Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation in tensions between Japan and South Korea in 2020 has refocused the attention on economic cooperation. Even though the dispute over travel restrictions has been denied by the government and bilateral economic initiatives have been pushed forward or expanded.
Brown (2013) was the first to pioneer the recording of resistance to pragmatics in L2 Korean learners. His study found that a myriad of factors, including personal beliefs and identity can influence a student's practical choices.
The role played by pragmatism in South Korea's foreign policy
In a time of constant change and uncertainty, South Korea's foreign policies must be clear and bold. It should be ready to defend its principles and work towards achieving global public good like climate change as well as sustainable development and maritime security. It must also be able of demonstrating its influence globally by delivering concrete benefits. However, it has to do so without jeopardizing its stability within the country.
This is a difficult task. Domestic politics are a major obstacle to South Korea's international policy and it is crucial that the presidency manages these domestic constraints in ways that increase confidence of the public in the national direction and accountability for foreign policies. It is not an easy task as the structures that support foreign policy formation are diverse and complicated. This article examines the challenges of overcoming these domestic constraints to project a cohesive foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current government's emphasis on a pragmatic partnership with allies and partners that have similar values. This approach can help counter the progressive attacks on GPS values-based principles and open up the possibility for Seoul in order to engage with nondemocracies. It will also improve the relationship with the United States which remains an essential partner in advancing a liberal democratic world order.
Seoul's complicated relationship with China which is the country's largest trading partner - is yet another challenge. While the Yoon administration has made strides in the development of multilateral security structures like the Quad but it must weigh these commitments against the need to maintain the economic ties with Beijing.
While long-time observers of Korean politics have pointed to ideology and regionalism as the primary factors in the political debate, younger voters appear less attached to this perspective. The younger generation is more diverse, and its worldview and values are evolving. This is reflected in the recent rise of K-pop, as well as the increasing global appeal of its culture exports. It's too early to determine whether these factors will affect the future of South Korea's foreign policy. It is worth keeping an eye on them.
South Korea's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea
South Korea must strike a delicate balance to shield 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, especially when it comes to helping non-democratic countries and engaging with human rights activists. In this respect, the Yoon administration's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea is a significant contrast to previous administrations.
As one of the most active pivotal nations in the world, South Korea needs to engage in multilateral partnerships to position 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 actions may appear to be small steps, but have enabled Seoul to leverage new partnerships to advance its position on regional and global issues. For example the 2023 Summit for Democracy emphasized the importance of democratic practice and reform to address issues such as corruption, digital transformation and transparency. The summit also announced the launching of $100 million worth of development cooperation projects for democracy, including e-governance and anti-corruption initiatives.
The Yoon government has also engaged with countries and organisations that share similar values and prioritizes to support its vision of a global network of security. These include the United States of America, Japan, China and the European Union. They also include ASEAN members and Pacific Island nations. Progressives have been criticized by some for these activities as lacking in values and pragmatism, however they are able to help South Korea develop a more robust toolkit for dealing with countries that are rogue, such as North Korea.
The emphasis placed on values by GPS however it could put Seoul in a difficult position in the event that it is forced to decide between interests and values. For instance the government's sensitivity to human rights advocacy and its inability to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of criminal activity may lead it to prioritize policies that are not democratic in the home. This is especially true when the government faces a situation like that of Kwon Pyong, the Chinese activist who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with Japan
In the midst of global uncertainty and an unstable world economy, trilateral collaboration between South Korea and Japan is a bright spot in Northeast Asia. While the three countries share a security interest in North Korea's nuclear threat they also have a significant economic stake in creating secure and safe supply chains and expanding trade opportunities. The resumption of their highest-level annual gathering is a clear signal that the three neighbors are keen to promote closer co-operation and economic integration.
The future of their partnership is, however, tested by several factors. The issue of how to handle the issue of human right violations committed by the Japanese or Korean militaries within their respective colonies is most pressing. The three leaders agreed that they would work together to resolve the issues and establish an inter-governmental system to prevent and punish human rights violations.
Another important challenge is how to balance the competing interests in East Asia, especially when it comes to ensuring international stability and addressing China's increasing influence in the region. In the past the trilateral security cooperation has often been hindered by disagreements about territorial and historical issues. Despite the recent signs of pragmatic stability, these disputes remain latent.
프라그마틱 플레이 was briefly tainted, for example, by North Korea's announcement it would launch a satellite during the summit and by Japan's decision, met with protests by 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 situation, but it requires the leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they fail to take this step and the current era of trilateral cooperation will only be a brief respite from an otherwise turbulent future. In the longer term If the current trend continues all three countries will be at odds over their mutual security interests. In that case, the only way for the trilateral relationship to last will be if each country is able to overcome its own national barriers to prosperity and peace.
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 a number tangible and significant 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 may be in contradiction to Seoul and Tokyo's cooperation with the United States.
The objective is to develop an environment of multilateral cooperation to the benefit of all three countries. The projects will include low-carbon transformations, innovative technologies to help an aging population as well as collective responses to global challenges such as climate changes, food security, and epidemics. It will also focus on enhancing people-to-people exchanges and establishing a 3-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts could aid in ensuring stability in the region. It is essential that South Korea maintains a positive relationship with both China and Japan particularly when faced with regional issues, such as North Korean provocation, escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait, and Sino-American rivalry. A deteriorating relationship with one of these countries could result in instability in the other that could negatively impact trilateral collaboration with both.
It is crucial to ensure that the Korean government makes an explicit distinction between bilateral and trilateral engagement with either of these countries. A clear distinction can help reduce the negative impact a strained relationship between China and Japan could affect trilateral relations.
China is primarily seeking to build support among Seoul and Tokyo against any possible protectionist policies that could be implemented by the next U.S. administration. China's emphasis on economic cooperation, particularly through the revival of negotiations for a China-Japan-Korea FTA and a joint statement on trade in the services market reflect this intention. Moreover, Beijing is likely hoping to prevent security cooperation with the United States from undermining the importance of its own trilateral economic and military relationships with these East Asian allies. This is a strategic decision to counter the threat from U.S. protectionism and create a platform to counter it with other powers.