Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The diplomatic de-escalation of Japan-South Korean tensions in 2020 has brought attention on cooperation in the field of economics. Even as the dispute over travel restrictions was rejected by bilateral economic initiatives, bilateral cooperation continued or grew.
프라그마틱 플레이 (2013) pioneered the documentation of resistance to pragmatics among L2 Korean learners. His study found that a variety of variables, including identity and personal beliefs, can influence a learner's pragmatic choices.
The role of pragmatism is South Korea's foreign policy
In this time of constant change and uncertainty, South Korea's foreign policy must be clear and bold. It must be willing to take a stand on principle and pursue global public goods, such as sustainable development, climate change and maritime security. It must also be able to project its influence internationally by providing tangible benefits. It must, however, do so without compromising the stability of its own economy.
This is a difficult task. Domestic politics are a key obstacle to South Korea's foreign policy, and it is critical that the leadership of the president manage these domestic constraints in ways that increase confidence of the public in the direction of the country and accountability of foreign policy. It's not an easy job, as the structures that support the formulation of foreign policy are varied and complicated. This article examines the difficulties of overcoming these domestic constraints to project a cohesive foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current administration's focus on pragmatic cooperation with allies and partners that have the same values. This approach can help counter radical attacks on GPS the foundation based on values and open the way for Seoul to work with non-democratic countries. It can also strengthen its relationship with the United States, which remains an essential partner in the advancement of the liberal democratic world order.
Seoul's complicated relationship with China - the country's largest trading partner - is yet another problem. The Yoon administration has made significant progress in building multilateral security structures such as the Quad. However, it must balance this commitment with its need to maintain economic relations with Beijing.
While long-time observers of Korean politics point to regionalism and ideology as the primary factors in political debate, younger voters are less influenced by this view. This new generation is also more diverse, and their worldview and values are evolving. This is evident in the recent rise of K-pop, as well as the increasing global appeal of its cultural exports. It is still too early to know if these factors will influence the future of South Korea’s foreign policy. They are worth watching.
South Korea's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea
South Korea must strike a delicate balance to protect itself from rogue states while avoiding being entangled in power struggles with its big neighbors. It must also take into account the balance between values and interests especially when it comes to assisting human rights activists and working with non-democratic countries. In this regard, the Yoon administration's diplomatic-pragmatic attitude towards North Korea is a significant departure from previous governments.
As one of the most active pivotal countries in the world, South Korea needs to engage in multilateral engagements to position its self within global and regional security networks. In its first two years in office the Yoon administration has proactively strengthened bilateral ties with democratically-minded allies and increased participation in minilateral and multilateral forums. These initiatives include the Korea-Pacific Islands Summit, and the Second Asia-Pacific Summit for Democracy.
These efforts may seem like incremental steps however they have enabled Seoul to leverage its newfound partnerships to promote its views on regional and global issues. For example the 2023 Summit for Democracy emphasized the importance of reforms and practice in democracy to tackle issues like corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit announced $100 million in development cooperation projects to support the democratic process, including anti-corruption and electronic governance efforts.
The Yoon government has also actively engaged with other countries and organizations with similar values and has prioritized its vision for the creation of a global 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. Progressives may have criticized these actions as lacking values and pragmatism, but they can help South Korea develop a more robust toolkit for dealing with countries that are rogue, such as North Korea.
The emphasis placed on values by GPS, however, could put Seoul into a strategic bind when it has to decide between interests and values. For instance, the government's sensitivity to human rights activism and its inability to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of criminal activity may lead it to prioritize policies that seem undemocratic at home. This is especially true if the government faces a situation similar to the case of Kwon Pong, an activist from China. Chinese advocate who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with Japan
In the face of global uncertainty and a volatile world economy, trilateral collaboration between South Korea and Japan is an optimistic signpost in Northeast Asia. While the three countries share a security interest in North Korea's nuclear threat, they also share a strong economic stake in creating secure and safe supply chains and expanding trade opportunities. The three countries' return at their most high-level meetings each year is a clear signal that they are looking to promote greater economic integration and cooperation.
However, the future of their relationship will be questioned by a variety of factors. The most pressing issue is the question of how they can address the issue of human rights violations allegedly 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 inter-governmental system to prevent and punish violations of human rights.
Another issue is how to balance the three countries' competing interests in East Asia, especially when it comes to ensuring international stability and addressing China's increasing influence in the region. In the past, trilateral security cooperation was often hindered by disputes relating to historical and territorial issues. Despite recent evidence of stability in the pragmatics however, these disputes continue to linger.
For instance, the summit was briefly tainted by North Korea's announcement of plans to attempt to launch a satellite during the summit, as well as by Japan's decision to extend its military drills with South Korea and the U.S., which drew protests from Beijing.
It is possible to revive the trilateral relationship in the current context however, it will require the leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they fail to do so this time around, the current period of trilateral cooperation could be only a brief respite from an otherwise turbulent future. In the longer term in the event that the current pattern continues, the three countries will find themselves in conflict over their shared security interests. In this situation the only way for the trilateral relationship can endure is if each country overcomes its own challenges to achieve peace and prosperity.
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 of Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response and an agreement on Trilateral Intellectual Property Cooperation. These documents are notable for setting out lofty goals that, in some cases may be in contradiction to Seoul and Tokyo's cooperation with the United States.
The goal is to establish the framework for multilateral cooperation that benefits all three countries. The projects would include the use of low-carbon technologies, innovative solutions to help an aging population as well as joint responses to global issues like climate change as well as food security and epidemics. It would also be focusing on enhancing people-to-people exchanges, and establishing a three-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts will also increase stability in the region. It is crucial that South Korea maintains a positive partnership with both China and Japan, especially when faced with regional issues like North Korean provocation, escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait, and Sino-American rivalry. A weakening relationship with one of these countries could result in instability in another that could adversely impact trilateral collaboration with both.
However, it is crucial that the Korean government promotes the distinction between bilateral and trilateral collaboration with one of these countries. A clear distinction can help reduce the negative impact a strained relationship between China and Japan can affect trilateral relations.
China's main objective is to win support from Seoul and Tokyo in opposition to the possible protectionist policies by the new 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 the services market, reflects this aim. Beijing also hopes to prevent the United States' security cooperation from undermining its own trilateral economic ties and military relationships. This is a tactical move to combat the increasing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish a platform for countering it with other powers.