• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Chung Min Lee"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Inside Korea"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "AP",
  "programs": [
    "Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "South Korea"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Military"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other

South Korea’s Grand Strategy in Transition: Coping with Existential Threats and New Political Forces

It is critical for South Korea to undertake structural military reforms and create a new bipartisan national security paradigm.

Link Copied
By Chung Min Lee
Published on Nov 1, 2017
Program mobile hero image

Program

Asia

The Asia Program in Washington studies disruptive security, governance, and technological risks that threaten peace, growth, and opportunity in the Asia-Pacific region, including a focus on China, Japan, and the Korean peninsula.

Learn More

Source: Strategic Asia 2017–18: Power, Ideas, and Military Strategy in the Asia-Pacific

Main Argument

Several facets of South Korea’s grand strategy remain constant, such as the goals of achieving peaceful reunification of the Korean Peninsula, deterring and defending the country’s territorial and political integrity from a range of North Korean threats, ensuring its global economic competitiveness, and sustaining its democratic foundations. Yet even as these pillars remain the same, South Korea must now adapt this strategy to address an unprecedented range of threats. It not only must contend with a growing spectrum of North Korean threats and nonlinear scenarios; it also must consider China’s anti-access/area-denial capabilities around the Korean Peninsula in an acute military crisis. These challenges will test the ability of the political leadership in Seoul to break out of its constant political infighting and build a new national security consensus.

Policy Implications

  • The South Korean government and military must anticipate hybrid conflict scenarios and the growing possibility of volatile transformations on the Korean Peninsula. The National Assembly should create a new national security committee to ensure bipartisan approaches to critical diplomatic, military, and intelligence issues.
  • The U.S. must ensure the credibility of extended deterrence by demonstrating its military, political, and economic commitment to Asia as a critical superpower counterbalance vis-à-vis China.
  • Despite outstanding historical differences and lingering legacies, it is important for South Korea and Japan to enhance their bilateral security, defense, and intelligence cooperation.

This piece was originally published in Strategic Asia 2017–18: Power, Ideas, and Military Strategy in the Asia-Pacific.

About the Author

Chung Min Lee

Senior Fellow, Asia Program

Chung Min Lee is a senior fellow in Carnegie’s Asia Program. He is an expert on Korean and Northeast Asian security, defense, intelligence, and crisis management.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    President Lee Jae Myung: A Year in Power

      Chung Min Lee

  • Paper
    Are Long-Term NATO–South Korea Defense Ties Possible? Transitioning From an Arms Exporter to a Trusted Defense Partner

      Chung Min Lee

Chung Min Lee
Senior Fellow, Asia Program
Chung Min Lee
SecurityMilitaryEast AsiaSouth Korea

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Close-up of Lithium-Ion Battery Pack
    Research
    Battery Ecosystems: A Comparative Analysis of Lithium-Ion Tech Policy

    A deep dive into the policy ecosystems behind battery development in China, South Korea, Japan, the European Union (including some of its member states), the United States, Canada, and India.

      • +5

      Milo McBride, Herbert Crowther, Darcie Draudt-Véjares, …

  • large boat sitting off a coastline
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Impacts of the Houthis’ Advance Could Extend Well Beyond Saudi Arabia

    The Horn of Africa countries are among those facing a new security calculus.

      • Andrew Leber
      • Dr. Lesley Anne Warner

      Andrew Leber, Lesley Anne Warner

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Will the Far Right Change Europe’s Russia Policy?

    The European far right might fail to steer EU policy in the direction Russia wants, but they will create enough chaos inside Europe to benefit the Kremlin.

      Dimitar Bechev

  • Greenland United States Denmark Agreement Nuuk
    Commentary
    The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of Time

    The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.

      Marc Pierini

  • The nuclear missile formation passes through Tian'anmen Square during a military parade on September 3, 2025 in Beijing, China.
    Paper
    Untangling the Nuclear Knot: A Constructive Agenda for Managing China’s Nuclear Relations with the United States and Its Allies

    The nuclear relationship between China and the United States is increasingly shaped by widening perception gaps rather than deliberate strategic design.

      Tong Zhao

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.