SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Akademik Tarih ve Düşünce Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: 3

Trump Administration Policies Toward South Korea in the Context of Offshore Balancing (2017–2021)

Offshore Balancing Stratejisi Bağlamında Trump Yönetiminin Güney Kore'ye Yönelik Politikaları (2017–2021)

Burak Bekteş(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0009-0003-0774-1741
Kader Özlem(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0000-0003-4780-2118
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-07-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Accordingly, the study evaluates U.S. policy by focusing on regional balances of power and the prevention of the emergence of a potential regional hegemon while incorporating regional-level analysis to assess the strategic implications of these policies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study analyzes United States (U.S.) policy toward South Korea during Donald Trump's first presidential term through the analytical framework of offshore balancing.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The emergence of strategic competition between the United States and China has further increased the geopolitical importance of the Asia-Pacific region, making South Korea an increasingly significant U.S. partner in the region.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Accordingly, the study evaluates U.S. policy by focusing on regional balances of power and the prevention of the emergence of a potential regional hegemon while incorporating regional-level analysis to assess the strategic implications of these policies.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Amerika Birleşik Devletleri · Güney Kore · Offshore Balancing

Abstract

This study analyzes United States (U.S.) policy toward South Korea during Donald Trump's first presidential term through the analytical framework of offshore balancing. The emergence of strategic competition between the United States and China has further increased the geopolitical importance of the Asia-Pacific region, making South Korea an increasingly significant U.S. partner in the region. Consequently, the U.S. strategic reorientation toward the Asia-Pacific has strengthened bilateral relations between Washington and Seoul. Within this context, the study examines the policies pursued by the Trump administration toward South Korea and evaluates their regional implications from the perspective of offshore balancing. Although the strategic importance of the U.S.–South Korea alliance, its mutual benefits, and the regional security environment have limited the full implementation of offshore balancing, several policies adopted during the Trump administration were broadly consistent with the strategy. At the same time, other policies diverged from its principal assumptions. Accordingly, the study evaluates U.S. policy by focusing on regional balances of power and the prevention of the emergence of a potential regional hegemon while incorporating regional-level analysis to assess the strategic implications of these policies.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri'nin (ABD) Donald Trump'ın ilk başkanlık dönemi (2017–2021) boyunca Güney Kore'ye yönelik politikalarını offshore balancing stratejisi çerçevesinde incelemektir. ABD ile Çin arasında giderek belirginleşen stratejik rekabet, Asya-Pasifik bölgesinin jeopolitik önemini artırmış ve bu durum, ABD'nin bölgedeki en önemli müttefiklerinden biri olan Güney Kore ile ilişkilerini daha da ön plana çıkarmıştır. Bu doğrultuda Washington yönetiminin Asya-Pasifik'e yönelen stratejik yaklaşımı, iki ülke arasındaki siyasi ve güvenlik iş birliğinin güçlenmesine katkı sağlamıştır. Bu kapsamda çalışmada, Trump yönetiminin Güney Kore'ye yönelik politikaları ve bu politikaların bölgesel etkileri offshore balancing stratejisinin temel varsayımları çerçevesinde analiz edilmektedir. Araştırma bulguları, ABD-Güney Kore ittifakının stratejik önemi, tarafların karşılıklı güvenlik çıkarları ve Asya-Pasifik bölgesinin mevcut jeopolitik koşulları nedeniyle offshore balancing stratejisinin tüm unsurlarıyla uygulanmasının mümkün olmadığını göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, Trump yönetimi döneminde izlenen bazı politikaların stratejinin temel ilkeleriyle büyük ölçüde örtüştüğü, buna karşılık bazı uygulamaların ise offshore balancing yaklaşımının öngörüleriyle çeliştiği tespit edilmiştir. Bu doğrultuda çalışma, Trump yönetiminin Güney Kore'ye yönelik politikasını bölgesel güç dengesi ile potansiyel bölgesel hegemonun ortaya çıkmasının engellenmesi perspektifinden değerlendirmekte ve söz konusu politikaların Asya-Pasifik güvenlik mimarisi üzerindeki etkilerini bölgesel düzeyde analiz etmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bekteş, B., Özlem, K. (2026). Trump Administration Policies Toward South Korea in the Context of Offshore Balancing (2017–2021). Akademik Tarih ve Düşünce Dergisi, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 3. https://ajindex.com/articles/1443615

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (31)

  1. Achcar, G. (2004). U.S. imperial strategy in the Middle East. Monthly Review, 55(9). https://monthlyreview.org/articles/u-s-imperial-strategy-in-the-middle-east/
  2. Blakemore, E. (2020, June 24). The Korean War never technically ended. Here's why. National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/why-korean-war-never-technically-ended
  3. Blankenship, B. (2025, January 21). Achieving burden-sharing: Retrenchment vs. conditionality. Defense Priorities. https://www.defensepriorities.org/explainers/achieving-burden-sharing-retrenchment-vs-conditionality/
  4. Brands, H. (2015, August 20). Retrenchment chic: The dangers of offshore balancing. Foreign Policy Research Institute. https://www.fpri.org/article/2015/08/retrenchment-chic-the-dangers-of-offshore-balancing/
  5. Campbell, C., Manyin, M. E., & Nikitin, M. B. D. (2022, February 24). U.S.-South Korea relations (CRS Report No. R41481). Library of Congress. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R41481
  6. Cha, V. (2025, October 6). South Korea's response to U.S. demands: Minimize risk, maximize reward. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/south-koreas-response-us-demands-minimize-risk-maximize-reward
  7. Chang, F. K. (2019, April 22). The rise of South Korea's defense industry and its impact on South Korean foreign relations. Foreign Policy Research Institute. https://www.fpri.org/article/2019/04/the-rise-of-south-koreas-defense-industry-and-its-impact-on-south-korean-foreign-relations/
  8. Clinton, H. (2011). America's Pacific century: The future of geopolitics will be decided in Asia, not in Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States should be right at the center of the action. Foreign Policy, 189, 56–63.
  9. Fifield, A. (2017, May 2). South Korea's likely next president asks the U.S. to respect its democracy. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/south-koreas-likely-next-president-warns-the-us-not-to-meddle-in-its-democracy/2017/05/02/2295255e-29c1-11e7-9081-f5405f56d3e4_story.html
  10. Glenn, B. (2013). A perspective on Korea's participation in the Vietnam War (Brief No. 53). Asan Institute for Policy Studies.
  11. Gürel, E., & Tat, M. (2017). SWOT analysis: A theoretical review. The Journal of International Social Research, 10(51), 994–1006.
  12. Holmes, J. (2016, July 19). Why offshore balancing won't work. The National Interest. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-offshore-balancing-wont-work-17025 Im Baeg, H. (2006). The U.S. role in Korean democracy and security since Cold War era. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 6(2), 157–187.
  13. Jae-Bong, L. (2009). US deployment of nuclear weapons in 1950s South Korea & North Korea's nuclear development: Toward denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The Asia-Pacific Journal, 7(8), 1–17.
  14. Kaplan, F. (2004, August 9). Rolling blunder. Washington Monthly. https://washingtonmonthly.com/2004/08/09/rolling-blunder-2/
  15. Kaplan, M. A. (1957). Balance of power, bipolarity and other models of international systems. American Political Science Review, 51(3), 684–695.
  16. Karnow, S. (1997). Vietnam: A history. Penguin Books.
  17. Kerg, B. (2025, July 10). South Korea is the ideal anchor for the first island chain. Atlantic Council. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/south-korea-is-the-ideal-anchor-for-the-first-island-chain/
  18. Kim, J. (2018, July 6). 'No nukes, no THAAD' – South Korean town calls for missile defence withdrawal. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-missiledefence-idUSKBN1JV35W/
  19. Kissinger, H. (2016). Dünya düzeni (S. S. Gül, Çev.). Boyner Yayınları. (Orijinal eser yayımlanma tarihi 2014)
  20. Krauthammer, C. (1990/1991). The unipolar moment. Foreign Affairs, 70(1), 23–33.
  21. Layne, C. (1997). From preponderance to offshore balancing. International Security, 22(1), 86–124.
  22. Lendon, B. (2018, June 12). Donald Trump says US to stop 'war games' with South Korea. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/12/politics/trump-us-military-war-games-south-korea-intl/index.html
  23. Liptak, K. (2019, June 30). Trump takes 20 steps into North Korea, making history as first sitting US leader to enter Hermit Nation. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/29/politics/kim-jong-un-donald-trump-dmz-north-korea/index.html
  24. Longo, D. J., & Sokol, K. (2025, January 7). U.S.-South Korea Special Measures Agreements (SMAs): Legal and policy issues for Congress (CRS In Focus IF13050). Library of Congress. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF13050
  25. Mearsheimer, J. J., & Walt, S. M. (2016). The case for offshore balancing. Foreign Affairs, 95(4), 70–83.
  26. Park, S. (2016, December 16). Implications of the General Security of Military Information Agreement for South Korea. Stimson Center. https://www.stimson.org/2016/implications-general-security-military-information-agreement-south-korea/
  27. Rosenfeld, E. (2018, June 12). Read the full text of the Trump-Kim agreement here. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/full-text-of-the-trump-kim-summit-agreement.html
  28. Snyder, S. A. (2021, May 25). The U.S.-South Korea summit: A relationship restored? Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/us-south-korea-summit-relationship-restored
  29. The White House. (2017, December 18). National Security Strategy of the United States of America. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905-2.pdf
  30. United Nations Treaty Series. (1956). Mutual Defense Treaty between the United States and the Republic of Korea; October 1, 1953 (Vol. 238, pp. 199–205). https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20238/v238.pdf
  31. Wit, J. S. (2026, April 3). Revisiting Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un's last meeting. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2026/04/revisiting-donald-trump-and-kim-jong-uns-last-meeting/