March 5, 2023 

No one expects Korea to take a leading role in helping Ukraine survive Russia’s criminal war of aggression. And I should also say that I find Korean public opinion on the issue quite bearable. The most horrible crimes against humanity in Europe since World War II may, seemingly far away, not top people’s list of concerns. But I rarely encounter the moral confusion, misinformation mixed with pieces of Putin’s propaganda or irresponsible talk of “neutrality” which are spreading even in countries that support Ukraine more actively, not to mention the cynical glee heard from parts of the developing world.

The fact that South Korea is among the very few countries outside Europe, North America and Oceania which have made some sacrifices, materially supporting Ukraine or sanctioning Russia, is not to be belittled as just another expression of the desire to appear on the same page with the world’s leading democracies. Korean sympathy for the victimized nation is genuine and deeply rooted in historic experience.

But it has gone nearly unnoticed how illogically, even hypocritically, the South Korean government answers requests for military aid to Ukraine. Western diplomats hinting at the contradiction are told that it is the government’s “position not to supply arms to countries engaged in conflict.” This means that Ukraine is disqualified as a receiver of weapons made in Korea precisely by actually being invaded. Other countries in central and eastern Europe, seeing themselves “only” threatened by Russia and not (yet) “engaged in war,” are warmly welcomed, in contrast, as customers of Korea’s arms industry.

I absolutely agree that governments should strictly control arms exports to rule out any abuse of dangerous products. But if you help politically trustworthy countries prepare for self-defense, how can you not help those already under attack? Whether a country actually “engages” in self-defense is, unfortunately, not its own choice.

Of course, no country with neighbors that South Korea has would risk its own preparedness out of solidarity with fellow democracies. But to reach President Yoon Suk Yeol’s declared goal of making South Korea the world’s number 4 arms exporter by 2027, the government is so eager to grab the “opportunity” of Russia’s aggression and to satisfy the rapidly growing demand by its horrified neighbors that concerns have been raised about the capacities for simultaneous self-supply.

The real reason for not providing the one country under actual attack with means of defense is, then, obvious: Forced to “engage” in a struggle to survive, Ukraine is basically bankrupt and needs military aid in contrast to “arms imports.” It is good to cooperate with other potential victims of Russia’s aggression who, mostly NATO- and EU members, can still pay. But ironic “principles” will sooner or later damage Korea’s credibility.