Self-reflective Tokyo a must to improve ties with Seoul

By Kim Sang-woo

In 2018, Seoul's Supreme Court ruled in favor of Korean forced labor victims, saying the Japanese companies, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Nippon Steel were liable for their wartime actions.

The ruling immediately prompted an angry response from Japan, arguing that all claims related to its annexation of Korea were settled by the signing of the Treaty on Basic Relations between the Republic of Korea and Japan in 1965.

"The biggest cause of dispute when South Korea and Japan try to improve the bilateral ties has been the differing perception of Japan's annexation of Korea," said former Korean Ambassador to Japan Shin Kak-soo. He added, "The two countries had mended their differences and 'agreed to disagree.' They had resorted to a diplomatic solution to the legal problem, but the Supreme Court's ruling reopened the Pandora's box that was sealed diplomatically."

The different perception about the colonial and wartime era by Korea and Japan is a daunting barrier to reconciliation.

Political needs and geopolitical forces may create opportunities for reconciliation. But in democratic societies like South Korea and Japan there must be an effort to create some shared understanding of the past. Without that, reconciliation will not be sustainable, as we have witnessed so far.

Efforts to improve relations should not be confined to the realm of diplomatic negotiations between the two foreign ministries. Civil society-based reconciliation is essential to provide the basis for sustaining whatever efforts are made by political leaders and government officials.

Without broader efforts to bridge the different historical perceptions, any initiative will likely collapse under the weight of public opinion.

Yet improving ties between Seoul and Tokyo remains an important task. Both share a set of core values and interests that differ from many other Asian countries. They are committed to preserving democratic political institutions, fair elections, and freedom of speech, assembly and religion.

As authoritarian countries in the region ― especially China, Russia and North Korea ― become increasingly supportive of each other, discord among the region's democracies may end up further empowering its assertive dictatorships.

Moreover, in an era of supply chain disruptions and growing economic nationalism, restoring the South Korea-Japan trade relationship is important to the global economy.

If the United States hopes to facilitate genuine and sustainable rapprochement between South Korea and Japan, it must acknowledge its own role in causing these rifts.

In the critical period after World War II, the U.S. decision to exclude South Korea from the peace treaty with Japan, disregarded Korean grievances against Japan and instead established a precedent by which U.S. strategic interest would take priority over correcting bad history.

At the time, Japan was the major strategic asset for the U.S. The peace treaty would follow with a mutual security agreement, and establish Japan's Self-Defense Forces, reinstate purged imperial Japanese officers and partially reverse early efforts to root out wartime Japanese leaders from public life.

The revisionist wing of Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which is unapologetic for Japan's imperial past, can trace its origin to the U.S. decisions made then.

This logic of quick solutions to maximize U.S. advantages in the short term ultimately led to South Korea's exclusion from the San Francisco Peace Treaty in 1951.

For more than 70 years, the Northeast Asia policy of successive U.S. administrations has seen the historical problems causing South Korea-Japan enmity to be a "them" problem.

Now, Washington needs to make the case more strongly to Tokyo that resolving historical issues will foster greater trust in Japan and strengthen the security of the U.S. democratic allies in the region.

For many observers, 1998 Joint Declaration by South Korean President Kim Dae-Jung and Japanese Prime Minister Obuchi Keizo to forge a new "future oriented" relationship represented the high point of bilateral relations.

However, efforts by Japan's LDP to reverse the negative views of imperial Japan complicated aspirations for a new Seoul-Tokyo relationship.

Observers argue that the nationalist faction of the LDP ― which was led by former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo until his recent assassination ― is pursuing revisionism of Japan's wartime past to soften what it views as a "masochistic" history. This has meant defending Japan's colonization of Korea as legal at the time; honoring the war dead, including convicted war criminals, at Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo; and supporting school textbook revisions that gloss over wartime atrocities.

No country has more to gain from rapprochement between South Korea and Japan then the U.S. and no country has more influence over Seoul and Tokyo.

Yet Washington has not fully understood how security and historical issues are interrelated. U.S. officials have frequently stressed that their South Korean counterparts should put historical and territorial disputes aside and focus on security issues.

To South Koreans, however, the two are inseparable. Japan's history of brutal colonization in Asia remains a source of bitterness and strong emotions for South Koreans and many fear Japan's potential military power as much as China or North Korea.

Having said that, President Yoon Suk-yeol may find a more receptive partner in Prime Minister Kishida Fumio on holding talks to improve relations as both countries face growing Chinese regional ambitions and must cooperate to strengthen their economies in a time of global crisis.

Yoon's real challenge, however, will be finding a rapprochement that is based on more than expediency. He needs to improve relations with Japan in a way that has widespread support in both countries and can replace current mistrust with genuine goodwill.

Of course, Yoon cannot do this alone, he will need a more self-reflective and cooperative Japan as well as an actively engaged United States as facilitator.

As George Bernard Shaw said "progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything."

Kim Sang-woo (swkim54@hotmail.com), former lawmaker, is currently chairman of the East Asia Cultural Project. He is also a member of the board of directors at the Kim Dae-jung Peace Foundation.