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 as the issue of travel restrictions was rebuffed by bilateral economic initiatives, bilateral cooperation continued or expanded.
Brown (2013) was the first to identify pragmatic resistance among L2 Korean learners. His study found that a variety of factors, including identity and personal beliefs, can influence a student's practical choices.
The role played by pragmatism in South Korea's foreign policy
In this time of uncertainty and changes, South Korea's Foreign Policy must be clear and bold. It should be able to stand up for principle and work towards achieving global public goods, such as climate change, sustainable development and maritime security. It must also have the ability to project its global influence through tangible benefits. Pragmatic KR must, however, do so without compromising the stability of its own economy.
This is an extremely difficult task. South Korea's foreign policy is restricted by domestic politics. It is crucial that the government of the country is able to manage these internal constraints to increase public confidence in the direction and accountability for foreign policies. This isn't easy, as the underlying structures sustaining foreign policy formation are complicated and diverse. This article will discuss how to handle these domestic constraints to establish a consistent foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current government's focus on a pragmatic relationship with allies and partners who share similar values. This strategy can help in defending against radical attacks on GPS the foundation based on values and create space for Seoul to engage with nondemocracies. It will also strengthen Seoul's 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 biggest trading partner - is a further problem. While the Yoon administration has made progress in establishing multilateral security structures like the Quad but it must be mindful of its need to preserve economic ties with Beijing.
While long-time observers of Korean politics point to regionalism and ideology as the primary factors in the political debate, younger voters seem less inclined to this outlook. This generation is more diverse views of the world, and its worldview and values are evolving. This is evident in the recent rise of Kpop, as well as the growing global popularity of its exports of culture. It is still too early to know if these factors will influence the future of South Korea's foreign policy. But, they are worth keeping an eye on.
South Korea's pragmatic and diplomatic approach to North Korea
South Korea faces a delicate balance between the need to face state terrorism and the desire to stay out of being drawn into power games with its major neighbors. It must also consider the conflict between values and interests especially when it comes down to supporting human rights activists and working with non-democratic countries. In this regard, the Yoon government's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea is an important contrast to previous governments.
As one of the most active pivotal nations in the world, South Korea needs to engage in multilateral partnerships as a way of establishing itself within regional and global security networks. In its first two years 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 efforts could appear to be small steps but they have helped Seoul to make use of its new alliances to advance its views on regional and global issues. The 2023 Summit for Democracy, for example, emphasized the importance and necessity of a democratic reform and practice to address issues like corruption, digital transformation and transparency. The summit also announced the launching of $100 million worth of development cooperation projects to promote democracy, including e-governance and anti-corruption measures.
The Yoon government has also actively engaged with other countries and organizations that share the same values and priorites to support its vision of the creation of a global security network. These include the United States, Japan, China, the European Union, ASEAN members, and Pacific Island nations. These activities may have been condemned by progressives as lacking in pragmatism and values however, they can help South Korea build a more solid toolkit for foreign policy when it comes to dealing with states that are rogue such as North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a strategic bind when faced with the dilemma of balancing values and interests. The government's concern for human rights and its refusal to deport North Koreans accused of criminal activities may lead it, for example to put a premium on policies that are not democratic in Korea. This is especially true when the government has to deal with a situation like that of Kwon Pyong, the Chinese activist who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral co-operation with Japan
In the midst of increasing global uncertainty and a weak world economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan, and China is an opportunity for Northeast Asia. The three countries share common security concerns regarding the nuclear threat from North Korea, but they also share a strong economic concern about developing an efficient and secure supply chain and expanding trade opportunities. The resumption of their highest-level annual meeting is a clear sign that the three neighbors would like to promote closer co-operation and economic integration.
The future of their partnership However, their relationship will be tested by several factors. The most pressing one is the issue of how they can address the issue of human rights violations allegedly committed by the Japanese and Korean militaries in their respective colonies. The three leaders agreed that they would work together to resolve the issues and establish an integrated system for preventing and punishing violations of human rights.
A third challenge is to find a balance between the competing interests of three countries in East Asia. This is particularly important in the context of maintaining stability in the region as well as addressing China’s growing influence. In the past the trilateral security cooperation has often been hindered by disputes regarding territorial and historical issues. These disputes continue to exist despite recent signs of a pragmatic stabilization.
For example, the meeting 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 drills with South Korea and the U.S. The move drew protests from Beijing.
The current situation offers a window of opportunity to revitalize the trilateral relationship, however it will require the leadership and cooperation of President Yoon and Prime Minister Kishida to make it a reality. If they fail to do so and the current era of trilateral cooperation will only be only a brief respite from an otherwise rocky future. If the current trend continues in the future, the three countries may encounter conflict with each other due to their security concerns. In this situation, the only way the trilateral relationship can endure is if each country can overcome its own obstacles to prosper and peace.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with China China
The 9th 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, a Statement on Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response as well as an Agreement on Trilateral Intellectual Property Cooperation. These documents are significant because they set high-level goals, which, in some cases, may be contrary to Seoul's and Tokyo's collaboration with the United States.
The goal is to strengthen a framework for multilateral cooperation that benefits all three countries. It would include projects to develop low-carbon solutions, advance new technologies to help the aging population, and enhance the ability of all three countries to respond to global challenges such as climate change, epidemics, and food security. It would also concentrate on enhancing people-to-people interactions and creating a trilateral innovation collaboration center.
These efforts could help to improve stability in the region. It is important that South Korea maintains a positive relationship 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 nations could result in instability in the other that could negatively impact trilateral cooperation with both.
It is important to ensure that the Korean government draws clear distinctions between trilateral engagement and bilateral engagement with either of these countries. A clear distinction can aid in minimizing the negative effects of a strained relationship with either China or Japan on trilateral relations with both.
China is primarily seeking to build support between Seoul and Tokyo against any possible protectionist policies in the next U.S. administration. This is reflected in China's emphasis on economic cooperation. Beijing is also seeking to stop the United States' security cooperation from affecting its own trilateral economic ties and military relations. Therefore, this is a strategic move to combat the growing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish an avenue to counter it with other powers.