Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The diplomatic de-escalation of Japan-South Korea tensions in 2020 has brought attention on cooperation in the field of economics. Despite the fact that the dispute over travel restrictions has been denied by the government bilateral economic initiatives have been pushed forward or expanded.
Brown (2013) was the first to identify the resistance to pragmatics of L2 Korean learners. His research found that a myriad of factors, including identity and personal beliefs, can influence a student's practical choices.
The role of pragmatism South Korea's foreign policy
In this time of uncertainty and changes South Korea's Foreign Policy has to be bold and clear. It must be prepared to take a stand on principles and work towards achieving global public goods like sustainable development, climate change, and maritime security. It should also be able to project its influence globally through delivering tangible benefits. However, it must do so without compromising its stability in the domestic sphere.
This is a daunting task. Domestic politics are a major obstacle to South Korea's foreign policy and it is essential that the presidency manages these domestic constraints in ways that promote public confidence in the direction of the country and accountability for foreign policies. It's not an easy job, because the structures that facilitate the development of foreign policy are diverse and complicated. This article focuses on how to manage these domestic constraints to establish a consistent foreign policy.
The current administration's focus on a pragmatic partnership with like-minded partners and allies will likely be a positive development for South Korea. This can help to counter radical attacks on GPS the foundation based on values and allow Seoul to work with non-democratic countries. It could also help strengthen its relationship with the United States, which remains an indispensable partner in advancing the liberal democratic world order.
Another challenge facing Seoul is to retool its relationship with China as the country's biggest trading partner. While the Yoon administration has made progress in establishing multilateral security architectures such as the Quad however, it must be mindful of its need to preserve the economic ties with Beijing.
Long-time observers of Korean politics point to regionalism and ideology as the primary drivers of the political debate, younger people are less influenced by this view. The younger generation is more diverse, and their worldview and values are evolving. This is evident by the recent growth of Kpop and the increasing global appeal of its exports of culture. It's too early to know how these factors will impact the future of South Korea's foreign policy. They are worth watching.
South Korea's diplomatic-pragmatic approach towards North Korea
South Korea must strike a delicate balance to protect itself from rogue states and to avoid getting caught up in power battles with its larger neighbors. It also needs to think about the trade-offs that exist between values and interests particularly when it comes down to helping non-democratic countries and engaging with human rights defenders. In this respect the Yoon government's diplomatic-pragmatic approach to North Korea is an important departure from past governments.
As one of the most active pivotal nations in the world, South Korea needs to engage in multilateral engagements as a way of establishing itself within global and regional security networks. In its first two years the Yoon Administration has actively boosted bilateral ties and expanded 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 efforts may appear to be small steps, but they have enabled Seoul to make use of new partnerships to advance its position on regional and global issues. For example, the 2023 Summit for Democracy emphasized the importance of reforms and practice in democracy to address challenges such as corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit announced $100 million in development cooperation projects that will help support democracy, including anti-corruption as well as electronic governance efforts.
The Yoon government has also engaged with countries and organisations that share similar values and priorites to support its vision for a global network of security. These are countries and organizations that include the United States of America, Japan, China and the European Union. They also include ASEAN members as well as Pacific Island nations. These activities may have been condemned by progressives as lacking in pragmatism or values, but they can help South Korea build a more solid toolkit for foreign policy when dealing with states that are rogue like North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a precarious position when confronted with trade-offs between values and desires. The government's concern for human rights and its refusal to deport North Koreans convicted of committing crimes could lead it, for instance, to prioritize policies that are not democratic in Korea. This is especially true if the government faces a situation like that of Kwon Pyong, a Chinese activist who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with Japan
In the face of global uncertainty and a volatile global economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea and Japan is an optimistic signpost in Northeast Asia. Although the three countries share a security concern with North Korea's nuclear threat, they also have a significant economic interest in developing secure and safe supply chains and expanding trade opportunities. The return of their top-level annual meeting is a clear indication that the three neighbors would like to promote closer economic integration and cooperation.
Pragmatic KR of their relationship However, their relationship will be determined by a variety of factors. The question of how to tackle the issue of human rights violations committed by the Japanese or Korean militaries in their respective colonies is most pressing. The three leaders agreed to work together to resolve these issues, and to establish a joint mechanism for preventing and punishing human rights violations.
Another issue is how to keep in balance the competing interests in East Asia, especially when it comes to maintaining international stability and addressing China's growing influence in the region. In the past, trilateral security cooperation was often hindered by disputes over historical and territorial issues. Despite recent evidence of stability in the pragmatics however, these disputes continue to linger.
The summit was briefly tainted by, for instance, North Korea's announcement it would launch a satellite during the summit, as well as Japan's decision, received with protests from Beijing to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S.
It is possible to revive the trilateral partnership in the current circumstances, but it requires the leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they do not then the current trilateral cooperation may only provide a temporary respite in a rocky future. If the current trend continues, in the long run the three countries could find themselves at odds with each other over their security concerns. In this case the only way for the trilateral relationship can endure is if each country can overcome its own obstacles to prosper and peace.
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 tangible and significant outcomes. The Summit's outcomes include a Joint Declaration and a Statement on Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response, and an Agreement on Trilateral Intellectual property Cooperation. These documents are significant because they set high-level goals, which in some cases run counter to Seoul's and Tokyo's collaboration with the United States.
The goal is to strengthen the framework for multilateral cooperation that will benefit all three countries. It will include projects to create low-carbon solutions, advance new technologies for aging populations and strengthen the ability of all three countries to respond to global challenges such as climate changes, epidemics, and food security. It would also be focusing on enhancing exchanges between people, and establishing a three-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts will also improve stability in the region. It is crucial that South Korea maintains a positive partnership with both China and Japan, especially when faced with regional issues, such as North Korean provocation, escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait, and Sino-American rivalry. A weakening relationship with one of these countries could result in instability in the other that could adversely impact trilateral collaboration with both.
It is crucial however that the Korean government draws a clear distinction between trilateral engagement and bilateral engagement with either of these countries. A clear distinction will minimize the negative impact that a strained relationship between China and Japan can affect trilateral relations.
China is primarily seeking to build support among Seoul and Tokyo against possible protectionist policies in the next U.S. administration. China's focus on economic co-operation especially through the resumption of talks on a China-Japan Korea FTA and an agreement regarding trade in services markets is a reflection of this goal. Beijing also hopes to prevent the United States' security cooperation from threatening its own trilateral economic and military ties. This is a strategic step to combat the growing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish a platform for countering it with other powers.