Donald Trump told the Wall Street Journal in April 2017 what discussion he had with Xi Jinping. Trump claimed that Xi was a Xi
entered the story of Korea and China. No Korea, nor North Korea. And you’re aware that you’re referring to thousands of years and numerous war. And Korea was once a part of China. And I came to the conclusion that it’s not that simple after listening for ten days.
Xi’s alleged opinion is more than just a traditional sneer; it reveals Beijing’s wider plan to establish China as the cultural and political core of East Asia. This effect plan depends on both narrative and power.
China uses an alleged spiritual authority to veer off into the affairs of neighbors like Korea by referring to a hegemonic tradition as the region’s legitimate hegemon. Dangerously, as Trump’s comment demonstrate, even world leaders may be influenced by this reactionary frame.
Interference dressed as control
Beijing’s opposition to South Korea’s participation in the General Security of Military Information Agreement ( GSOMIA ) and the US-supplied Terminal High Altitude Area Defense ( THAAD ) missile system is driven by this narrative. But that’s only the launch.
Seoul has been under Chinese influence in terms of its politics, society, and defense policies. In response to disagreements, it has used illegal trade sanctions, including those aimed at Vietnamese companies like Lotte, which have a ban on tourism, and which have banned Asian entertainment.
It even criticizes US-Korean military activities conducted on Korean soil, and it frequently objected to Korean officials ‘ trips to US military installations or strategy meetings. These steps aim to restrict Seoul’s freedom, address South Korea as a slave rather than a US royal lover, and deter the US from having any influence in South Korea.
Korea’s much history as a sovereign state
China’s historic claims are being investigated. Koreans have remained a part of the tribal Korean system throughout the Joseon Dynasty, which is a variation of China’s Qing kingdom. Although Joseon and China shared a watershed relationship, it was more metaphorical than social.
The Korean court established its own kings, set direction for foreign affairs, and rarely fell under Beijing’s strong rule.
Not a status, but a culture
China is a society that purports to be a state. This frequently quoted note reveals a significant fact about China’s identity and its claims to superiority over others.
In fact, the majority of royal China was ruled by non-Hanespeoples for almost the entirety of its recorded history, primarily from Manchuria and Mongolia. The geographical boundaries and racial makeup of late royal and current China were largely influenced by the kingdoms they established, including the Liao, Jin, Western Xia, Yuan, and Qing.
Under Manchu law, Han Chinese men were compelled to go the lane hairstyle, shaving their fronts and braiding their rest. It was perceived as a sign of obedience, but it disagreed with Confucian principles that considered it insulting to cut hair. The lane was incredibly humiliating for Han Chinese, who saw their hair as a mark of filial devotion and ethnic identity.
In all of these situations, which is important, China recognized non-Han rulers as reputable Chinese dynasties. By virtue of their ancestry and the fact that they governed under Foreign laws, the Manchus and Mongols were recognized as legitimate rulers of China.
In this way, China’s identity has generally been more political than cultural, much like the US’s. China has been ruled by strangers who have preserved and advanced Chinese culture, just as the US has been led by people who embraced and upheld British principles but not always by bright Anglo-Saxon Protestants. This makes Beijing’s contemporary rely on Han-centric traditional says all the more unfactual.
Korea’s independence was overshadowed by China’s.
During those times, Korea remained unaffected by foreign power. The Goryeo and Joseon empires kept their political independence atop China’s political and social ties.
Unfortunately, while the Han Chinese were governed by non-Han dynasties during the time when China today asserts local authority, Korea remained independent.
Traditional revisionism as a coercive device
Beijing is still using this imperfect historical narrative to stress Seoul into reducing its military cooperation with Washington.
China acts as though Korea’s independence were a negotiation, opposing missile defense systems, and repressing trilateral cooperation with Japan, while interfering with private education on subjects like the Goguryeo country.
This is more than just a rehash of the history. It’s a deliberate attempt to stifle Korea’s sovereignty and challenge the US’s approach to foreign policy, which treats Northeast Asian nations as equal and separate partners.
It’s also a part of a wider structure of traditional revisionism intended to advance social goals. China aims to justify interference in Asian affairs by making these assertions.
Autonomy cannot be renegotiated.
Without seeking Beijing’s consent, South Korea and the United States have every right to dictate their military pose, conduct impartial diplomacy, and plan for their future together. The US-South Korea empire was founded on respect for one another and shared political principles, not on myths or twisted histories. It continues to be a crucial component of regional harmony and balance.
Washington must continue to have a perceptive eye on China’s historical revisionism as a proper tool and vehemently refute any notion that Beijing’s approval is necessary for Asian defense policy. Anything else would degrade South Korea’s legitimacy as well as encourage China’s expansion into the Indo-Pacific and above.
Former South Korean liberal party international official Hanjin Lew is a political commentator with an emphasis on East Asian affairs.