How did Korean isolation affect its political status?

Korean isolation led to its political status as a hermit kingdom, largely independent but vulnerable to foreign influence and invasion.

Korea's isolationist policy, known as Sakoku, was a double-edged sword. On one hand, it allowed Korea to maintain its sovereignty and cultural identity without the interference of foreign powers. This was particularly important during a period when many Asian countries were being colonised or heavily influenced by Western powers. Korea's political status was thus one of relative independence, with the ruling Joseon dynasty able to govern without significant foreign intervention.

However, this isolation also left Korea vulnerable. Without strong alliances or a significant international presence, Korea was an easy target for more powerful nations. This was evident in the late 19th and early 20th centuries when Korea was invaded by Japan, leading to a brutal occupation that lasted until the end of World War II. The isolationist policy had left Korea politically and militarily weak, unable to effectively resist such an invasion.

Furthermore, Korea's isolation meant that it was largely left out of international diplomacy and trade. While other countries were forming alliances, signing treaties, and engaging in global trade, Korea was largely on its own. This lack of international engagement hindered Korea's political and economic development, leaving it behind many of its neighbours.

In addition, the isolationist policy also led to internal political instability. With limited foreign influence, the ruling dynasty was able to maintain a tight grip on power, leading to a highly centralised and autocratic political system. This lack of political competition and the resulting corruption and inefficiency eventually led to widespread discontent and rebellion, further weakening Korea's political status.

In conclusion, while Korea's isolation allowed it to maintain its independence and cultural identity, it also left it vulnerable to foreign invasion and internal instability. Its political status was thus one of relative independence but also significant vulnerability.