뉴스레터

"In today's world with drastic changes in international order, especially in Northeast Asia with fierce competition among the powers, it doesn't seem to be easy for Korea to defend its national interests and ensure its survival. International relations require a variety of channels ranging from summit diplomacy to non-governmental exchange. In the process of utilizing these channels, it will be necessary to make efforts to have as many partners as possible that have common interests, whether they be ethical causes, cultural similarities, or practical gains in security or economy."

The fact that Japan is a very important country to Korea, both historically and presently, does not require a lengthy explanation. It can be said that the biggest issues in Korea-Japan relations, such as issues over the controversial history textbooks, the Japanese military sexual slavery, and Dokdo, etc., are chiefly historical ones originating from Japan's aggression and colonial rule. These issues, which have always existed in the post-war bilateral relations, have occasionally become volatile and caused serious tensions in the relations between Korea and Japan. On the other hand, exchanges between the two countries on the fronts of people, economy, and culture have increased dramatically over the last half-century and made progress beyond the border as a political boundary and the sea as a geographical obstacle.

Political leaders who perceived these two faces of Korea-Japan relations have often made attempts to settle the historical issues once and for all and forge new Korea-Japan relations under the slogan of 'New Generation for Korea and Japan.' However, those attempts have failed in most cases, and in many cases led to the more seriously strained relations.

The new Korean government launched this year is not focused on the symbolic and declaratory policies toward Japan which the past governments often presented. And this seems to be due to a few changes in circumstances. First of all, the legacy of Korea-Japan relations that became worse than ever during the last days of the past government has made it difficult to make such an attempt. Additionally, the view on Korea-Japan relations not as bilateral relations but in the context of the broader region of Asia may have contributed to such policy direction.

President Park Geun-hye attracted attention at an academic conference last October when she was a candidate by presenting the 'Asia Paradox' which expanded and applied the paradoxical aspects of Korea-Japan specifically to Northeast Asia. It refers to a paradoxical situation that while enjoying economic development and increasing economic exchanges within the region, which accounts for 20 percent of the gross world product, Northeast Asia is also faced with strained relations caused by heightened nationalism surrounding historical perception. It may have been inspired especially by the strained Korea-Japan relations prompted by the Korean president's visit to Dokdo and demand of an apology from the Japanese emperor, combined with the mounting tensions between China and Japan over the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Dao), and the international community's increasing concerns about these situations in Northeast Asia.

It may not be denied that the underlying assumption of the 'Asia Paradox'-style perception of international relations in Northeast Asia is that Japan is the responsible one. It implies that it is necessary for Japan to accept responsibility for what they did in the past and thereby heal the trauma they caused, so as to rebuild trust between the countries. As far as this value-based viewpoint is concerned, there is plenty of room for Korea and China to take joint steps. In her state visit to China in June this year, President Park moved beyond discussing major issues in politics and economy and sought cultural cooperation through 'bonding of humanities.' It can be said that this is in line with the inherently value-oriented aspect of the Paradox.

When she presented the 'Asia Paradox,' President Park was still a presidential candidate in the position of an observer. However, since she took office as president a few months later, she has been faced with this 'Paradox' situation as an important actor. Her perspective seems to be maintained, at least in management of Korea-Japan relations. Normally a new Korean president makes Japan the second or third destination for his or her state visits after inauguration. But President Park hasn't made her state visit to Japan yet. Even at a number of multilateral talks where the two heads of state were to inevitably meet. no summit meetings were held. Far from showing a forward-looking attitude toward the historical issues, the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe took a more conservative stance. And this may have contributed to such policy choice. Pictures of the two heads of state who appeared to be trying to avoid each other while in the same place, which were a clear representation of the chill in the bilateral relations, have adorned the newspapers.

President Park's perception of the 'Paradox' situation has been expressed directly or indirectly during the talks with the heads of other states or the press conferences with the media of the other country. In the process, the Japanese leader's expression of a forward-looking position on historical issues was established almost as a prerequisite for a summit and improved relations, and her intentions of not having any summit (with Japan) that would not ensure improved relations were also expressed.

If there was any historical issue for which international cooperation and collaboration has been effective to a certain extent in moving toward resolution, it was the Japanese military sexual slavery. From the mid-1990s onward, the international community has raised awareness of the Japanese military sexual slavery as sexual violence during wartime, and exerted increasingly more pressure on Japan trying to avoid responsibility for it. The notion that there was something wrong with Japan's retrogressive perception of historical issues such as the military sexual slavery spread across the U.S., and it bore fruit as the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution on the Japanese military sexual slavery in July 2007. Shinzo Abe, the then Prime Minister of Japan, had visited the U.S. in April earlier that year and tried to stop the passage of the resolution. But even Japan's strong lobbying power had been insufficient to turn the tide of public opinion.

The global spread of the Japanese military sexual slavery issue demonstrates the importance of making points that people of other countries can relate to in debates of historical perception. But it needs to be noted that such international value-bonding or sharing cannot be a magic want to solve complex issues in international relations. Issues about Japan's historical perception and perspective are difficult to solve not only because they are related to issues between both countries as the countries concerned but also because they are multi-layered and fundamentally linked to changes in regional and world order. Currently, Japan's perceptions of foreign affairs and history are very intricately intertwined with a series of bilateral relations, including Korea-Japan relations, U.S.-Japan relations, China-Japan relations, U.S.-China relations, Korea-U.S. relations, Korea-China relations, North Korea-China relations, North Korea-U.S. relations, etc.

Prime Minister Abe, who returned to power by beating the DPJ in the election in late 2012, seems to have succeeded in getting support from the U.S. by focusing on economic and security issues in negotiations with the U.S. And that support was manifested and confirmed last October as the U.S. endorsed the exercise of Japan's right of collective self-defense. It needs to be noted that such support from the U.S. was given despite the deep concerns expressed by Korea and other neighboring countries. Furthermore, rumor has it that negative opinions are being formed both in and out of the U.S. government about the position of Korea protesting the efforts for close security cooperation between the U.S. and Japan for reasons of historical issues. This may be a good example of what could result if the security issue clashed with the issue of historical perception. The endorsement of the exercise of Japan's right of collective self-defense is spreading to Australia, Europe and to Southeast Asian countries, including the Philippines and Cambodia.

The main reason for endorsing the exercise of Japan's right of collective self-defense, as the U.S. and Japan explain, is the North Korean nuclear issue. However, everybody knows that the underlying reasons are the rise of China and the U.S.'s and Japan's intent to establish a security partnership between the two to cope with it. On one hand, Japan, having been replaced by China as the second largest economy in the world, is trying to borrow the U.S.'s power to stop its status and influence from weakening. On the other hand, the U.S. is trying to share with Japan the security burden arising from its weakening economic power resulting from fiscal deficits. In a way, their policy choice was made where the interests of the two countries met. This potential confrontation situation between U.S/Japan and China leaves Korea with much fewer choices. In this regard, this change in the political landscape poses a serious problem that goes much beyond the scope of the right of collective self-defense. In today's world with drastic changes in international order, especially in Northeast Asia with fierce competition among the powers, it doesn't seem to be easy for Korea to defend its national interests and ensure its survival. International relations require a variety of channels ranging from summit diplomacy to non-governmental exchange. In the process of utilizing these channels, it will be necessary to make efforts to have as many partners as possible that have common interests, whether they be ethical causes, cultural similarities, or practical gains in security or economy. The close-knit relationship network so established will certainly be a shield that ensures our survival and prosperity.