Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation of tensions between Japan and South Korea in 2020 has brought the focus back to economic cooperation. Even as the dispute over travel restrictions was rejected and bilateral economic initiatives were continued or grew.
Brown (2013) pioneered the recording of resistance to pragmatics among L2 Korean learners. His research revealed that a variety of factors, such as identity and personal beliefs can influence a student's pragmatic decisions.
The role played by pragmatism is South Korea's foreign policies
In a time of flux and change South Korea's foreign policies must be bold and clear. It should be able to take a stand on principle and promote global public goods, such as climate change, sustainable development and maritime security. It must also have the capacity to expand its global influence through tangible benefits. But, it should do so without jeopardizing its stability within the country.
This is a daunting task. Domestic politics are a major obstacle to South Korea's foreign policy and it is crucial that the presidential leadership manages these domestic constraints in ways that boost confidence in the direction of the nation and accountability of foreign policies. This isn't an easy task, as the underlying structures that support foreign policy development are complicated and diverse. This article examines how to handle the domestic constraints to create a coherent foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current government's emphasis on pragmatic cooperation with allies and partners who share similar values. This can help to counter the advancing attacks on GPS on a values-based basis and allow Seoul to interact with non-democratic countries. pragmatickr could also help enhance the relationship with the United States which remains an important partner in the development of a liberal democratic world order.
Another challenge facing Seoul is to retool its relationship with China as the country's biggest trading partner. The Yoon administration has made significant progress in establishing multilateral security structures, such as the Quad. However, it must be mindful of its need to maintain economic ties with Beijing.
Younger voters appear to be less influenced by this view. This new generation is more diverse, and their worldview and values are changing. This is reflected by the recent rise of Kpop and the increasing global appeal of its culture exports. It's too early to determine whether these trends will impact the future of South Korea's foreign policy. But they are something worth watching closely.
South Korea's diplomatic-pragmatic approach to North Korea
South Korea must strike a delicate balance in order to safeguard itself from rogue states and to avoid getting drawn into power struggles with its larger neighbors. It also needs to take into account the trade-offs between values and interests especially when it comes to assisting 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 departure from past governments.
As one of the world's most active pivotal states South Korea must strive for multilateral cooperation as a means of establishing itself in the global and regional security network. In its first two years the Yoon Administration has actively boosted bilateral ties and 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 initiatives may seem like tiny steps, but they have helped Seoul to leverage new partnerships to advance its views regarding regional and global issues. The 2023 Summit for Democracy, for instance, highlighted the importance and necessity of reforming democracy and practice to address issues like digital transformation, corruption, and transparency. The summit also announced the implementation of $100 million worth of development cooperation initiatives for democratic governance, including e-governance as well as anti-corruption efforts.
In addition, the Yoon government has actively engaged with countries and organizations with similar values and priorities to further support its vision of a global security network. These organizations and countries include the United States, Japan, China, the European Union, ASEAN members, and Pacific Island nations. These activities have been condemned by progressives as lacking in pragmatism and values however, they can help South Korea build a more robust foreign policy toolkit in dealing with rogue states 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. For instance, the government's sensitivity to human rights activists and its reluctance to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of committing crimes could cause it to prioritize policies that are not democratic at home. This is particularly true if the government is faced with a situation similar to the case of Kwon Pong, a Chinese advocate who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with Japan
In the midst of increasing global uncertainty and a fragile world economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan, and China is an optimistic signpost for Northeast Asia. The three countries share an interest in security that is shared with the nuclear threat from North Korea, but they also share a major economic interest in establishing a secure and safe supply chains and expanding trade opportunities. The return of their highest-level annual meeting is a clear indication that the three neighbors would like to promote closer economic integration and co-operation.
The future of their relationship However, their relationship will be determined by a variety of factors. The most pressing issue is the issue of how they can address 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 resolve these issues, and to establish a joint mechanism for preventing and punishing human rights abuses.
Another important challenge is how to find a balance between the three countries' competing interests in East Asia, especially when it comes to ensuring international stability and addressing China's growing influence in the region. In the past trilateral security cooperation was often hindered by disputes over territorial and historical issues. These disputes are still present despite recent signs of a pragmatic stabilization.
The summit was briefly tainted by, for instance, North Korea's announcement that it would launch a satellite at the summit, as well as Japan's decision that was met with protests by Beijing, to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S.
It is possible to revive the trilateral relationship in the current circumstances however, it will require leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they do not and they don't, the current trilateral cooperation will only provide a temporary respite in an otherwise rocky future. If the current trend continues, in the long run, the three countries may encounter conflict with each other over their shared security interests. In such a scenario the only way for the trilateral relationship to endure is if each of the countries is able to overcome its own national challenges to peace and prosperity.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with China China
The 9th China-Japan Korea-China Trilateral Summit wrapped up this week, with the leaders of South Korea, Japan and China signing a number of tangible and significant outcomes. The Summit's outcomes include a joint Declaration and a Statement on Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response and an agreement on Trilateral Intellectual Property Cooperation. These documents are notable for laying out lofty goals which, in some cases may be in contradiction to Seoul and Tokyo's cooperation with the United States.
The aim is to build the framework for multilateral cooperation that will benefit all three countries. It could include projects to create low-carbon solutions, advance new technologies to help the aging population and improve the ability of all three countries to respond to global challenges like climate change, epidemics, and food security. It would also concentrate on strengthening people-to-people exchanges and the establishment of a trilateral innovation cooperation center.
These efforts would aid in ensuring stability in the region. South Korea must maintain a positive relationship with China and Japan. This is particularly important when dealing with regional issues, such as North Korean provocations, tensions in Taiwan Strait and Sino-American rivalry. A decline in relations with one of these countries could result in instability in the other which could negatively impact trilateral collaboration with both.
It is important to ensure that the Korean government makes clear distinctions between trilateral engagement and bilateral engagement with either of these countries. A clear separation can help reduce the negative impact that a strained relationship between China and Japan could impact trilateral relations.
China's main objective is to win support from Seoul and Tokyo in opposition to any protectionist policies of the next U.S. Administration. China's focus on economic cooperation especially through the resumption of negotiations for a China-Japan-Korea FTA and a joint statement on trade in the services market, reflects this aim. Beijing is also hoping to stop the United States' security cooperation from undermining its own trilateral economic and military ties. Thus, this is a tactical move to combat the increasing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish a platform for countering it with other powers.