By SoEun Park
Foreign Affairs
“With the renewed bonds of friendship—and girded by the ironclad U.S.-Japan and U.S.-ROK alliances—each of our bilateral relationships is now stronger than ever. So too is our trilateral relationship.”
The historic summit held at Camp David on August 18, 2023, was an essential marker in deepening trilateral cooperation and coordination among the three allies: the United States, South Korea, and Japan. In a joint statement, the leaders said this trilateral security cooperation aims to bolster the stability and peace of their shared region, aligning with their goals and efforts to promote regional peace and stability (Statement).
However, work still remains to create this solid security partnership; for a more solid and sustainable trilateral partnership, substantial improvement in the South Korea-Japan relationship is crucial, as the connections between South Korea and the United States, as well as between the United States and Japan, are stronger. Although the trilateral relationship has undeniably improved, the domestic public opinion in South Korea has been taken into account with more people-to-people exchanges. Thus, a robust trilateral partnership would be defined as all three countries benefiting from a substantial trilateral partnership (in terms of collective interests such as security, economic growth, and technological innovation). Still, Korea should also be able to maintain its autonomy and dignity in the process. Whereas solid lines connect the two latter connections, a dotted line can indicate the link between South Korea and Japan, posing the risk of becoming a potential gap in the trilateral partnership (CGIS). So what explains this dotted line, and what does this mean for envisioning a shared future and trilateral cooperation?
History between Korea and Japan: Japanese Occupation of Korea
To tackle this question of the gap in the trilateral partnership, we must travel back in time and delve deeper into the forced culture erasure and exploitation.
These two countries share a complicated history. As neighbors, they have naturally fought frequently since at least the 7th century, with Japan making numerous attempts to invade the Korean peninsula over the centuries (BBC).
In 1910, Korea fell under the dominion of the Empire of Japan. Korea endured Japanese rule until 1945, succumbing to its culmination of warfare, intimidation, and political machinations. Between the years of 1910-1945, Japan worked to wipe out Korean culture, language, and history, waging an “all-out war” on Korean culture to establish control of its new protectorate (Blakemore). This included imposing prohibitions on the Korean language in schools and universities. Japanese colonization led to the destruction of cultural heritage, including the burning of historical documents and the alteration of landscapes.
Most prominently, approximately 725,000 Korean workers were forcibly taken to Japan and its colonies, while hundreds of thousands of Korean women were coerced into sexual slavery (Blakemore). These are the victims who became known as “comfort women.” Scholars believe the system entrapped 200,000 victims; however, estimates vary from 20,000 to nearly 500,000 (Dudden).
Furthermore, Japan exploited Korean art and culture to reinforce its own image of superiority, distorting and undermining historical narratives and Korean identity. Despite this formidable oppression, resistance movements advocating for Korean independence, like the March 1 Movement of 1919, emerged. Although the Japanese brutally suppressed the protests, the desire for independence swept through Korea.
On August 15, 1945, Koreans finally attained the long-awaited moment: the liberation of their country following Japan’s surrender in the Pacific War (Korea.net).
Current Day Relations between Korea and Japan
Needless to say, Korea and Japan’s relations have been strained due to historical grievances from the Japanese colonial period. Thus, to improve diplomatic and economic ties between the two countries, these historical issues must be addressed.
For instance, past agreements such as the 1965 normalization treaty, claims agreement, and the 2015 comfort women agreement, which were meant to resolve their differences, were often vague or “paid insufficient attention to the victims’ concerns for the sake of political expediency and national goals,” reinforcing the dotted line between Korea and Japan (Aum, Galic). This is due to the fact that despite the incremental improvements resulting from these agreements, fundamental questions regarding the colonial period remained unresolved, making the agreements controversial. For instance, in 2018, the South Korean Supreme Court’s rulings holding Japanese companies accountable for compensating Korean victims of forced labor directly contradicted Japan’s interpretation of the colonial period and the 1965 claims agreement, resulting in strained bilateral relations (Aum, Galic).
Relations between Korea and Japan have significantly improved, especially since Yoon Suk-yeol, South Korea’s president, took office in 2022. The Biden administration has prioritized the alliance with the U.S., aligning closely with the administration’s goal of reinforcing alliances with like-minded nations to uphold a rules-based international order in response to increasing authoritarianism, including North Korea (Council of Foreign Affairs). Despite facing significant political backlash domestically, Yoon has dedicated considerable effort to prioritizing forward-looking relations with Japan in order to bolster readiness and strengthen deterrence against North Korea, thus gaining strong approval from the United States. Nonetheless, pursuing this diplomatic approach, he disregarded the historical grievances regarding forced labor that strained Japan-South Korea relations under his predecessor, Moon Jae-in (Council of Foreign Affairs). Many South Koreans feel Japan has not done enough to atone for the past and that President Yoon is giving it a free pass, and his critics are anxious that U.S.-Sluth military exercises will be provocative towards North Korea. Proponents of the relationship believe Japanese Prime Minister Kishida has been too cautious about seizing the opportunity Mr Yoon represents (Konig).
Korea should strike a balance: preserve its autonomy without merely appeasing Japan and the United States while simultaneously nurturing stable relationships with both nations.
While relations between Korea and Japan appear to be improving currently, it is vital to acknowledge South Korea’s domestic dissatisfaction with President Yoon, and internal political shifts, including establishing new parties ahead of the 2024 general election, will also threaten the relationship’s stability (East Asian Forum). A month after Camp David, a Gallup poll showcased “Yoon’s approval rating at a modest 34 percent” (Financial Review). Therefore, achieving sustainable reconciliation and laying down more robust foundations is necessary, which will demand extraordinary restitution and investment efforts. The United States seeks stronger South Korea-Japan relations to bolster a unified front among its key Northeast Asian allies, which is essential for regional stability and countering shared security threats such as North Korea and China. Thus, the U.S. aims to facilitate increased cooperation on security matters, intelligence sharing, and defense capabilities, strengthening deterrence against mutual adversaries. However, stronger South Korean relations not only serve the interests of the United States but also offer significant benefits for both South Korea and Japan in terms of security, economic cooperation, cultural exchange, and shared democratic values.
Rather than simply “moving on” from historical issues, the Japanese and Korean governments and their respective publics can actively engage with history through memorialization and education.
Memorization can be carried out through peace monuments and museums, which leaves a tangible legacy for victims who will soon pass away (Le). These efforts are future-oriented as continually being updated, negotiated, and debated demands critical assessments of historical narrative from both sides (Le). Two sides need to work together to embolden the dotted line into a solid line; Japan should denounce any assertions denying the inhumane nature of the comfort women system, while South Korea should promote scholarly exploration of the complexities of the colonial era and address domestic discrimination endured by comfort women in the postwar period, including instances involving ethnic Japanese descent (Le).
Furthermore, Japan can draw lessons on how to implement the history of its occupation of South Korea, comfort women, and forced labor from Germany and how they are teaching children about the Holocaust. In German schools, the Holocaust is taught through engaging methods such as role-playing and discussions, aiming to foster critical thinking and historical understanding among students. According to Birthe Pater, head of the education department at the Arolsen Archives, the goals in the schools are to go far beyond the historical events but enable an understanding of what social issues of the time were and what people’s scope for an individual was, motivating “students to appreciate in historical-political debates and develop an awareness of current affairs” (Bruer). A similar approach can be executed in the Japanese educational system.
Japan must confront its past mistakes through these avenues rather than denying their existence within its national narrative. It must unequivocally condemn accounts that seek to downplay the coercive and inhumane nature of the comfort women system rather than the removal of comfort women memorial statues (United States Institute of Peace). A further example of this downplay is the first visit of a Japanese leader to the South Korean capital in 12 years in May 2023, when Kishida failed to formally apologize for wrongs committed during the occupation from 1910-1945 and instead expressed sympathy, claiming that “his heart hurts” when he thinks of suffering and pain under Japanese rule. (Reuters). Conversely, South Korea should be open to accepting Japan’s apology and find new ways to cooperate with a neighboring East Asian democracy, especially when faced with the “assertive China, threatening North Korea and disruptive Russia,” while maintaining strong trade relations with China (Konig).
This balance will be challenging to strike for Korea. It is evident that Korea and Japan will both benefit from strengthening their relationship with each other, including regional security, economic development, and prosperity based on their shared values of freedom, human rights, and the rule of law (US DOD). According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the United States, Japan, and South Korea are recommended to collaborate in several other key areas: strengthening legal and judicial systems, particularly in Southeast Asia, promoting women’s empowerment and gender equality, and enhancing security ties with Indonesia by exploring new avenues of cooperation such as cybersecurity (CSIS). As China’s aggressive behavior in the South China Sea has escalated, the trilateral cooperation has also been a response to not only North Korea but also to address potential threats from China (Voa News).
The United States can strengthen South Korea-Japan relations through patient diplomacy and encouraging the remembrance of the history of comfort women and forced labor.
Throughout history, the United States has been successful in using its strategic influence as the primary military ally of both South Korea and Japan to encourage these countries to come closer together (The Diplomat). To achieve this, the U.S. has implemented policies that reinforce its importance and credibility as a partner including the 1965 normalization treaty and Trilateral Coordination and Oversight Group (TCOG) (The Diplomat). These policies have led to reciprocating actions from South Korea and Japan, resulting in deeper trilateral cooperation.
However, for South Korea, it is important to exercise caution when seeking to satisfy Japan and the United States to the detriment of defending South Korea’s national interests. All parties involved must work together to address historical grievances in a manner that meets domestic interests while promoting regional stability that aligns with national interests. Achieving this delicate balance necessitates open and honest dialogue among all parties and a commitment to the partnership with the approval of significant stakeholders, including those who have been historically victimized, while also realizing the mutual benefits of expanding the scope and depth of trilateral relationships for all parties involved. This will ultimately be the key to strengthening the prospective solid lines between the three countries.
Photo: The Korea Times
Comments