[Lee Byung-jong] Korea’s role in global governance

At a time when the basic framework of world multilateralism seems to be decaying under the weight of rising nationalism in many parts of the globe, it may sound odd to call for South Korea to play a greater role in global governance. The two summit meetings President Lee Jae Myung just concluded in Japan and the United States attest to the necessity of Korea’s bilateral diplomacy rather than multilateralism. Yet, as a country that has benefited enormously from multilateral institutions over the past seven decades — and whose future depends greatly on how these institutions evolve — Korea should strive to uphold and reinforce the global governance system rather than watch it collapse.

Without the security and economic institutions of global governance, Korea would likely not have survived, let alone thrived. The most important global multilateral body for security, the United Nations, ensured Korea’s survival in the wake of North Korea’s invasion in 1950. Economic institutions such as the World Bank and, later, the World Trade Organization provided support that helped Korea rise from the ashes of the Korean War (1950-53) and transform into a major trading nation. Beyond security and economics, global governance structures in education, human rights, health and technology also played vital roles in Korea’s successful journey toward stability and prosperity.

Yet many of these institutions are now weakened by populist “my country first” movements, notably in the US. Since Trump’s first term, multilateralism has cracked under anti-globalization sentiment. Trump attacked numerous multilateral institutions and accords, undermining the basis of global governance. Under him, the US withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, UNESCO, the World Health Organization and the UN Human Rights Council.

Since returning to power, Trump’s disruption has accelerated. His tariffs against both allies and rivals shook the post-WWII multilateral trade system built under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the WTO. By paralyzing the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism and demanding bilateral deals, he is trying to dismantle the organization altogether.

The World Bank has also come under fire from US President Donald Trump's administration, which criticizes its supposed pro-China leanings and progressive policies. Similarly, Trump distrusts the UN, claiming it erodes US sovereignty and wastes American contributions — the US pays about 22 percent of the UN’s total budget.

Perhaps most striking is Trump’s open skepticism toward US allies. He claims that countries in NATO and beyond have long “ripped off” the United States, and he demands sharp increases in allied defense spending. He has threatened to abandon NATO altogether unless Europe makes greater contributions. His preference for one-on-one negotiations over multilateral mechanisms underscores a clear intention to replace the international order with a network of bilateral deals.

Korea’s new government cannot, of course, escape this new reality of bilateralism based on a realist worldview, particularly in its relationship with Washington. On issues ranging from tariffs to investment to defense, the Lee administration had to expend enormous diplomatic energy to avoid damaging outcomes. Fortunately, President Lee managed to escape the kind of confrontational ambush that other leaders, including those of Ukraine and South Africa, have experienced in their dealings with Trump. Their meeting was surprisingly amicable, full of praise and even flattery on both sides.

Yet Korea should not be content with maintaining good bilateral ties with Washington — or with any single power. As a middle power with aspirations to become a “Global Pivotal State,” Korea needs to invest more in multilateral global governance. In this regard, Korea has a modest record of contributions. Ban Ki-moon served as UN Secretary-General for a decade. Korea has held a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council three times. The country has also hosted significant international gatherings, including the 2010 G20 Summit in Seoul, and it will host the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in Gyeongju, Gyeonggi Province, later this year. In 2010, Korea became home to the Green Climate Fund in Incheon, a UN agency central to global climate financing.

Still, Korea’s overall role in global governance remains underwhelming. On pressing issues such as the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, Seoul has been cautious, preferring silence to proactive engagement. Its official development assistance stands at just 0.2 percent of gross domestic product — below the OECD average of 0.3 percent. Few Korean nationals hold high-level positions in major international organizations.

Global governance may be under strain due to rising nationalism and great-power rivalry, but it will not disappear. In a deeply interconnected world, no single state can address challenges like pandemics, climate change, refugee crises, nuclear proliferation or economic inequality alone. Such problems demand collective global efforts. The multilateral system may evolve and — perhaps even strengthen — because of the complexity of global challenges.

For Korea, the choice is clear. It can remain a passive beneficiary of global governance, or it can step forward as an active contributor, shaping institutions that will define the future. As the world struggles between nationalism and multilateralism, Korea must decide whether it will be a bystander or a stakeholder in preserving and revitalizing the system that has sustained it for seven decades.

Lee Byung-jong

Lee Byung-jong is a former Seoul correspondent for Newsweek, The Associated Press and Bloomberg News. He is a professor at the School of Global Service at Sookmyung Women’s University in Seoul. The views expressed here are the writer’s own. -- Ed.