Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation of tensions among Japan and South Korea in 2020 has brought the focus back to economic cooperation. Despite the fact that the dispute over travel restrictions has been rebuffed by the government, bilateral economic initiatives have been pushed forward or expanded.
Brown (2013) was the first researcher to study the resistance to pragmatics of L2 Korean learners. His research found that a myriad of factors, including identity and personal beliefs, can affect a learner's practical choices.
The role played by pragmatism in South Korea's foreign policy
In this time of uncertainty and change, South Korea's Foreign Policy has to be bold and clear. It should be able to stand by its principles and promote global public goods, such as climate change, sustainable development, and maritime security. It must also possess the capacity to expand its global influence through tangible benefits. However, it has to be able to do this without compromising its domestic stability.
This is an extremely difficult task. Domestic politics are a key obstacle to South Korea's foreign policy, and it is critical that the presidency manages these domestic constraints in ways that boost confidence in the national direction and accountability of foreign policies. It is not an easy job, since the structures that aid in the formulation of foreign policy are varied and complicated. This article examines the difficulties of overcoming these constraints domestically to project a cohesive foreign policy.
South Korea will likely benefit from the current administration's focus on a pragmatic partnership with allies and partners who share similar values. This approach can help counter progressive attacks against GPS the foundation based on values and open the way for Seoul to engage with nondemocracies. It could also help strengthen its relationship with the United States, which remains an essential partner in the advancement of the liberal democratic world order.
Another issue facing Seoul is to retool its complicated relationship with China as the country's biggest trading partner. The Yoon administration has made significant progress in establishing multilateral security structures such as the Quad. However, it must balance this commitment with its need to maintain economic relations with Beijing.
Younger voters seem to be less influenced by this viewpoint. The younger generation is more diverse, and their worldview and values are changing. This is evident in the recent rise of K-pop and the growing international appeal of its cultural exports. It is too early to tell if these trends will impact 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 faces a delicate balance between the need to combat rogue state threats and the desire to avoid being drawn into power games among its large neighbors. It also needs to think about the trade-offs between interests and values, especially when it comes to helping non-democratic countries and engaging with human rights activists. In this respect, the Yoon government's diplomatic and pragmatic approach to North Korea is an important departure from past governments.
As one of the world's most active pivotal states South Korea must strive for multilateral engagement as a way to position itself within a regional and global security network. In its first two years the Yoon Administration has actively bolstered bilateral ties and increased participation in minilaterals as well as multilateral forums. These initiatives include the first Korea-Pacific Islands Summit, and the second Asia-Pacific Summit for Democracy.
These efforts may seem like small steps but they have helped Seoul to leverage its newfound partnerships to spread its opinions on global and regional issues. The 2023 Summit for Democracy, for instance, stressed the importance and necessity of democratic reform and practice to deal with issues like corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit announced $100 million in development cooperation projects to help the democratic process, including anti-corruption and electronic governance efforts.
In addition the Yoon government has actively engaged with other countries and organizations that have similar values and goals to help support its vision of a global security network. These countries and organizations include the United States, Japan, China as well as the European Union, ASEAN members, and Pacific Island nations. These actions may be criticised by progressives for being lacking in pragmatism and values, however, they can assist South Korea build a more robust toolkit for foreign policy in dealing with states that are rogue like North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a precarious position when confronted with trade-offs between values and interests. For instance the government's sensitivity to human rights advocacy and its refusal to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of criminal activity may lead it to prioritize policies that appear undemocratic in the home. This is particularly true if the government is faced with a situation similar to that of Kwon Pong, who was a Chinese advocate who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral co-operation with Japan
In the midst a rising global uncertainty and a shaky world economy, trilateral cooperation between South Korea, Japan, and China is an opportunity for Northeast Asia. The three countries have a shared security interest regarding the nuclear threat from North Korea, but they also share a major economic concern about developing safe and secure supply chain and expanding trade opportunities. The return of their top-level annual gathering is a clear signal that the three neighbors want to push for greater economic integration and co-operation.
However the future of their relationship will be tested by a number of factors. The most pressing one is the question of how to tackle the issue of human rights violations allegedly committed by the Japanese and Korean militaries in their respective colonies. The three leaders agreed to cooperate to address these issues, and to establish a joint procedure for preventing and reprimanding human rights violations.
Another issue pragmatickr is how to find a balance between the 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 impeded by disputes over territorial and historical issues. These disputes are still present despite recent signs of a pragmatic stabilization.
For instance, the summit was briefly shadowed by North Korea's announcement that it would attempt to launch satellites during the summit, as well as by Japan's decision to extend its military drills with South Korea and the U.S. The move drew protests from Beijing.
The current situation offers an opportunity to revitalize the trilateral relationship, but it will require the leadership and reciprocity of President Yoon and Prime Minister Kishida to bring it to fruition. If they fail to do so, the current era of trilateral cooperation could be a brief respite from the otherwise rocky future. In the longer term If the current trend continues, the three countries will be at odds over their mutual security interests. In that case the only way for the trilateral partnership to last will be if each country is able to overcome its own national barriers 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. They include a Joint Declaration of the Summit, 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 may be in contradiction to Seoul and Tokyo's cooperation with the United States.
The aim is to establish an environment of multilateral cooperation that is to the benefit of all three countries. The projects will include the use of low-carbon technologies, innovative solutions for an aging population and joint responses to global issues such as climate changes, food security, and epidemics. It would also be focusing on strengthening people-to -people exchanges and establishing a 3-way innovation cooperation center.
These efforts could also contribute to improving stability in the region. It is essential that South Korea maintains a positive relationship with both China and Japan particularly when confronted by regional issues such as 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 the other and therefore negatively impact trilateral cooperation with both.
However, it is important that the Korean government promotes an explicit distinction between trilateral cooperation and bilateral relations with one of these countries. A clear separation will minimize the negative impact a strained relationship between China and Japan could affect trilateral relations.
China is largely seeking to build support between Seoul and Tokyo against possible protectionist policies that could be implemented by the next U.S. administration. This is evident in China's emphasis on economic cooperation. Moreover, Beijing is likely hoping to prevent security cooperation with the United States from undermining the importance of its own trilateral military and economic ties with these East Asian allies. This is a smart move to counter the increasing threat posed by U.S. protectionism and create an opportunity to combat it with other powers.