The Latest Situation in the Republic of Korea

March 24, 2005
Akio Kawato
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 　　　　　　　　　　
I visited Seoul, Republic of Korea (ROK) from March 3 to 6 and exchanged views with various people including Korean diplomats, researchers, and journalists. The purpose of my visit was to verify reports by some members of the Japanese press that “the ROK is ‘tilting to the left’ and overly leaning towards China and North Korea” (in verifying the reports it was found that a balance is being restored in the thinking of the ROK leadership). However, my visit happened to be right when the Takeshima Island issue had again become an issue between the two countries, leaving me to think about a lot of different things.

The above is summarized in the following report.

(1) Greater cultural similarities between Japan and the ROK than between Japan and China, and the “Asia Cool” phenomenon
Looking at the traditional craftwork and modern designs of the ROK, it seems that Japan’s aesthetic sense is much more aligned with the ROK’s than China’s (Although not often told in Japan the ceramics from medieval Japan including Arita ware trace back to a Korean craftsman who was brought to Japan by Hideyoshi’s Korean expedition; hence this is only natural). Popular culture is also widespread in the ROK; its aristocratic culture is, however, more refined than Japan’s in some cases. The city of Seoul does not have the same energy and vitality as Shanghai and Beijing of late (15 years ago Seoul was a vibrant city, much like Shanghai today) but does have the wealth of know-how and calmness of a city with ten years under its belt since attaining economic development.

What I have observed from my visits to Shanghai, Beijing, Seoul, and Taipei is not just that the cities are taking shape but that the youths are leaving behind their former selves as an “Asian” collective group lacking in individuality and transforming themselves into individuals who are aware of who they are. Currently when youths in the West are becoming less and less cultivated and cultured, East Asia is adding on its charm and sophistication which may be called “Asia Cool.”

(2) Changes in thinking due to economic development and “denial of old system” made possible by the end of the Cold War
Prior to this visit, I went to listen to a lecture given by Mr. Kim Yeong Su, a young writer from the ROK, who was invited by the Japan Foundation. I was struck by his remark that, “The Korean writers who emerged in the 1990s abandoned everything that had limited their possibilities, for instance, the anti-establishment position to date that was lacking in individualism and based on ideologies, and as individuals began to respect their personal views, as well as reexamine history. This was largely influenced by Haruki Murakami’s approach which was devoid of ideology, preoccupying itself in personal views. This is called the ‘Haruki Phenomenon.’”

The things I saw and heard in Seoul during my visit confirmed what I have just mentioned. Many of President Roh Moo-hyun’s aides are those who were at the forefront of the student movements during the period of military rule. They have defined the period of military rule as a corrupt period under US subjugation. Since assuming power, they have been critical of the US, demonstrating an attitude leaning towards China and North Korea while at the same time boldly advancing reallocations, even allowing the breakup of conglomerates like Daewoo Corporation.

In the ROK (as well as Taiwan), there is already a generational change taking place among the people in the power center. Young people in power turn to direct democratic methods as the source of their power, and this is secured by the extent of the President’s authority. This is why differences arise in how the ROK responds to a wide range of issues in comparison to Japan, which has a parliamentary Cabinet system.

(3) Difficult aspects of Japan-ROK relations
Compared to 15 years ago when I last visited the ROK, Korean people now leave far more room for interactions with Japan. This time I did not meet any intellectuals who exacted an apology from the outset. Japanese signs could be found sporadically at entertainment spots, and the Japanese food business was also expanding into the Korean market. At the Lotte Hotel numerous life-size posters of “Yon-sama” (Korean actor Bae Yong-joon) can be found, with Japanese women getting their commemorative photographs taken alongside him. Japan-ROK relations have clearly reached a new stage accompanied by mutual interest and respect for one another. However, with such events as the adoption of an ordinance establishing a “Takeshima Day” by the Shimane Prefectural Assembly; preceded by a meeting with the foreign press to introduce the events related to the 40th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Japan and the ROK at which a Japanese Ambassador’s upfront explanation about the opinions of the Government of Japan on the issue of territorial rights over Takeshima Island in response to a question by a Korean journalist from TV Asahi was received by the Korean press and others as an act lacking in integrity for Japan “professes friendship while in reality is going after the territory”; and the fact that this meeting was held immediately before the anniversary of the Anti-Japanese “3.1 Independence Movement” in 1919, the situation was not such that the Office of the President, the Korean press and analysts could just remain silent.

During my stay in Seoul, the Korean press was still restrained in its views. From then on, however, with the actual adoption of the ordinance and the advance disclosure of the content of the newly approved history textbooks of Fusosha Publishing Inc. stressing the point that “there were also ‘positive things’ during the period of Japan’s annexation of Korea,” the backlash by the ROK side escalated.

The Korean press does not think that Japan is going to regain Takeshima Island; it also knows that Fusosha’s textbook is not widely disseminated in actuality. However, once anti-Japanese sentiments have been sparked, “the choice is either to keep quiet or join in.” While it is believed that public opinion in the ROK is overly sensitive to Japan, we were actually on the verge of getting past this period. It was just then when negative factors from the Japanese side built up and the Korean press interpreted all of this as a provocation (This point is not very well known in Japan. Many people on the Japanese side have the wrong idea that the ROK are　suddenly raising their voices once again over the Takeshima Island issue.). There are many top officials in the current administration who had been suppressed during the military rule and had “reexamined in their own way [the ROK’s relations with such countries as the US and China], from the perspective of putting behind what happened in the past during the military rule.” It can be said that this also extended to ROK-Japan relations as a result of the latest incidents.
　
Nevertheless, it is believed that Japan-ROK relations are fundamentally forward-looking, as evidenced from the statement issued by President Roh Moo-hyun for the ROK people on the history issue between Japan and the ROK on the 23rd, which states, “We and Japan are neighbors who by destiny cannot avoid each other.” As long as both parties do not further escalate the situation by how they respond, it can also be said that the negative factors for the time being have been exhausted. In addition, Japanese sentiments towards the ROK have not yet cooled down. We just have to hope that the improvement of relations over the past several years has put Japan-ROK relations on a higher foundation.

(4) Policies on ROK-North Korea relations approaching a landing
The two regions in East Asia which have been split up, the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan, show interesting similarities in one aspect. That is, both regions, apart from what the parties in question and the parties concerned say on the surface, in truth, wish most of all to maintain the status quo or have a stepwise solution to the issue. It is problematic for China, too, which is on its way to regaining the important position it once held in the Korean Peninsula to see the dissolution of North Korea, which is positioned as a buffer zone between the US military in the ROK.

Meanwhile, the Roh Moo-hyun administration has regarded North Korea as a compatriot rather than an enemy by, for instance, strongly requesting ROK companies to participate in the rising industrial zone in North Korea, and has been continuing the “Sunshine Policy” of the Kim Dae-jung administration which tried to promote market opening and liberalization by extending assistance instead of putting pressure. However, in seeing Japan, the ROK, US, and China being trifled by the North Korean side on the nuclear issue and so forth and the North Korean side ignoring the goodwill expressed by the ROK side, it appears that the ROK has lost its direction in certain respects.

Regarding the issue of North Korea’s nuclear weapons, some in Japan point out that the ROK people actually are proud of this from an ethnical standpoint. However, my interviewees have all unanimously said that, “If North Korea’s nuclear programs lead to the nuclear armament of Japan and heighten Japan’s defense capabilities, the presence of the US will be relatively leveled down, and the ROK will in turn be caught in between Japan and China which are in antagonistic relations. This is a nightmare scenario for the ROK, and that is why it genuinely wants to eliminate North Korea’s nuclear programs.”

(5) From an excessive slant towards China to reevaluation of the US
President Roh Moo-hyun’s aides from the “3/8/6 generation” (the generation in their 30s who graduated from university in the 1980s and were born in the 1960s) are the crowd who took part in the student movements that made an enemy out of the US, which had supported military rule. And the advent of the Roh Moo-hyun administration coincided with the timing of China’s emergence as a major power. China has already been the number one trading partner of the ROK for the past several years. In addition, Korean industries are hurrying to invest in China. We can thus understand why those close to President Roh Moo-hyun who aimed to reexamine the US subjugation during the military rule were at first leaning heavily towards China, “a major power that was neither the US nor Japan.”

Meanwhile, as for Japan, the Korean Peninsula was bringing back a security nightmare it had not experienced since the Meiji period: a “Korean Peninsula dominated by China or Russia.” However, the situation for the moment has not taken on a serious dimension. Last year, the fact that members of Chinese academic circles openly stated their views that “Goguryeo was a Chinese dependent territory” seemed to have awakened Korean public opinion, and today, even the “3/8/6 generation” is reaffirming the importance of “the US for its role as a balancer and mediator that has no ambitions with respect to the Korean Peninsula, for the US is not a neighboring country like China and Japan.”

(6) Strengthening group security in Asia
It has long been pointed out that Asia lacks a group security organization like the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). Various explanations have been given as to why this is the case, but simply put, it comes down to the fact that “There was no need. It was more efficient to [ensure security] through bilateral arrangements between the US and various countries including the Japan-US security alliance.” NATO had two objectives. The first was to deter attacks from the Soviet Union, and the other was to suppress Germany’s comeback as a major military power and to incorporate it into a framework of cooperation among all European countries. If we look at East Asia in this regard, we can see that only the US with its nuclear weapons can counter attacks from the Soviet Union and China, and if not the US, countries in Asia were too weak to suppress Japan from resurging as a major military power. In other words there was no point of creating an Asian version of NATO.

However, with the Soviet Union and China no longer enemy states and with such countries as the ROK, China, and ASEAN countries increasing their power, it is only a matter of time until the US is positioned alongside East Asian countries. While we should avoid a rapid transformation, we should be thinking about creating such schemes as an East Asian sea lane security scheme and in the future launching a structure for Japan, the US and China to contain each other’s power and prevent each other from becoming a hegemonic power.

A vast majority of opinions to date expressed that a Western European-style group security structure cannot be created in Asia unless a number of issues are solved such as the situation surrounding the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan and memories of the war involving Japan. However, my visits around Asia have made me think that there is no need to wait indefinitely until these issues are solved, that it is issues like those involving the Korean Peninsula and Taiwan that need a multilateral mechanism which assures a solution, and that the Six-Party Talks involving North Korea are gradually turning into a group security structure or at least beginning to resemble a group discussion structure. If that is indeed the case, it is my belief that we can increasingly strengthen the multilateral discussion mechanism for peacefully administering group security in East Asia.
(END)