Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation of tensions between Japan and South Korea in 2020 has refocused the attention on economic cooperation. Despite the issue of travel restrictions has been rejected by the government and bilateral economic initiatives have remained or gotten more extensive.
Brown (2013) was the first to pioneer the study of the phenomenon of resistance to pragmatics among L2 Korean learners. His research found that a variety of factors such as personal beliefs and identity can affect a learner's practical choices.
The role of pragmatism lies in South Korea's foreign policies
In this time of constant change and uncertainty South Korea's foreign policy needs to be clear and bold. It should be ready to stand up for principles and work towards achieving global public good like climate change, sustainable development and maritime security. It must also be able of demonstrating its influence globally by delivering concrete benefits. However, it must be able to do this without compromising its domestic stability.
This is a challenging task. South Korea's foreign policies are restricted by domestic politics. It is important that the leadership of the country is able to manage the domestic obstacles to build public confidence in the direction and accountability for foreign policy. This isn't an easy task since the underlying structures that support foreign policy development are complicated and diverse. This article will discuss how to manage the domestic constraints to establish a consistent foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current administration's focus on a pragmatic relationship with allies and partners who share similar values. This strategy can help in defending against progressive attacks against GPS its values-based foundation and allow Seoul to work with non-democratic countries. It could also help enhance the relationship with the United States which remains an important partner in the development of a liberal democratic world order.
Another challenge facing Seoul is to retool its complex relationship with China the nation's largest trading partner. While the Yoon administration has made progress in the development of multilateral security structures like the Quad but it must balance these commitments with its need to preserve relations with Beijing.
Younger voters are less influenced by this viewpoint. This generation is more diverse views of the world, and its values and worldview are changing. This is reflected in the recent growth of K-pop, as well as the increasing global appeal of its culture exports. It is too early to determine whether these factors will affect the future of South Korea's foreign policy. They are worth watching.
South Korea's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea
South Korea must strike a delicate balance to protect itself from rogue states and avoid getting drawn into power struggles with its large neighbors. It must also take into account the conflict between values and interests especially when it comes down to supporting human rights activists and engaging with non-democratic countries. In this regard the Yoon administration's diplomatic-pragmatic attitude towards North Korea is a significant contrast to previous governments.
As one of the world's most active pivotal states, South Korea must strive for multilateral engagement as a means to position itself within a global and regional security network. In its first two-year tenure the Yoon Administration has actively bolstered bilateral ties and increased participation in minilaterals as well as multilateral forums. These initiatives include the Korea-Pacific Islands Summit, and the Second Asia-Pacific Summit for Democracy.
These actions may appear to be tiny steps, but they have allowed Seoul to make use of new partnerships to further promote its opinions on regional and global issues. The 2023 Summit for Democracy, for example, emphasized the importance and necessity of a democratic reform and practice to deal with issues such as digital transformation, corruption, and transparency. The summit announced $100 million in development cooperation projects that will help support democracy, including anti-corruption and e-governance efforts.
Additionally the Yoon government has proactively engaged with organizations and countries that have similar values and goals to help support its vision of an international security network. These countries and organizations include the United States, Japan, China, the European Union, ASEAN members and Pacific Island nations. These actions may have been condemned by progressives as lacking in pragmatism or values, but they can help South Korea build a more robust toolkit for foreign policy in dealing with rogue states such as North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a difficult position when faced with the dilemma of balancing values and interests. For instance, the government's sensitivity to human rights activism and its refusal to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of committing crimes could lead to it prioritizing policies that seem undemocratic in the home. This is especially true when the government has to deal with similar circumstances to Kwon Pyong, the Chinese activist who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with Japan. Japan
In the midst a rising global uncertainty and a fragile global economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan, and China is a bright spot for Northeast Asia. The three countries have common security concerns regarding the nuclear threat posed by North Korea, but they also share a strong economic concern about developing an efficient and secure supply chain and expanding trade opportunities. Read the Full Guide in their highest-level meeting every year is an obvious signal that they are looking to encourage more economic integration and cooperation.
However, the future of their alliance will be tested by a variety of elements. The most pressing issue is the question of how to deal with the issue of human rights violations that have been committed by the Japanese and Korean militaries in their respective colonies. The three leaders agreed they would work together to address the issues and create a joint system for preventing and punishing violations of human rights.
Another challenge is to find a balance between the competing interests of the three countries in East Asia. This is especially important in the context of maintaining stability in the region as well as combating China's growing influence. In the past, trilateral security cooperation has often been hindered by disagreements over historical and territorial issues. These disputes are still present despite recent signs of pragmatic stabilization.
The summit was briefly tainted by, for instance, North Korea's announcement it would launch a satellite at the summit and by Japan's decision, received with protests from Beijing to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S.
It is possible to bring back the trilateral relationship in the current context however, it will require initiative and cooperation of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they do not, the current era trilateral cooperation will only provide a temporary respite in an otherwise rocky future. If the current trend continues over the long term the three countries could be at odds with one another over their security interests. In this case the only way that the trilateral partnership can last is if each country overcomes its own challenges to peace and prosper.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with China China
The Ninth China-Japan-Korea Trilateral Summit wrapped up this week with the leaders of South Korea, Japan and China signing a variety of significant and tangible outcomes. The Summit's outcomes include a Joint Declaration of Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response and an agreement on Trilateral Intellectual property Cooperation. These documents are notable for laying out ambitious goals that, in some instances are in opposition to Seoul and Tokyo's cooperation with the United States.
The aim is to establish an environment of multilateral cooperation for the benefit of all three countries. The projects will include the use of low-carbon technologies, innovative solutions for an aging population and coordinated responses to global issues like climate change, epidemics and food security. It would also be focusing on strengthening people-to -people exchanges, and establishing a three-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts will help to improve stability in the region. It is crucial that South Korea maintains a positive partnership with both China and Japan particularly when confronted with regional issues, such as North Korean provocation, escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait, and Sino-American rivalry. A deteriorating partnership with one of these countries could cause instability in the other and consequently negatively impact trilateral cooperation with both.
It is crucial, however, that the Korean government draws clear distinctions between bilateral and trilateral engagement with either of these countries. A clear distinction will help to minimize the negative effects of a strained relationship with either China or Japan on trilateral relations with both.
China is mostly trying to build support among Seoul and Tokyo against possible protectionist policies that could be implemented by the next U.S. administration. This is reflected in China's emphasis on economic cooperation. Moreover, Beijing is likely hoping to stop security cooperation with the United States from undermining the importance of its trilateral military and economic relationships with these East Asian allies. This is a deliberate move to counter the growing threat from U.S. protectionism and create an avenue to counter it with other powers.