accepting them.

The confrontation between nations has intensified further. The West versus non-West, liberal democracy versus authoritarianism, heralding a "new Cold War era." The United States, the European Union (EU), and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have joined forces. NATO and the EU issued a joint declaration for the first time in five years, stating, "Let us play complementary and enhanced roles for the security of each nation." For the EU, which does not possess its own military forces, NATO's umbrella was likely necessary to compensate for its insufficient defense capabilities. NATO also sought to check China. At the NATO summit held in Madrid, Spain, in June last year, the "2022 Strategic Concept" was adopted, defining China as a "challenge" for the first time in history. Meanwhile, the opposing alliance strengthened its honeymoon period: Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. China abstained from voting on the United Nations Security Council resolution condemning Russia's annexation of Ukrainian territories, effectively blocking sanctions against Russia. They even declared a "no-limits partnership."

Our government's concerns have deepened, primarily due to North Korea. Taking advantage of the chaotic international situation, North Korea conducted unprecedented military demonstrations last year, including intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launches. However, repeated opposition from permanent Security Council members China and Russia has repeatedly blocked even condemnation statements from the Security Council. Since both North Korea and Russia face comprehensive and high-intensity sanctions from the United States and the West, their strategic alliance is expected to accelerate further.

We have two options. We must consider whether to act together with the West or continue pragmatic diplomacy. To control North Korea's nuclear advancement through diplomatic cooperation, the first option is to indirectly support Ukraine via Poland or the United States, which have imported large amounts of "K-defense" (Korean defense products). This means shifting from a stance of not providing lethal weapons directly to Ukraine, aside from economic and humanitarian aid. Sweden and Finland, which have maintained military non-alignment policies for over 70 years, have also abandoned their neutral stance.

Alternatively, we could choose pragmatic diplomacy, similar to India’s "neither fully aligned nor opposed" approach. India participates in the Quad, a security dialogue aimed at countering China led by the United States, but has not joined sanctions against Russia. Instead, it benefits by purchasing Russian crude oil at low prices. However, if our government chooses this path, it may become more difficult to prevent North Korea from possessing nuclear weapons. Observing Ukraine, which gave up its nuclear weapons under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum in exchange for security guarantees but was ultimately invaded, North Korea might take this as a cautionary example. There is concern that the Ukraine war could fuel North Korea’s determination to acquire nuclear weapons. Wise judgment from the government is needed at this critical time.