Role conceptions and diplomatic behaviours: comparing Japan and South Korea in the South China Sea

Abstract

ABSTRACT The South China Sea is a region marked by overlapping territorial claims and escalating tensions among various nations. Unlike claimant states, whose direct territorial interests significantly shape their foreign policy decisions, non-claimant states possess a broader range of diplomatic options. This article examines the contrasting diplomatic behaviours of non-claimant regional states in the South China Sea disputes. Through a comparative case study of Japan and South Korea, it argues that the divergent responses of these two middle powers largely stem from the roles they assume within the policy arena. Japan, as an assertive actor driven by a sense of obligation, has actively taken positions on disputed events to demonstrate its presence. Conversely, South Korea, adopting the role of a detached observer, has exercised caution and maintained a low profile, aiming to avoid potential diplomatic costs. The findings highlight the significance of ideational factors in influencing regional states’ responses to security challenges. Furthermore, this study contributes to role theory research by introducing a new term for further study and by demonstrating the tangible effects of role conceptions on state behaviour in specific policy contexts.