Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation in tensions between Japan and South Korea in 2020 has brought the focus back to economic cooperation. Even as the issue of travel restrictions was resolved and bilateral economic initiatives were have continued or increased.
Brown (2013) was the first to document pragmatic resistance among L2 Korean learners. Pragmatic KR revealed that a variety of variables such as personal beliefs and identity can influence a learner's pragmatic decisions.
The role of pragmatism is South Korea's foreign policies
In this time of uncertainty and changes, South Korea's Foreign Policy must be bold and clear. It must be prepared to stand up for principles and work towards achieving global public good, such as climate changes, sustainable development and maritime security. It should also have the capacity to demonstrate its global influence through tangible benefits. However, it must be able to do this without jeopardizing the stability of its economy.
This is an extremely difficult task. South Korea's foreign policy is hindered by domestic politics. It is crucial that the leadership of the country manages these domestic constraints to promote public confidence in the direction and accountability for foreign policies. It is not an easy task as the structures that support the development of foreign policy are diverse and complicated. This article examines the challenges of overcoming these constraints domestically to project a cohesive foreign policy.
The current government's emphasis on pragmatic cooperation with like-minded partners and allies will likely be a positive thing for South Korea. This strategy can help in defending against radical attacks on GPS the foundation based on values and allow Seoul to work with non-democratic countries. It could also help strengthen its relationship with the United States, which remains an essential partner in advancing the liberal democratic world order.
Another issue facing Seoul is to retool its complex relationship with China as the country's biggest trading partner. The Yoon administration has made significant progress in establishing multilateral security structures like the Quad. However it must weigh this effort against the need to maintain economic connections with Beijing.
While long-time observers of Korean politics point to ideology and regionalism as the primary factors in political debate, younger voters appear less attached to this perspective. The younger generation is more diverse, and their worldview and values are changing. This is reflected in the recent growth of K-pop and the rising global appeal of its culture exports. It is still too early to know whether these trends will affect the future of South Korea’s foreign policy. It is worth keeping an eye on them.
South Korea's diplomatic-pragmatic approach towards North Korea
South Korea must strike a delicate balance in order to protect itself from rogue states and avoid getting drawn into power struggles with its larger neighbors. It must also take into account the balance between values and interests, especially when it comes to supporting human rights activists and interacting with non-democratic governments. In this respect the Yoon government's diplomatic-pragmatic approach to North Korea is an important contrast to previous governments.
As one of the most active pivotal countries in the world, South Korea needs to participate in multilateral engagements to position itself within global and regional security networks. In the first two years of office, the Yoon administration has actively strengthened bilateral ties with democratic allies and stepped up participation in multilateral and minilateral forums. These initiatives include the 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 make use of new partnerships to further promote its views regarding regional and global issues. The 2023 Summit for Democracy, for example, emphasized the importance and necessity of reforming democracy and practice to address issues such as corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit also announced the execution of $100 million worth of development cooperation initiatives for democracy, including e-governance and anti-corruption initiatives.
Additionally the Yoon government has proactively engaged with organizations and countries with similar values and goals to help support its vision of an international security network. These include the United States of America, Japan, China and the European Union. They also include ASEAN members as well as Pacific Island nations. These activities have been condemned by progressives as lacking in pragmatism and values but they can help South Korea build a more robust foreign policy toolkit when it comes to dealing with states that are rogue like North Korea.
GPS's emphasis on values however, could put Seoul in a precarious position when it has to choose between values and interests. For instance the government's sensitivity to human rights activists and its inability to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of committing crimes could lead to it prioritizing policies that appear undemocratic at home. This is particularly true if the government faces a scenario similar to the one of Kwon Pong, an activist from China. Chinese advocate who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with Japan
In the midst a rising global uncertainty and a shaky global economy, trilateral collaboration between South Korea, Japan, and China is an optimistic signpost for Northeast Asia. The three countries have a shared security interest regarding the threat of nuclear war from North Korea, but they also share a major economic concern about developing secure and safe supply chains and expanding trade opportunities. The three countries' resumption in their highest-level meeting every year is a clear indication of their desire to promote more economic integration and cooperation.
The future of their partnership, however, will be tested by several factors. The most pressing one is the issue of how they can address 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 to create a joint mechanism to prevent and punish human rights abuses.
A third issue is to find a compromise between the competing interests of three countries of East Asia. This is especially important when it comes to maintaining stability in the region and combating China's growing influence. In the past, trilateral security cooperation has often been hindered by disputes over historical and territorial issues. Despite recent evidence of stability in the pragmatics the disputes are still lingering.
For instance, the summit was briefly tainted by North Korea's announcement that it will 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., which drew protests from Beijing.
The current situation offers a window of chance to rejuvenate the trilateral partnership, but it will require the leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Prime Minister Kishida to make it a reality. If they fail to take this step this time around, the current period of trilateral cooperation could be only a brief respite from an otherwise turbulent future. If the current trajectory continues in the future, the three countries may be at odds with each other over their security concerns. In this case the only way for the trilateral relationship will last is if each country can overcome its own obstacles to prosper and peace.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with China
The Ninth China-Japan-Korea Trilateral Summit wrapped up this week and saw the leaders of South Korea, Japan and China signing a number of important and tangible outcomes. They include a Joint Declaration of the Summit as well as a statement on Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response as well as a Joint Vision on Trilateral Intellectual Property Cooperation. These documents are notable for laying out lofty goals which, in some cases, run counter to Seoul and Tokyo's cooperation with the United States.
The goal is to establish a framework for multilateral cooperation that will benefit all three countries. It will include projects to develop low-carbon solutions, advance new technologies for the aging population and improve joint responses to global challenges such as climate change, epidemics, and food security. It would also be focusing on enhancing exchanges between people, and establishing a three-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts will also help improve stability in the area. 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 decline in relations with one of these nations could lead to instability in another which could negatively impact trilateral cooperation with both.
However, it is crucial that the Korean government makes an explicit distinction between bilateral and trilateral collaboration with one of these countries. A clear separation will minimize the negative impact that a strained relationship between China and Japan can impact trilateral relations.
China is mostly trying to build support in Seoul and Tokyo against any possible protectionist policies under the upcoming U.S. administration. China's focus on economic cooperation particularly through the resumption of talks on a China-Japan Korea FTA and the joint statement on trade in services markets is a reflection of this goal. Additionally, 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. This is a deliberate move to counter the increasing threat posed by U.S. protectionism and create an avenue to counter it with other powers.