I am an editorial writer at The Korea Times, focusing on foreign policy, North Korea and domestic politics. My key areas of interest include North Korea, foreign interference in elections, election integrity, cyberattacks and human rights. Prior to joining the Editorial Board, I served as both Politics Desk editor and Culture Desk editor. During my career, I have reported on the Presidential Office under the Lee Myung-bak administration, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the National Assembly.
Neutral state proposed to cut foreign influence
Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe arrives at his official residence in Tokyo, Japan, in this July 2017 file photo. / Reuters-Yonhap
By Kang Hyun-kyung
'Why Japan' shows liberal thinker's worldview
By Kang Hyun-kyung
Ha Jong-moon's “Why Does Japan Want to Conquer Korea?” gives an insight into the direction of President Moon Jae-in's foreign policy and goals for diplomatic footing in East Asia to those who remain clueless about the liberal government's motives.
It's an informative piece for those who want to understand Moon's position when he is handling key foreign policy issues related to South Korea's relations with the United States, China and Japan and inter-Korean diplomacy.
Despite this merit, the book reveals its limitations with its overly simplistic analysis of complex East Asian affairs and a polarizing worldview that pits Korea against Japan in all areas despite their common ground on the security front which necessitates their cooperation.
The author tries to rally support for what he believes is good for Korea's future to ensure its survival as a sovereign state at a time when East Asia is locked in a fierce diplomatic power game after China replaced Japan as the world's second largest economy in 2011.
Ha put forth a permanent neutral state as a vision for Korea.
According to him, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe aims to alter Japan's pacifist Constitution to allow the country to beef up its military in order to invade other countries and until then he is hoping that South Korea can be under the influence of the United States.
Specifically, Ha, a professor of Japan Studies at Hanshin University in Seoul, said Abe and Japanese rightists hope that the U.S. troops can stay in South Korea until Japan is ready to move forward to fulfill its diplomatic goals _ expansion_ after removing institutional obstacles.
He said the current geopolitical circumstances Korea is faced with are similar to what happened 150 years ago when imperial states locked horns in deadly power games to broaden their territories by invading and conquering other countries.
The Joseon Kingdom was a small, weak state and its leaders were not capable enough to use the world order in its favor. The country eventually fell victim to the imperial states' expansionist ambitions, forcing Koreans to become Japan's second-class citizens.
“In the late 19th Century, Japan went to war with China without revealing its ambition to invade Korea afterwards. Today, in the 21st Century, Japan has pushed for a South Korea-Japan-U.S. tripartite alliance, making a case for its necessity to counter the rise of China,” Ha said in the book. “Why in the past did Japan force Joseon to open its door to the world against its will? Why did they interfere in other country's affairs to turn the tide for the sake of its own good?”
He defies skeptics who claim South Korea has no other option but to seek a neutral stance, insisting that it has to push to ensure its survival as a sovereign state.
Contrary to his observation, many experts agree that it was the United States, not Japan, which encouraged its two East Asian allies to cooperate on the security front in East Asia to counter the security threat from North Korea and China.
“Why Does Japan Want to Conquer Korea” by Ha Jong-moon
What Ha said in the book echoes the view of some liberal thinkers who laid the foundation for President Moon Jae-in's foreign policy strategy, of which direction leads South Korea to keep China close while maintaining a distance with the United States and Japan.
Under the Moon government, South Korea's relations with Japan hit the lowest point since their diplomatic ties were normalized in 1965. South Korea's ties with the United States showed signs of turning sour as the liberal government tried to engage with North Korea which is under layered international sanctions despite no progress being made in regards to the latter's nuclear ambitions.
President Moon's China policy was put to the test after the coronavirus outbreak.
He turned a deaf ear to mounting calls to impose a travel ban on Chinese tourists, allowing them to visit South Korea despite the virus outbreak.
“Why Does Japan Want to Conquer Korea?” published by MEDICI Media, doesn't address such diplomatic costs South Korea paid or has to pay and, instead, tries to defend Moon's policy stance.
It seems inevitable that the author meets criticism that he is locked in a victim mentality.
His worldview seems to be self-deprecating. He deems South Korea a passive state having no other means to ensure its survival in an intensified international power game. Although he speaks about a way that can help the nation survive in the tough geopolitical landscape, he considers South Korea's fate will be determined by others, just as it was in the past.
Unlike his pessimistic views, there are several small but strong countries that find their own way to survive. These countries mobilize diplomatic resources and economic clout to determine their own future.
The dominance of alleged “defeatism” among liberal thinkers, including Ha, regarding the nation's fate seems to be the source of their pessimistic worldview that belittles the potential of their home country.
“Why Does Japan Want to Conquer Korea?” rules out power dynamics. The author views the fates of countries as pre-determined.
Although he claims he tries to present his ideas to save Korea from being victimized into a diplomatic quagmire, his policy recipe seems to do the opposite.
The author's worldview resembles that of a group of Korean thinkers who played a nationalism card in the late Joseon Kingdom when it faced unprecedented diplomatic chaos.
At that time, there were two different schools of thought ― traditionalists and pragmatists ― inside the government. The former was a group of stalwart Confucians who refused to adapt to the changing environment, insisting on continuing their way of life.
Meanwhile, pragmatists who were keen foreign policy observers and aware of what was going on outside the country unsuccessfully called for innovation of national policy to help it better cope with the security environment.