US Trying to Hold Together Yoon's Unpopular Japan Policy
Discover more from Korean Policy and Culture: The US-Korea Policy Project
US Trying to Hold Together Yoon's Unpopular Japan Policy
Should the US let Korea and Japan address their disputes themselves?
US foreign policy advisor Kurt Campbell, whose roles include being National Security Council coordinator for the Indo-Pacific, praised Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol for making his deal with Japan to resolve a court case concerning forced labor.
"I do want to commend the courage of President Yoon in his decision to take some of these steps and to go to Japan and to make some unilateral steps," Campbell said at an event hosted by the Center for a New American Security.
What about Japan’s courage to come to an agreement? It required more political “courage” on the Korean side because the Koreans were the only ones to make real concessions. (Campbell is right that it was more of a unilateral move and less of a deal.) About 6-in-10 Koreans oppose it. Japan is already undermining the renewed relations by changing textbooks to deny forced labor occurred.
The fact that so many American officials have supported the agreement so strongly shows they think it will help advance US foreign policy interests in Asia.
I wrote in the National Interest:
President Joe Biden's quick response to the announcement suggests the United States is trying to lock this agreement in place, showing how Washington views South Korean and Japanese cooperation as critical for its agenda in Northeast Asia. Biden called it a “groundbreaking new chapter of cooperation and partnership between two of the United States’ closest allies” and said he “look[s] forward to continuing to strengthen and enhance the trilateral ties between the Republic of Korea, Japan, and the United States.”
It is a given that North Korea having nuclear weapons is bad for both South Korea and Japan. North Korea fires missiles over Japan and into the sea by Japan. But the US seems to be hoping for a trilateral relationship extending beyond deterring North Korea and towards broader US foreign policy interests.
Campbell also said at the event:
"One is basically just strong deterrence and solidarity in the face of increasing North Korean provocations. I think that's the central purpose, but also increasingly to diversify beyond that, to talk about technology standards, to talk about regional issues and challenges, and to see what's possible with respect to trilateral engagement," added Campbell.
Campbell called North Korea the “central purpose.” But he also thinks there could be goals extending “increasingly to diversify beyond that,” including “regional issues and challenges.”
One “regional issue” could be China.
South Koreans are turning colder toward China. China has used its economic might as a cudgel to threaten Korea over THAAD before. But South Korea does not view China as an all-embodying threat that Washington DC, with it’s “New Cold War” mindset, increasingly does.
There are fissures between the US and Korea on many China-related issues. Korean chipmakers are concerned about the CHIPS Act, which could deny subsidies to Korean companies because of their large supply chains in China. With Korean companies having previously pledged to open plants in the US, they could be at a competitive disadvantage against companies that receive subsidies. Korea has said CHIPS could hamper Korean investment in the US if Korean companies cannot receive subsidies.
The US responded to a similar controversy over a bill offering tax credits for EV production decoupled from China by expanding the scope of allowed sources; it recognized agreements over critical minerals with Japan and the EU.
Let Korea and Japan Solve Their Issues Themselves
US pressure on Korea to give in to Japan could create resentment amongst Koreans, especially if it is seen as mainly done to advance US foreign policy goals. The US did not encourage Japan to address its treatment of history. A healthy and sustainable relationship needs both sides to compromise.
This goes back to the 2019 court ruling against the Japanese companies that employed forced labor. It goes back further to the controversies over comfort women and the Yasukuni Shrine. It would be best if these issues could be resolved on their own merits and not tied to foreign policy initiatives or political whims.
