Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The diplomatic de-escalation between Japan and 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 rejected by the government and bilateral economic initiatives have been pushed forward or expanded.
Brown (2013) was the first researcher to study pragmatic resistance among L2 Korean learners. His study found that a myriad of factors such as identity and personal beliefs, can affect a learner's practical choices.
The role of pragmatism in South Korea's foreign policy
In a time of change and flux South Korea's foreign policies must be clear and bold. It must be prepared to stand up for the principle of equality and pursue global public goods, such as climate change, sustainable development, and maritime security. It must be able to demonstrate its influence globally through providing tangible benefits. However, it must do so without compromising the stability of its domestic economy.
This is a difficult task. South Korea's foreign policies are hindered by domestic politics. It is important that the government of the country is able to manage these internal constraints to increase public trust in the direction and accountability of foreign policies. This isn't easy because the structures sustaining foreign policy formation are a complex and varied. This article focuses on the challenges of overcoming these constraints domestically to create a coherent foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current government's emphasis on a pragmatic partnership with allies and partners who share similar values. This can help to counter the progressive attacks on GPS on a values-based basis and create space for Seoul to be able to engage with non-democratic countries. It could also help improve the relationship with the United States which remains an important partner in the development of a liberal democratic world order.
Seoul's complicated relationship with China - the country's biggest trading partner - is another issue. The Yoon administration has made significant progress in establishing multilateral security structures such as the Quad. However it must balance this commitment with the need to maintain economic connections with Beijing.
Younger voters are less influenced by this view. The younger generation is more diverse, and its outlook and values are evolving. Pragmatic KR is evident in the recent growth of K-pop and the growing international appeal of its cultural exports. It's too early to tell how these factors will impact the future of South Korea’s foreign policy. But they are something worth keeping an eye on.
South Korea's diplomatic-pragmatic approach towards North Korea
South Korea faces a delicate balance between the need to confront threats from rogue states and the desire to avoid being entangled into power games with its large neighbors. It also needs to think about the trade-offs between interests and values, particularly when it comes to helping non-democratic countries and engaging with human rights activists. In this regard, the Yoon administration's diplomatic-pragmatic attitude towards North Korea is a significant departure from previous administrations.
As one of the world's most active pivotal states South Korea must strive for multilateral engagement as a way of positioning itself within a global and regional security network. In its first two-year tenure, the Yoon Administration has actively strengthened bilateral ties and has increased participation in minilaterals and multilateral forums. These initiatives include the first 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 leverage new partnerships to advance its views regarding 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 to promote democracy, such as e-governance and anti-corruption measures.
The Yoon government has also actively engaging with organizations and countries with similar values and prioritizes to support its vision for an international network of security. These include the United States of America, Japan, China and the European Union. They also include ASEAN members as well as Pacific Island nations. Progressives have been criticized by some for these activities as lacking in values and pragmatism, however they can help South Korea develop a more robust toolkit for dealing with countries that are in a state of rogue, like North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a difficult position when faced with the dilemma of balancing values and interests. The government's concern for human rights and refusal to deport North Koreans accused of criminal activities may lead to it, for example to prioritize policies that are undemocratic in Korea. This is especially true when the government has to deal with a situation like that of Kwon Pyong, a Chinese activist who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with Japan
In the face of global uncertainty and an unstable world economy, trilateral collaboration between South Korea and Japan is a bright spot in Northeast Asia. The three countries share an interest in security that is shared with the threat of nuclear war from North Korea, but they also share a strong economic concern about developing safe and secure supply chain and expanding trade opportunities. The three countries' return in their annual summit at the highest level every year is a clear signal that they are looking to push for greater economic integration and cooperation.
The future of their partnership However, their relationship will be determined by a variety of factors. The most pressing is the question of how to tackle 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 resolve the issues and establish an integrated system to prevent and punish violations of human rights.
A third challenge is to find a compromise between the competing interests of the three countries of East Asia. This is especially important when it comes to maintaining stability in the region as well as combating China's increasing influence. In the past the trilateral security cooperation has often been hindered by disagreements regarding territorial and historical issues. Despite the recent evidence of stability in the pragmatics however, these disputes continue to linger.
For example, the meeting was briefly overshadowed by North Korea's announcement that it would attempt to launch a satellite during the summit, and by Japan's decision to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S. This prompted protests from Beijing.
It is possible to revive the trilateral partnership in the current circumstances however, it will require initiative and reciprocity from President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they fail to act accordingly, the current era of trilateral cooperation will only be a brief respite from an otherwise turbulent future. If the current trajectory continues over the long term, the three countries may be at odds with each other over their shared security concerns. In such a scenario the only way to ensure the trilateral relationship to endure will be if each country is able to overcome its own national challenges to peace and prosperity.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with China China
The Ninth China, Japan, and Korea Trilateral Summit concluded this week with the leaders of South Korea and Japan signing several 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 because they set high-level goals that, in some cases, may be contrary to Tokyo's and Seoul's cooperation with the United States.
The objective is to develop a framework of multilateral cooperation for the benefit of all three countries. It would include projects to develop low-carbon transformation, advance innovative technologies for the aging population, and enhance joint responses to global challenges like climate change, epidemics, as well as food security. It will also be focusing on enhancing exchanges between people and establishing a three-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts will aid in ensuring stability in the region. South Korea must maintain a positive relationship with China and Japan. This is especially important when dealing with regional issues such as North Korean provocations, tensions in Taiwan Strait and Sino-American rivalry. A deteriorating relationship with one of these countries could lead to instability in another, which would negatively impact trilateral collaboration with both.
It is important that the Korean government makes the distinction between trilateral cooperation and bilateral engagement with one of these countries. A clear distinction can help reduce the negative impact that a strained relationship between China and Japan could have on trilateral relations.
China is primarily seeking to build support between Seoul and Tokyo against any possible protectionist policies in the next U.S. administration. China's emphasis on economic cooperation especially through the resumption of talks for a China-Japan-Korea FTA and an agreement on trade in the services market is a reflection of this goal. Beijing is also seeking to stop the United States' security cooperation from affecting its own trilateral economic and military relationships. This is a strategic decision to counter the growing threat from U.S. protectionism and create an avenue to counter it with other powers.