South Korea’s Apec Diplomacy Hailed as a Win, But Analysts Warn of Fragile US-China Balancing Act
Reading Time: 5 minutes
South Korea’s ambitious diplomatic outreach at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) summit has drawn praise at home, but analysts are cautioning that Seoul may face mounting strategic and economic pressures as it attempts to balance its alliances with both the United States and China. While recent meetings between President Lee Jae-myung and leaders of the world’s two superpowers were seen as diplomatic milestones, some observers warn that the celebrations may be premature.
President Lee’s back-to-back engagements with U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping were framed by the South Korean government as evidence of Seoul’s growing geopolitical relevance. The bilateral talks were held on the sidelines of the Apec summit, and both were portrayed as constructive in tone, with pledges to deepen trade and security cooperation.
In particular, Lee’s meeting with Xi in Gyeongju marked the first high-level bilateral summit between South Korea and China in nearly four years, signaling a possible thaw in relations that had been strained since Seoul’s deployment of the U.S.-built THAAD missile defense system in 2017. Meanwhile, the reaffirmation of military ties with Washington underscored South Korea’s enduring security alliance with its oldest defense partner.
However, experts say this dual-track strategy—rebooting economic ties with Beijing while reinforcing military cooperation with Washington—could leave Seoul walking a precarious tightrope.
“South Korea may be trying to have it both ways, but the current strategic climate makes that increasingly difficult,” said Dr. Yoon Ji-ho, a senior fellow at the Korea Institute for International Policy. “Both the U.S. and China are more willing than ever to pressure smaller states into choosing sides, especially in critical sectors such as semiconductors, defense technologies, and supply chains.”
South Korea’s economy remains highly dependent on exports, particularly to China, which remains its largest trading partner. At the same time, the U.S. is South Korea’s primary security guarantor and a critical technology and investment partner. This interdependence with both sides makes hedging a logical choice—but also one fraught with risk.
Seoul’s tech industry, including companies like Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, has already faced fallout from tightened U.S. export controls aimed at limiting China’s access to advanced semiconductors. While South Korean firms have secured temporary exemptions, future restrictions could force Seoul into politically difficult decisions. Simultaneously, Beijing has not hesitated to wield economic tools to signal displeasure with South Korea’s security choices in the past.
“Seoul risks alienating both partners if it cannot maintain strategic clarity,” said Professor Choi Min-jung of Yonsei University. “Trying to play mediator or neutral actor works only until a major flashpoint—such as a Taiwan Strait crisis or a new North Korean provocation—forces alignment.”
China has increasingly pushed for a “regional autonomy” approach to Asian security, signaling wariness about U.S. military alliances in its neighborhood. Meanwhile, the United States has hardened its Indo-Pacific posture through initiatives like AUKUS, the Quad, and enhanced military cooperation with allies including Japan, the Philippines, and Australia—effectively drawing lines in the regional sand.
For President Lee, the diplomatic optics of the Apec summit were valuable in reinforcing his image as a pragmatic statesman. Domestically, his ability to maintain dialogue with both Trump and Xi was praised by moderates and business leaders eager to see more stable external conditions for trade and investment. However, foreign policy analysts caution that photo ops and policy deliverables are two very different things.
“Positive diplomatic atmospherics do not guarantee long-term policy autonomy,” noted Park Soo-hyun, a former National Security Council adviser. “South Korea’s margin for maneuver is narrowing, and it will need to make clearer strategic choices if geopolitical rivalry continues to intensify.”
In the meantime, Seoul is expected to pursue a “strategic reassurance” campaign, working behind the scenes to ensure that both Washington and Beijing view its actions as balanced and non-threatening. Whether such an approach can hold amid deepening polarization in the global order remains to be seen.
