Diplomatic- Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia

The diplomatic de-escalation of Japan-South Korea tensions in 2020 has refocused attention on cooperation in the field of economics. Even when the dispute over travel restrictions was resolved and bilateral economic initiatives were continued or grew.

Brown (2013) was the first to pioneer the study of the phenomenon of resistance to pragmatics among L2 Korean learners. His study found that a variety of variables such as personal identity and beliefs can affect a learner’s practical choices.

The role of pragmatism South Korea’s foreign policy

In the midst of flux and changes South Korea’s Foreign Policy must be bold and clear. It should be able to stand by its principles and work towards achieving global public goods such as sustainable development, climate change and maritime security. It must also have the capacity to expand its global influence through tangible benefits. However, it must be able to do this without jeopardizing the stability of its own economy.

This is a daunting task. South Korea’s foreign policies are restricted by domestic politics. It is essential that the government of the country can manage these domestic constraints to promote public confidence in the direction and accountability of foreign policies. This isn’t an easy task since the underlying structures that guide foreign policy are a complex and varied. This article focuses on the challenges of managing these domestic constraints to project a cohesive foreign policy.

The current government’s emphasis on cooperation that is pragmatic with similar allies and partners will likely be a positive thing for South Korea. This strategy can help in resolving the progressive attacks on GPS on a values-based basis and create space for Seoul to interact with nondemocracies. It will also improve the relationship with the United States which remains an important partner in the development of an order of world democracy that is liberal and democratic.

Another challenge for Seoul is to retool its relationship with China as the country’s biggest trading partner. While the Yoon administration has made strides in the development of multilateral security architectures such as the Quad but it must balance these commitments with its need to preserve the economic ties with Beijing.

Long-time observers of Korean politics point to regionalism and ideology as the primary factors in the political debate, younger people appear less attached to this view. This new generation has an increasingly diverse worldview and its worldview and values are evolving. This is reflected in the recent rise of K-pop and the rising global appeal of its cultural exports. It’s too early to know if these factors will shape 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 faces a delicate balance between the need to confront threats from rogue states and the desire to avoid being entangled into power games among its major neighbors. It must also consider the trade-offs that exist between values and interests, particularly when it comes to aiding non-democratic nations and collaborating with human rights activists. 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 states, South Korea must strive for multilateral engagement as a way of establishing itself in the global and regional security network. In its first two-year tenure the Yoon Administration has actively strengthened bilateral ties and increased participation in minilaterals as well as multilateral forums. These initiatives include the first Korea-Pacific Islands Summit, and the second Asia-Pacific Summit for Democracy.

These efforts might seem like small steps, but they have positioned Seoul to leverage its newly formed partnerships to promote its views on global and regional issues. For example, the 2023 Summit for Democracy emphasized the importance of reforming democratic practices and practices to address issues such as corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit announced $100 million in development cooperation projects that will help support the democratic process, including anti-corruption and the e-governance effort.

In addition to that, the Yoon government has proactively engaged with countries and organizations that have similar values and priorities to support its vision of a global security network. These organizations and countries include the United States, Japan, China and the European Union, ASEAN members and Pacific Island nations. Progressives might have criticized these activities as lacking in values and pragmatism, but they can assist South Korea develop a more robust toolkit for dealing with rogue countries such as North Korea.

The importance of values in GPS however, could put Seoul in a difficult position when it has to decide between interests and values. The government’s concern for human rights and refusal to deport North Koreans who are 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 if the government is faced with similar circumstances to Kwon Pyong, an activist from China. Chinese activist who sought asylum in South Korea.

South Korea’s trilateral collaboration with Japan. Japan

In the face of global uncertainty and an unstable global economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea and Japan is an opportunity to shine in 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 strong economic concern over establishing a secure and safe supply chains and expanding trade opportunities. The resumption of their highest-level annual meeting is a clear indication that the three neighbors want to push for greater economic integration and co-operation.

However, the future of their relationship will be questioned by a variety of issues. The most pressing one 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 to work together to solve these issues and create a joint mechanism to prevent and punish human rights abuses.

A third issue is to find a balance between the competing interests of the three countries of East Asia. This is crucial in ensuring stability in the region as well as addressing China’s increasing influence. In the past the trilateral security cooperation frequently been stifled by disputes over historical and territorial issues. Despite recent signs of pragmatic stability, these disputes remain latent.

For example, the meeting was briefly tainted by North Korea’s announcement of plans to attempt to launch a satellite during the summit, and also by Japan’s decision to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S. The move drew protests from Beijing.

The current situation provides an chance to rejuvenate the trilateral relationship, but it will require the leadership and commitment of President Yoon and Prime Minister Kishida to bring it to fruition. If they don’t and they don’t, the current trilateral cooperation will only be a temporary relief in an otherwise rocky future. If the current pattern continues in the future, the three countries may encounter conflict with each other over their shared security concerns. In this situation the only way for the trilateral relationship will last is if each country overcomes its own obstacles to peace and prosper.

South Korea’s trilateral co-operation 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, a Statement on Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response and an agreement on Trilateral Intellectual property Cooperation. These documents are notable for laying out ambitious goals which, in some cases, run counter to Seoul and Tokyo’s cooperation with the United States.

The goal is to create a framework of multilateral cooperation for the benefit of all three countries. It would include projects that will help develop low-carbon solutions, advance new technologies for aging populations and improve the ability of all three countries to respond to global challenges like climate change, epidemics, and food security. It will also focus on strengthening people-to -people exchanges and establishing a 3-way innovation cooperation center.

These efforts will also help improve stability in the area. It is important 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 weakening relationship with one of these nations could result in instability in another, which would adversely impact trilateral collaboration with both.

However, it is also crucial that the Korean government makes a clear distinction between bilateral and trilateral collaboration with one of these countries. A clear separation can reduce the negative impact of a strained relationship with either China or Japan on trilateral relations with both.

China’s main goal is to get support from Seoul and Tokyo in opposition to any protectionist policies that will be implemented by the next U.S. Administration. China’s emphasis on economic cooperation especially through the resumption of talks on 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 relations with these East Asian allies. Therefore, this is a tactical move to counter the growing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish an opportunity to combat it with other powers.