Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The diplomatic de-escalation of Japan-South Korean tensions in 2020 has refocused on the importance of economic cooperation. Even when the dispute over travel restrictions was resolved, bilateral economic initiatives continued or expanded.
Brown (2013) was the first to pioneer the documentation of resistance to pragmatics among L2 Korean learners. His research revealed that a number of factors such as personal identity and beliefs, can affect a student's practical decisions.
The role of pragmatism in South Korea's foreign policy
In a time of constant change and uncertainty, South Korea's foreign policy needs to be clear and bold. It must be prepared to defend its values and work towards achieving the public good globally like climate change, sustainable development and maritime security. It must also have the ability to project its global influence by delivering tangible benefits. However, it must be able to do this without compromising its domestic stability.
This is a challenging task. South Korea's foreign policies are restricted by domestic politics. It is important that the leadership of the country can manage the domestic obstacles to build public confidence in the direction and accountability of foreign policy. It is not an easy task, as the structures that support foreign policy formation are diverse and complicated. This article focuses on the challenges of managing these domestic constraints to project a cohesive foreign policy.
The current government's emphasis on pragmatic cooperation with like-minded allies and partners is likely to be a positive step for South Korea. This can help to counter the growing attacks on GPS on a values-based basis and open up the possibility for Seoul to interact with nondemocracies. It will also strengthen Seoul's relationship with the United States, which remains an essential partner in advancing the liberal democratic world order.
Another issue facing Seoul is to improve its complicated relationship with China, the country's largest trading partner. While the Yoon administration has made strides in establishing multilateral security structures, such as the Quad, it must balance these commitments with its need to keep the economic ties with Beijing.
Younger voters appear to be less attached to this view. The younger generation has more diverse views of the world, and its values and worldview are evolving. This is evident in the recent growth of K-pop, as well as the increasing international appeal of its cultural exports. It is still too early to determine if these factors will influence the future of South Korea's foreign policy. They are worth watching.
South Korea's diplomatic-pragmatic approach towards North Korea
South Korea must strike a delicate balance in order to shield itself from rogue states and avoid getting caught up in power battles with its large neighbors. It must also consider the trade-offs that exist between values and interests particularly when it comes to aiding non-democratic nations and collaborating with human rights activists. In this respect the Yoon government's pragmatic and diplomatic approach to North Korea is an important contrast to previous governments.
As one of the most active pivotal states South Korea must strive for multilateral engagement as a means of positioning itself within a global and regional security network. In its first two years, the Yoon Administration has actively strengthened bilateral ties and has increased participation in minilaterals as well as multilateral forums. These initiatives include the first Korea-Pacific Islands Summit as well as the second Asia-Pacific Summit for Democracy.
These efforts could appear to be incremental steps but they have helped Seoul to leverage its newfound partnerships to promote its views on regional and global issues. The 2023 Summit for Democracy, for instance, stressed the importance and necessity of reforming democracy and practice to deal with issues such as corruption, digital transformation and transparency. The summit also announced the launching of $100 million worth of development cooperation projects to promote democratic governance, including e-governance as well as anti-corruption initiatives.
In addition the Yoon government has actively engaged with organizations and countries with similar values and priorities to support its vision of a global security network. These countries and organizations include the United States, Japan, China, the European Union, ASEAN members and Pacific Island nations. Progressives may have criticized these activities for being lacking in values and pragmatism, but they are able to help South Korea develop a more robust toolkit to deal with rogue countries such as North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a strategic bind when faced with the dilemma of balancing values and interests. For instance, the government's sensitivity to human rights activism and its reluctance to deport North Korean refugees who have been accused of criminal activities may lead it to prioritize policies that appear undemocratic in the home. This is especially true if the government is faced with a situation similar to the one of Kwon Pong, a Chinese advocate who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with Japan
In the midst of rising global uncertainty and a shaky global economy, trilateral collaboration between South Korea, Japan, and China is an opportunity for Northeast Asia. While the three countries share a common security concern with the nuclear threat posed by North Korea, 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 every year is a clear indication that they want to promote greater economic integration and cooperation.
프라그마틱 게임 of their relationship, however, will be tested by several factors. The most pressing is the issue of how to deal with the issue of human rights violations committed by the Japanese and Korean militaries in their respective colonies. The three leaders agreed they will work together to solve the issues and establish an inter-governmental system to prevent and punish violations of human rights.
Another issue is how to balance 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 the trilateral security cooperation often been hindered by disagreements about territorial and historical issues. These disputes are still present despite recent signs of pragmatic stabilization.
The summit was briefly tainted by, for example, North Korea's announcement it would launch a satellite at the summit, as well as Japan's decision, which was received with protests from Beijing, to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S.
The current situation offers an chance to rejuvenate the trilateral partnership, but it will require the initiative and commitment of President Yoon and Prime Minister Kishida to bring it to fruition. If they do not and they don't, the current trilateral cooperation may only be a temporary relief in a rocky future. If the current trend continues, in the long run, the three countries may encounter conflict with each other due to their shared security interests. In this scenario, the only way for the trilateral partnership to last will be if each nation is able to overcome its own national barriers to prosperity and peace.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with China
The 9th China-Japan-Korea Trilateral Summit wrapped up this week with the leaders of South Korea, Japan and China signing a variety of significant and tangible 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 significant because they set high-level goals, which in some instances, are contrary to Seoul's and Tokyo's collaboration with the United States.
The aim is to establish a framework of multilateral cooperation that is to the benefit of all three countries. It will include projects to develop low-carbon transformations, develop innovative technologies for the aging population and improve collaboration in responding to global challenges like climate changes, epidemics, and food security. It will also focus on enhancing exchanges between people and establishing a trilateral innovation cooperation center.
These efforts could help to improve stability in the region. It is important 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 partnership with one of these countries could lead to instability in the other and negatively impact trilateral cooperation with both.
It is vital that the Korean government makes a clear distinction between trilateral cooperation and bilateral engagement with one of these countries. A clear separation can aid in minimizing the negative effects of a tension-filled relationship with either China or Japan on trilateral relations with both.
China's main objective is to get support from Seoul and Tokyo in opposition to any protectionist policies by the new U.S. Administration. China's focus on economic cooperation especially through the resumption of talks for a China-Japan-Korea FTA and a joint statement on trade in the services market is a reflection of this goal. Beijing is also seeking to stop the United States' security cooperation from threatening its own trilateral economic ties and military ties. Therefore, this is a tactical move to counter the growing threat of U.S. protectionism and establish a platform for countering it with other powers.