The paper examines how South Korea’s role as a middle power influences its approach to hosting sports mega-events, impacting global dynamics.
Since the early 1990s South Korea has come to be widely perceived, internally and externally, as a global ‘middle power’. But what does this mean concerning its approach to international relations? How, more particularly, is it reflected in its approach to hosting Sports Mega-Events (SMEs)? In this paper it is argued that the most persuasive explanation for distinguishing a category of middle powers in international politics is their distinctive role in processes of (re-) constituting ‘world orders’. And in this context, their prominent involvement in SME hosting makes a significant contribution both to the legitimation of SME ‘brands’, and to the role of SME’s in reinforcing the rise and decline of particular world orders. Situating Korea’s eager pursuit of SME hosting opportunities in comparison to middle powers as a group, the paper distinguishes hostcentred objectives and impacts from the systemic repercussions of middle powers’ SME hosting roles, with particular attention to their role in the rise, sustainment, and decline of hegemonic neoliberalism between the early 1980s and the mid 2020s. Finally, the challenges they face in navigating the new politics of SMEs in an era of world order uncertainty are addressed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
David Black (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: