Seoul’s Global South turn: A blueprint for a fractured world

Today, the global community faces an era of “compound crises”. Entrenched US-China tensions, the normalisation of geopolitical conflict, and the spread of “my country first” policies are shaking the foundations of the liberal international order.

In this sense, the current world order stands atop two layers of fracture. One is the geopolitical rupture created by US-China strategic competition, the war in Ukraine and instability in the Middle East. The other is the geoeconomic rupture created by climate change, supply chain disruptions and the digital divide.

In this situation, the Global South — with its large population, growth potential, resources and voting power — has emerged as a key axis shaping the future of the global economy and international norms. 

The Global South generally refers to emerging and developing countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America located in the lower latitudes of the northern hemisphere, or in the southern hemisphere. 

Once dismissed merely as “aid recipients”, these countries have, as of 2026, become a “swing vote” capable of determining the direction of global agendas — from climate and development to public health and digital governance. This shift is driven by their youthful populations, abundant resources, and commanding numerical weight within international organisations.

Above all, this is where the world’s future markets lie, and much of the answer to worsening supply chain instability can also be found in the Global South.

The US and China alike place great importance on strengthening ties with the Global South. Middle powers, in particular, feel an ever-greater compulsion to defend the existing order through solidarity as great powers increasingly seek to reshape it by force. 

It is at this juncture that South Korea is seeking to define its role as a middle power. While it is not a great power capable of shaping the international order through military dominance, it is a rare country that possesses economic power, technological capability, democratic governance and development experience all at once. 

Having risen from the ruins of war, authoritarianism and poverty, South Korea has achieved industrialisation and democratisation in tandem — transforming from an aid recipient into a donor. Building on this experience, South Korea can serve as a bridge between advanced and developing nations, while also playing a leading role in shaping international norms and narrowing the digital divide.

The strength of a middle power lies not in the size of its military, but in the density of its networks. South Korea has already demonstrated its influence by hosting numerous multilateral meetings, connecting countries and leading specific agendas within the international community. 

The G20 Seoul Summit, along with its accumulated capabilities in development cooperation, public health and digital sectors, represents an important diplomatic asset. Building on this foundation, South Korea seeks not merely to balance between the US and China, but to establish itself as a trusted coordinator and facilitator in areas such as supply chain resilience, climate response, public health cooperation and digital public goods.

South Korea may not wield overwhelming power, but it offers proven experience and institutional capacity that others seek to emulate, making it a natural exemplar of a distinctly Korean model of middle-power diplomacy.

South Korea’s declaration that it will strengthen solidarity with the Global South is not merely a matter of choice, but also a strategy of survival. In line with this, South Korean diplomacy has articulated “inclusiveness, trust and reciprocity” as its three core principles of cooperation. The aim is to contribute to stability in Northeast Asia and, more broadly, to global peace and prosperity, while prioritising development partnerships and efforts to reduce the digital divide.

Of course, solidarity cannot be achieved through slogans alone. Aid, investment, trade, technology, education and cultural exchange must be designed as an integrated package that helps enhance both the industrial and administrative capacities of partner countries. Only when South Korea is recognised not as “a country that helps”, but as “a country that grows together”, can solidarity with the Global South be elevated from diplomatic rhetoric to national strategy.

A middle power is not simply a country that cautiously survives in the cracks between great powers. If South Korea is to become a country that reconnects a divided world and reactivates stalled cooperation, it must not view the Global South merely as a new market or a source of raw materials. Rather, it must treat these countries as partners in jointly designing the international order on the basis of mutual respect and trust. 

As US-China competition intensifies, South Korea is increasingly likely to face pressure to choose sides. However, by building solidarity with influential Global South countries such as India, Indonesia, and Brazil, setting common agendas, and participating in the shaping of international norms, South Korea can avoid being trapped in a bipolar order centred on great powers. Instead, it can carve out an independent diplomatic space within an emerging multipolar world order.

The world is now in turmoil as it moves towards a new order. Amid this vortex of upheaval, South Korea, as a middle power, seeks to assume the role of a “bridge of trust” that mediates global conflicts and spreads the values of shared prosperity. Naturally, this also requires sophisticated and tailored strategies to strengthen solidarity. It would be a mistake to group all countries into a single category and respond to them in the same way. 

India should be approached as a strategic partner; Asian countries such as Vietnam as counterparts for sharing development experience; Africa as both a future market and a partner in green growth; and Latin America as a hub for digital and supply chain cooperation. In other words, this approach must be underpinned by a finely tuned, country-specific “solution diplomacy”.

Fortunately, South Korea also possesses strong cultural influence through Hallyu — a defining cultural icon of the 21st century — as well as robust capabilities in advanced manufacturing.

Solidarity with the Global South is not merely an extension of South Korea’s regional diplomatic outreach; it is a test bed for elevating South Korean diplomacy to a higher level. Only when South Korea becomes a true friend of the Global South, grounded in broader trust, will it be able to pursue genuine “pragmatic diplomacy” that is not swept away by bloc politics. I look forward to the solidarity and encouragement of the nations of the Global South.

Related: South Korea’s ‘pragmatic’ China policy in a vortex of uncertainty | Pragmatism vs power: Why Lee Jae-myung can’t pivot toward Beijing