뉴스레터

The bickering over Dokdo and history is the biggest cause of conflict between South Korea and Japan, and it is likely and inevitably to intensify even under the newly launched Park Geun-hye administration of South Korea. Japan's post-war generations want to break free from the nation's past of colonial rule and aggression, rather than repenting it. It shows in their strong tendency to be bold in their words or deeds when it comes to historical issues. They also tend to be more indifferent or insensitive to how precarious and sensitive historical issues (including the Dokdo issue) can be to South Korea-Japan relations. On the other hand, the Korean tend to be hypersensitive and overreacting to historical issues.

How South Korean and Japanese Governments Deal with Historical Issues

As is well known, Japan has pushed forward its annual provocative events: holding what is called the 'Takeshima Day' event on February 22; screening textbooks for approval in March; and mentioning Dokdo in its Diplomatic Blue Paper and Defense White Paper. No leader of Japan could dare cancel or change any of them which have become like well-established traditions. Instead of stopping these events, the hard right-wing Prime Minister Abe is most likely to push forward them harder or make them more provocative. Before the general elections last year, he even had infamously expressed his intention of taking measures to revise or take back the 1993 'Kono Statement.' The Park Geun-hye administration taking moderation action or no action at all against such provocation is simply unimaginable.

All the past South Korean administrations have taken extremely firm measures, though varying in degree depending on the adminstration, against Japan's perception of history and/or provocation over Dokdo. South Korea's hard-line Japan policy may be explained by the political circles-mass media-public opinion in a triangle that builds up historical issues. When Japan raises an issue over history that escalates into a diplomatic issue, the South Korean political circles, whether the ruling or the opposition side, get in the race of demanding super-tough action. The mass media, both the conservative and progressive, also join in bashing and resenting Japan's provocation through nationalistic remarks and editorials. A flare-up of anti-Japanese sentiment in public opinion follows. The online sites boil with anti-Japanese sentiment. Then, the government takes firm, hard-line measures against Japan. The government's sensitive reaction to public opinion has been justified, especially since democracy took root in South Korea. When it comes to dealing with historical issues, it is difficult, if not impossible, for the South Korean government to be autonomous and flexible on its own.

The Reality of South Korea-Japan Relations Today

For the South Korean-Japan relations from the 1990s onward, there has been a repeating pattern: amity-cooperation (Warm) followed by confrontation-conflict (Cold). The so-called 'Warm-Cold' cycle is at work in the bilateral relations. In other words, in the beginning of an administration, forging a forward-looking partnership with Japan is put forward for some time, until Japan provokes South Korea over history (Dokdo), whereupon South Korea gets tougher in its Japan policy, straining the bilateral relations. Ultimately, South Korea either maintains its deteriorated relations with Japan as they are or seeks to improve them. This cycle of relations with Japan is unlikely to apply to the new Park Geun-hye administration. Since President Lee Myung-bak's unexpected visit to Dokdo and 'remark on the Japanese Emperor,' the image of South Korea in Japan has plunged to an all-time low. And the already strained South Korea-Japan relations have never been worse since the 2000s. Furthermore, the South Korean Constitutional Court's ruling against the 'comfort women' issue and the South Korean Supreme Court's decision on post-war settlement have made it extremely difficult for the South Korean government's Japan policy to be flexible about historical issues.

Under the circumstances, the Park Geun-hye administration's Japan policy is expected to take the "minimum approach" of keeping the troublesome issues of Dokdo and history below the surface, rather than seeking to forge a new partnership and strengthen friendship. On its part, the Abe administration is also very unlikely to come up with a package of active policies for South Korea. Abe's political DNA is, in a word, right-winged. About issues like constitution, security, and historical perception, he is likely to say and do things that are exactly the opposite of what a majority of Koreans want to hear or see. This sums up the reality of South-Korean relations today.

A 'Joint Organization for Seeking Historical Reconciliation between South Korea and Japan (Tentative Name)' Is Needed

Considering the gap in historical perception or the conflicting views on the Dokdo issue between the two countries, rows between South Korea and Japan over Dokdo and history will likely continue to occur frequently. Unfortunately, there are no quick fixes or solutions to these rows. More often than not, these issues will only inflame national sentiments and strain the overall bilateral relations. Under the circumstances, resolving the historical conflict between the two countries will eventually require a long-term approach. If the gap between the two peoples in historical perception is the ultimate cause of historical conflicts, closing the gap will be the desired solution to the conflicts. But it wouldn't be easy for either country to make an one-sided request to the other to close the gap in historical conception.

In this respect, I think that the two rounds of activities of the 'Korea-Japan Joint History Research Committee' have remarkable significance. Identifying the gap in historical perception through joint academic research and a better understanding of each other based on the identified differences is the first step toward resolving historical issues. And I would like to propose a 'joint organization seeking historical reconciliation between South Korea and Japan (tentative name)' consisting of private-sector experts and representatives of the two countries as a vehicle to deal with the chaotic issues over history that strain South Korea-Japan relations. I suggest that this organization should conduct joint research to seek reasonable solutions to the historical issues including 'comfort women' and post-war settlement. If the existing 'Korea-Japan Joint History Research Committee' was a joint history research organization by historians, the joint organization I propose here will be a policy-making organization in which figures from more diverse fields participate in seeking feasible solutions.
The desired membership of this organization will consist of not only experts in history, politics, and Korea-Japan relations but representatives of Korean Council for Women Drafted for Military Sexual Slavery by Japan and other civil-society groups, an association of lawyers, and the figures from judicial circles recommended by the Consitutional Court and Supreme Court. Once the joint organization of 20 people (10 representatives each from either country) is formed with full support from both governments, I suggest that it should collect wisdom to come up with reasonable solutions for historical reconciliation between South Korea and Japan over the next three years until 2015, the 50th year since the restoration of diplomatic ties between the two countries. During the 3-year period, both governments will have to be, in effect, forbidden to intervene in historical issues but concentrate on economy, security, culture, among other policies. Of course, there is no guarantee that in three years this organization will come up with the solution satisfactory to the governments and peoples of both countries. However, whether it can come to a good conclusion or not, carrying out the project in itself in which figures of the private sector, civil society, and academia gather together to collect wisdom and opinions to solve problems toward true peace and co-prosperity in both countries and East Asia transcending narrow national interests or domestic political interests will create positive effects on many levels. The reasonable management of historical conflicts between the two countries will require, first and foremost, implicit agreement and concerted effort between the top leaders of both countries. If and when the leaders of both countries are acutely aware that letting historical conflicts damage the bilateral relations and aggravate national sentiments does no good but harm to their national interests, they will set about making concerted efforts to ease historical conflicts. For this to happen, there will have to be trust and dialogue based on it between the leaders of both countries.

Sharing the Value of Human Rights, Liberal Democracy, and Capitalism is the First Step Toward Community Building

In seeking changes in historical perception, academic dialogue or exchange at civil-society or private-sector levels will be a more effective solution than all-out government efforts. After all, a more effective approach to solving historical issues will be by the logic of civil society in pursuit of universal values and norms rather than by the logic of state in pursuit of exclusive national interests. Association between civil-society groups across the borders could provide an important clue to resolving problems.

South Korea-Japan relations are as multi-layered as any bilateral relations in Asia, and they are developing continuously. It is confirmed that remarkable advancement has been made in recent years in multi-layered exchange and cooperation between local governments, civil-society groups, businesses, and intellectuals. Needless to say, such multi-layered exchange and cooperation is considered an important asset in improving South Korea-Japan relations. To resolve historical conflicts, the perpetrator Japan needs to be humble, but the victim South Korea is also required to show tolerance for historical reconciliation. Also needed in South Korean-Japan relations is a forward-looking viewpoint. Most importantly, it shouldn't be overlooked that South Korea and Japan are major players of Asia, countries that share the political values of human rights and liberal democracy and the economic value of capitalist market order. It should be understood that sharing these fundamental values is the first step toward building a community in this region.