Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation of tensions among Japan and South Korea in 2020 has refocused the attention on economic cooperation. Even when the issue of travel restrictions was rejected, bilateral economic initiatives have continued or increased.
Brown (2013) was the first to identify pragmatic resistance among L2 Korean learners. His study found that a variety of factors, including personal identity and beliefs can influence a learner's pragmatic decisions.
The role of pragmatism South Korea's foreign policy
In this time of uncertainty and changes South Korea's Foreign Policy must be bold and clear. It should be ready to defend its principles and pursue the public good globally like climate change, sustainable development and maritime security. It must also have the capacity to demonstrate its global influence by delivering tangible benefits. It must, however, be able to do this without jeopardizing the stability of its economy.
This is a challenging 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 confidence in the direction and accountability for foreign policies. This isn't easy because the structures sustaining foreign policy formation are complicated and diverse. This article focuses on the challenges of overcoming these constraints domestically to develop a cohesive foreign policy.
The current government's focus on pragmatic cooperation with like-minded allies and partners will likely be a positive step for South Korea. This strategy can help in resolving the growing attacks on GPS on a values-based basis and create space for Seoul in order to engage with non-democratic countries. It can also enhance 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.
Seoul's complicated relationship with China - the country's largest trading partner - is a further issue. While the Yoon administration has made strides in the development of multilateral security structures like the Quad, it must be mindful of its need to preserve relations with Beijing.
Younger voters seem to be less influenced by this viewpoint. This new generation is more diverse, and its outlook and values are changing. This is evident by the recent growth of Kpop and the rising global appeal of its exports of culture. It's too early to determine whether these factors will affect the future of South Korea's foreign policy. But it is worth paying attention to.
South Korea's diplomatic-pragmatic approach towards North Korea
South Korea faces a delicate balance between the need to face threats from rogue states and the desire to stay out of being drawn into power games with its large neighbors. It must also consider the trade-offs between values and interests especially when it comes to supporting nondemocratic countries and engaging with human rights defenders. In this respect the Yoon government's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea is an important change from previous governments.
As one of the most active pivotal states South Korea must strive for multilateral cooperation as a means of establishing itself in a global and regional security network. In its first two-year tenure the Yoon Administration has actively bolstered bilateral ties and has increased participation in minilaterals and multilateral forums. These initiatives include the Korea-Pacific Islands Summit, and the Second Asia-Pacific Summit for Democracy.
These efforts might seem like incremental steps however they have enabled Seoul to leverage its newfound alliances to advance its views on global and regional issues. For instance, the 2023 Summit for Democracy emphasized the importance of reforms and practice in democracy to address issues such as corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit announced $100 million in development cooperation projects to help democracy, including anti-corruption and electronic governance efforts.
The Yoon government has also actively engaged with countries and organisations that share similar values and has prioritized its vision of an international network of security. These countries and organizations include the United States, Japan, China as well as the European Union, ASEAN members and Pacific Island nations. Progressives may have criticized these actions as lacking values and pragmatism. However, they can assist South Korea develop a more robust toolkit for dealing with countries that are rogue, such as North Korea.
GPS's emphasis on values however it could put Seoul in a precarious position if it is forced to choose between values and interests. For instance the government's sensitivity towards human rights activism and its reluctance to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of criminal activities could cause it to prioritize policies that are not democratic in the home. This is especially true when the government is faced with an issue similar to that of Kwon Pyong, an activist from China. Chinese activist who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with Japan
In the face of global uncertainty and an unstable global economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea and Japan is a bright spot in Northeast Asia. Although the three countries share a common security interest in the nuclear threat posed by North Korea, they also share a strong economic stake in establishing secure and safe supply chains and expanding trade opportunities. The return of their top-level annual meeting is a clear indication that the three neighbors are keen to encourage greater co-operation and economic integration.
However the future of their relationship will be questioned by a variety of elements. The question of how to deal with the issue of human right violations committed by the Japanese or Korean militaries in their respective colonies is the most urgent. The three leaders agreed that they will work together to solve the issues and establish an inter-governmental system for preventing and punishing human rights violations.
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 growing influence in the region. In the past trilateral security cooperation was often hampered by disputes over historical and territorial issues. Despite recent signs of pragmatic stability the disputes are still lingering.
For example, the meeting was briefly overshadowed by North Korea's announcement that it will attempt to launch satellites during the summit, as well as by Japan's decision to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S. The move drew protests from Beijing.
It is possible to revive the trilateral relationship in the current circumstances however, it will require the leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they do not then the current trilateral cooperation will only provide a temporary respite in an otherwise rocky future. If the current pattern continues, in the long run, the three countries may encounter conflict with each other over their security interests. In 프라그마틱 for the trilateral relationship to last is if each of the countries is able to overcome its own national challenges to peace and prosperity.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with 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 laying out lofty goals that, in some instances 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 benefits all three countries. It will include projects that will help develop low-carbon transformations, develop innovative technologies for aging populations and improve joint responses to global issues like climate change, epidemics, as well as food security. It will also be focusing on strengthening people-to -people exchanges and establishing a 3-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts will also increase stability in the area. 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 deteriorating relationship with one of these countries could lead to instability in another which could negatively impact trilateral cooperation with both.
It is important, however, that the Korean government makes clear distinctions between bilateral and trilateral engagement with one or the other of these countries. A clear distinction will help minimize the negative impact a strained relationship between China and Japan could have on trilateral relations.
China's main goal is to get support from Seoul and Tokyo in opposition to any protectionist policies by the new U.S. Administration. This is reflected in China's focus on economic cooperation. Beijing also hopes to prevent the United States' security cooperation from undermining its own trilateral economic and military relationships. Thus, this is a strategic move to combat the increasing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish an opportunity to combat it with other powers.