Diplomatic-Pragmatic Korea and Northeast Asia
The de-escalation of tensions between Japan and South Korea in 2020 has brought the focus back to economic cooperation. Despite the issue of travel restrictions has been rebuffed by the government, bilateral economic initiatives have remained or expanded.
Brown (2013) was the first researcher to study pragmatic resistance among L2 Korean learners. His study revealed that a variety of factors such as the identity of the person and their beliefs, can affect a student's practical choices.
The role of pragmatism is South Korea's foreign policy
In these times of flux and change South Korea's foreign policy must be clear and bold. It must be prepared to stand up for principles and work towards achieving global public goods, such as sustainable development, climate change, and maritime security. It should also have the capacity to demonstrate its global influence through tangible benefits. However, it has to be able to do this without compromising its stability within the country.
This is a challenging task. South Korea's foreign policy is restricted by domestic politics. It is crucial that the government of the country can manage these domestic constraints to promote public trust in the direction and accountability for foreign policy. This isn't easy, as the underlying structures that support foreign policy development are complex and diverse. This article examines how to handle these domestic constraints in order to project a coherent foreign policy.
프라그마틱 데모 will likely benefit from the current government's emphasis on a pragmatic partnership with allies and partners who have similar values. This approach can help counter the growing attacks on GPS on a values-based basis and open up the possibility for Seoul to be able to engage with non-democratic countries. It could also help strengthen the relationship with the United States which remains an essential partner in advancing an order of world democracy that is liberal and democratic.
Another issue facing Seoul is to improve its complex relationship with China, the country's largest trading partner. While the Yoon administration has made progress in the development of multilateral security architectures such as the Quad, it must balance these commitments with its need to keep relations with Beijing.
Long-time observers of Korean politics have pointed to ideology and regionalism as the primary factors in political debate, younger voters seem less inclined to this view. This new generation has a more diverse worldview, and its worldview and values are changing. This is reflected in the recent rise of K-pop, as well as the increasing global appeal of its culture exports. It's too early to know 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 must strike a delicate balance to shield itself from rogue states and to avoid getting caught up in power battles with its big neighbors. It must also consider the trade-offs between interests and values, particularly when it comes down to helping non-democratic countries and engaging with human rights activists. In this respect the Yoon administration's pragmatic and diplomatic approach to North Korea is a significant contrast to previous governments.
As one of the world's most active pivotal states South Korea must strive for multilateral cooperation as a means 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 and multilateral forums. These initiatives include the Korea-Pacific Islands Summit and the Second Asia-Pacific Summit for Democracy.
These efforts might seem like small steps however they have enabled Seoul to leverage its newfound partnerships to promote its views on global and regional issues. For example, the 2023 Summit for Democracy emphasized the importance of reforming democratic practices and practices to address issues such as corruption, digital transformation, and transparency. The summit announced $100 million in development cooperation projects that will help support the democratic process, including anti-corruption and e-governance efforts.
Additionally, the Yoon government has proactively engaged with countries and organizations with similar values and goals to help support its vision of the creation of a global security network. These include the United States, Japan, China, the European Union, ASEAN members and Pacific Island nations. Progressives may have criticized these activities as lacking in values and pragmatism, but they are able to help South Korea develop a more robust toolkit for dealing with countries that are rogue, such as North Korea.
However, GPS' emphasis on values could put Seoul in a difficult position when it comes to balancing values and desires. The government's concern for human rights and refusal to deport North Koreans convicted of criminal activities may lead it, for instance, to prioritize policies that are not democratic in Korea. This is especially true if the government is faced with a situation similar to the one of Kwon Pong, who was a Chinese advocate who sought asylum in South Korea.
South Korea's trilateral cooperation with Japan. Japan
In the face of global uncertainty and a volatile world economy, trilateral collaboration between South Korea and Japan is an optimistic signpost in Northeast Asia. The three countries have an interest in security that is shared with the threat of nuclear war from North Korea, but they also share a major economic concern over establishing a an efficient 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.
The future of their relationship is, however, challenged by a variety of circumstances. 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 most urgent. The three leaders agreed they would work together to resolve the issues and establish an integrated system to prevent and punish violations of human rights.
Another major issue is how to balance the three countries' competing interests in East Asia, especially when it comes to maintaining international stability and addressing China's growing influence in the region. In the past trilateral security cooperation was often hampered by disputes relating to historical and territorial issues. Despite the recent evidence of stability in the pragmatics however, these disputes continue to linger.
The meeting was briefly overshadowed by, for instance, North Korea's announcement to launch a satellite at the summit and by Japan's decision that was met with protests by Beijing to extend its military exercises with South Korea and the U.S.
It is possible to revive the trilateral relationship in the current situation however, it will require the initiative and cooperation of President Yoon and Premier Kishida. If they don't then the current trilateral cooperation may only provide a temporary respite in a turbulent future. In the long term in the event that the current pattern continues, the three countries will end up at odds over their mutual security interests. In this scenario the only way that the trilateral relationship will last is if each country can overcome its own challenges to peace and prosper.
South Korea's trilateral partnership with China
The Ninth China, Japan, and Korea Trilateral Summit concluded this week with the leaders of South Korea and Japan signing numerous tangible and significant outcomes. The Summit's outcomes include a joint Declaration, a Statement on Future Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response and an Agreement on Trilateral Intellectual Property Cooperation. These documents are notable because they set lofty goals, which, in some cases run counter to Tokyo's and Seoul's cooperation with the United States.
The aim is to build a framework for multilateral cooperation that benefits all three countries. The projects would focus on the use of low-carbon technologies, innovative solutions to help an aging population as well as collective responses to global challenges such as climate changes, epidemics and food security. It would also focus on strengthening people-to-people exchanges and creating a trilateral innovation collaboration center.
These efforts will also increase stability in the region. South Korea must maintain a positive relationship with China and Japan. This is particularly crucial when it comes to regional issues, such as North Korean provocations, tensions in the Taiwan Strait and Sino-American rivalry. A weakening relationship with one of these countries could cause instability in the other and consequently negatively affect trilateral cooperation between both.
However, it is also crucial that the Korean government makes an explicit distinction between trilateral cooperation and bilateral relations with one of these countries. A clear distinction will minimize the negative impact that a strained relationship between China and Japan could impact trilateral relations.
China's primary goal is to get support from Seoul and Tokyo in opposition to possible protectionist policies that will be implemented by the next U.S. Administration. This is evident in China's emphasis on economic cooperation. Beijing is also hoping to stop the United States' security cooperation from affecting its own trilateral economic and military relations. This is a deliberate move to counter the increasing threat posed by U.S. protectionism and create an opportunity to combat it with other powers.