The heated debate over the possible deployment of an advanced U.S. missile defense battery to the peninsula is spawning concerns that the Cold War-era mentality still lives on here and will complicate Seoul’s strategic approaches to security issues.

Since the issue surrounding the Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense system surfaced last year, a flurry of reports and expert analyses have depicted it as a matter of Seoul’s choice between the U.S. and China, as if the two economically interdependent powers were stuck in another Cold War.

Observers cautioned against a “one-dimensional, all-or-nothing thinking” about world politics including Sino-U.S. relations, noting that the antiquated Cold War-era thinking still persists on the peninsula due mostly to the ideological division between the two Koreas.

“Seventy years ago, World War II ended, while the Korean Peninsula became divided. Over the course of time, Germany was unified while Korea still remains divided. Thus, the end of the war left unfinished business for Korea, and the Cold War structure still persists here,” said Huh Moon-young, a senior fellow at the state-run Korea Institute for National Unification.

“We should break the Cold War mentality to bring in a new era, new perspectives. Thus, the THAAD issue will be a crucial litmus test for Korea that will affect not only Korea but also Northeast Asia as a whole. We cannot solve this issue with a dichotomous way of thinking.”

Indeed, in Korea, any sensitive issue that involves the U.S. and China has turned into a tricky diplomatic choice for South Korea, which wants to maintain both its security alliance with the U.S. and strategic partnership with China.

Thus, debate on such issues tend to focus on which side South Korea should take ― rather than on the security aspect of the issue ― based apparently on the views that, like the Soviet-U.S. relationship, the U.S.-China relations would only be a “zero-sum” game in which one side’s gains mean the other side’s loss.

In the case of THAAD, public discussion has centered on whether Seoul should okay the U.S.’ dispatch of THAAD here ― not on whether THAAD is really an effective option to counter North Korea’s missile threats, or whether there is any alternative to better defend the South.

“The world is far more complex with growing economic interdependence, international rules and all. The U.S. and China are not running toward each other on a one-dimensional line only to clash,” said Kim Tae-hyun, political scientist at Chung-Ang University and chairman of the Korean Association of International Studies.

“There may be four or five more dimensions in the Sino-U.S. relations, or perhaps more than that. (The public and media) seem to only pay attention to that one security dimension when they talk about the multidimensional relations.”

Touching on the causes of the failures to see the multifaceted aspects of the relations between the major powers, Kim noted that in the public domain, there tend to be a flurry of conspiracy theories due to Korea’s historical experience of victimization by foreign forces.

He added that the public and media tended to exaggerate, simplify or overly generalize complicated issues as they often do not seriously affect citizens’ daily lives.

Beyond the domestic factors, the trend of power politics in East Asia and beyond appears to have affected the Cold War-era thinking in Korea, according to Jo Yang-hyeon, a professor at the Korea National Diplomatic Academy.

“Along with the national division on the peninsula, elements of power politics, which have recently been strengthened amid tension between the U.S. and Russia and between the U.S. and China, might have impacted the way we view our relations with China and the U.S.,” he said.

Amid the “U.S. vs. China” debate, Seoul officials vowed to make their decision on the issue strictly from the standpoint of national interests and military efficacy. Yet, the toughest challenge facing Seoul comes from the symbolism that the public attaches to THAAD.

Should Seoul consent to the deployment in South Korea of THAAD, one of the core strategic U.S. defense assets, the public would perceive the country as a staunch ally of the U.S. that would stand up against future U.S. adversaries, potentially China and Russia.

If THAAD is installed here, Seoul would likely be the first U.S. ally to host a THAAD battery, which would further reinforce the symbolism. The U.S. currently runs four THAAD batteries in the U.S. mainland and Guam, and plans to deploy a few THAAD batteries to its allies including Korea.

Analysts say that to overcome the symbolism, the public debate should be oriented toward enhancing national interests rather than churning out “U.S. vs. China” discourse, and that the government should employ a more strategic, prudent diplomacy to persuade Beijing of its intentions about the security cooperation with the U.S.

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