APEC 2025: A Reflection of South Korea’s Diplomatic Leadership
The current global landscape indicates that the world is moving away from cooperation and toward an era of increasingly sharp fragmentation. The current rivalry between the United States (U.S.) and China is not merely a competition between two great powers, but has become a structural trend reshaping the international order. Geopolitical fragmentation runs counter to the principles of liberal internationalism, which for decades have underpinned the global economy. As distrust toward international institutions grows and states increasingly favor unilateral or bilateral approaches, multilateralism loses its appeal. In this context, the relevance of multilateral forums such as APEC is questioned.
U.S. protectionist policies, especially during the Trump administration, have been trailblazing this crack in the global economic structure. Ironically, the same country that once served as the founder of pillars of global trade practices now contradicts the very principles of open economy it designed. These new systemic pressures have never been as palpable for South Korea during its chairmanship of APEC 2025, when the country finds itself caught between pressure from the U.S. and the imperative to preserve its strategic autonomy.
South Korea’s challenging chairmanship in APEC stems from its direct experience with the impact of the global trend. As a country deeply embedded in global supply chains, particularly in semiconductors and high technology, Korea stands at the intersection of U.S. and Chinese interests. The U.S. has pursued an increasingly assertive and transactional policy, even toward its allies. At the same time, Seoul’s strong security dependence on Washington, amid the persistent threat from North Korea, further constrains its diplomatic maneuverability. Under such conditions, abandoning multilateralism is not only unrealistic but also highly risky.
Despite these pressures, South Korea’s foreign strategy retains a typical middle-power behavior in that it consistently supports multilateralism. South Korea’s engagement with APEC began in 1991, when it was still a newly industrializing economy. Aligning with its domestic export-oriented industrialization strategy, its early presidencies supported APEC’s core values of liberalization and an open economy. Similarly, during its second term as APEC chair in 2005, South Korea emerged as an agenda shaper, particularly in efforts to reduce trade barriers. This confidence stemmed from its accession to the OECD in 1996 and economic revitalization following the 1997 Asian financial crisis, during which it actively promoted the expansion of free trade areas. Today, South Korea has achieved advanced economy status, yet it faces a far more complex challenge in sustaining norms of economic cooperation at a time when global commitment to multilateralism itself is under increasing strain.
Under the leadership of President Lee Jae-myung, South Korea has been successful in navigating the challenges of the 2025 APEC presidency. This success can largely be attributed to Lee’s pragmatic leadership style, which has enabled diplomatic agility amid an increasingly fragmented regional and global environment.
First, Lee’s strategic pragmatism is reflected in South Korea’s decision to avoid advancing a politically sensitive and increasingly contested liberalization agenda. Instead, Seoul has emphasized new and shared challenges, including technology, energy, sustainability, and the governance of artificial intelligence. This approach is not only more politically acceptable in the current geopolitical climate but also directly relevant to both domestic and regional needs. By offering a third-path alternative amid U.S. –China polarization, South Korea seeks to preserve its strategic autonomy by focusing on “common problems” that are acceptable to all APEC economies. In doing so, South Korea reinforces its role as a bridge economy and sustains its relevance within the regional economic architecture.
Second, the adopted strategic choices reflect the elevation of domestic imperatives in line with President Lee’s commitment to economic revitalization. By prioritizing future-oriented issues such as technology and digital transformation, Lee integrates domestic interest into the regional agenda. Given South Korea’s advanced technological capabilities, this approach positions the country not only as a participant but also as a rule-maker in emerging areas such as artificial intelligence governance and digital economy.
Third, Lee’s pragmatism is evident in the recalibration of bilateral and multilateral engagement. During the Trump presidency, the U.S. adopted an overtly bilateral approach to economic diplomacy. Prior to the APEC meetings, key bilateral engagements, including Trump-Xi meeting helped ease tensions between the two countries. This temporary de-escalation, facilitated in part by trade-related concessions, created a more conducive environment for multilateral cooperation within APEC. Lee’s leadership accommodated these bilateral dynamics, allowing bilateral progress to support, rather than undermine, multilateral outcomes.
Ultimately, amid intensifying global fragmentation, the central question is how middle powers can remain relevant and influential. South Korea’s leadership in APEC thus represents a critical test of the adaptability of multilateralism to new geopolitical realities. At its core, the APEC experience suggests that multilateralism can remain viable when it evolves into a pragmatic platform capable of addressing the concrete economic and governance needs of the Asia-Pacific region.