Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation in tensions between Japan and South Korea in 2020 has renewed focus on economic cooperation. Even when the dispute over travel restrictions was resolved and bilateral economic initiatives were have continued or increased.
Brown (2013) was the first to document the resistance of pragmatics among L2 Korean learners. His research showed that a variety of factors such as personal identity and beliefs, can affect a student's practical decisions.
The role of pragmatism in South Korea's foreign policy
In the midst of flux and changes South Korea's Foreign Policy must be bold and clear. It must be prepared to take a stand on principles and promote global public goods like sustainable development, climate change, and maritime security. It should also have the ability to project its global influence through tangible benefits. But, it should be able to do this without compromising its domestic stability.
This is a difficult task. Domestic politics are a major obstacle to South Korea's foreign policy and it is crucial that the presidency manages these domestic constraints in ways that boost confidence in the direction of the nation and accountability for foreign policies. It is not an easy job, since the structures that aid in the development of foreign policy are diverse and complicated. This article examines the difficulties of managing these domestic constraints to project a cohesive foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current government's focus on pragmatic cooperation with allies and partners that share similar values. This can help to counter the growing attacks on GPS' values-based basis and allow Seoul in order to engage with non-democratic countries. It can also strengthen its relationship with the United States, which remains an essential partner in advancing the liberal democratic world order.
Seoul's complicated relationship with China - the country's largest trading partner - is another issue. The Yoon administration has made significant progress in the development of multilateral security structures such as the Quad. However, it must weigh this effort against its need to maintain its economic connections with Beijing.
Younger voters are less influenced by this view. This new generation is more diverse, and their worldview and values are evolving. This is evident by the recent growth of Kpop and the rising global popularity of its exports of culture. It's too early to determine if these factors will influence the future of South Korea's foreign policy. They are worth watching.
South Korea's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea
South Korea faces a delicate balance between the need to combat rogue state threats and the desire to avoid being drawn into power games among its major neighbors. It also has to consider the trade-offs between interests and values especially when it comes to assisting human rights activists and interacting with non-democratic countries. In this respect, the Yoon government's pragmatic and diplomatic approach to North Korea is an important change from previous governments.
As one of the world's most active pivotal states, South Korea must strive for multilateral cooperation as a means to position itself within a global and regional security network. In its first two-year tenure, the Yoon Administration has actively strengthened 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 small steps, but they have enabled Seoul to make use of new partnerships to further promote its opinions on global and regional issues. For instance the 2023 Summit for Democracy emphasized the importance of democratic practice and reform to address challenges such as corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit also announced the execution of $100 million worth of development cooperation projects to promote democratic governance, including e-governance as well as anti-corruption measures.
The Yoon government has also actively engaged with other countries and organizations with similar values and priorites to support its vision for the creation of a global security network. These organizations and countries include the United States, Japan, China as well as the European Union, ASEAN members and Pacific Island nations. Progressives may have criticized these activities for being lacking in values and pragmatism, but they are able to help South Korea develop a more robust toolkit to deal with countries that are rogue, such as North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a precarious position when it comes to balancing values and desires. The government's 프라그마틱 코리아 concern for human rights and its refusal to deport North Koreans accused of committing crimes could lead to it, for example to prioritize policies that are not democratic in Korea. This is especially true when the government is faced with a situation similar to that of Kwon Pong, who was a Chinese advocate who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with Japan. Japan
In the midst of increasing global uncertainty and a weak global economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan, and China is an optimistic signpost for Northeast Asia. The three countries have an interest in security that is shared with the nuclear threat from North Korea, but they also share a major economic concern over establishing a safe and secure supply chain and expanding trade opportunities. The three countries' resumption at their most high-level meetings each year is a clear signal that they are looking to push for more economic integration and cooperation.
However the future of their partnership will be tested by a variety of elements. The most pressing one is the question of how to tackle the issue of human rights violations committed by the Japanese and Korean militaries in their respective colonies. The three leaders agreed to work together to solve these issues, and to create a joint procedure for preventing and reprimanding human rights violations.
Another major 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 impeded by disagreements over territorial and historical issues. These disputes are still present despite recent signs of a more pragmatic stabilization.
For instance, the summit was briefly overshadowed by North Korea's announcement that it would attempt to launch a satellite during the summit, and also by Japan's decision to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S. The move drew protests from Beijing.
It is possible to revive the trilateral partnership in the current context however, it will require the leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they don't and they don't, the current trilateral cooperation will only provide a temporary respite in a rocky future. In the longer term If the current trend continues all three countries will find themselves at odds with respect to their respective security interests. In this case the only way that the trilateral relationship will last is if each country can overcome its own obstacles to achieve peace and prosperity.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with China
The Ninth China, Japan, and Korea Trilateral Summit concluded this week with the leaders of South Korea and Japan signing numerous tangible and significant outcomes. These include a Joint Declaration of the Summit as well as a statement on Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response and a Joint Vision 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 goal is to establish a framework for multilateral cooperation that benefits all three countries. It could include projects that will help develop low-carbon transformations, develop innovative technologies for aging populations, and enhance collaboration in responding to global challenges such as climate change, epidemics, as well as food security. It would also be focusing on strengthening people-to -people exchanges and establishing a three-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts will also increase stability in the region. South Korea must maintain a positive relationship with China and Japan. This is particularly crucial when it comes to regional issues like North Korean provocations, tensions in Taiwan Strait and Sino-American rivalry. A weakening relationship with one of these countries could cause instability in the other, and negatively impact trilateral cooperation with both.
However, it is also crucial that the Korean government makes a clear distinction between trilateral cooperation and bilateral relations with one of these countries. A clear separation can help reduce the negative impact a strained relationship between China and Japan could have on trilateral relations.
China's main objective is to gain support from Seoul and Tokyo in opposition to any protectionist policies that will be implemented by the next U.S. Administration. This is reflected in China's focus on economic cooperation. Furthermore, Beijing is likely hoping to prevent security cooperation with the United States from undermining the importance of its trilateral military and economic ties with these East Asian allies. This is a tactical move to counter the growing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish an avenue to counter it with other powers.