Korea should align with Japan on Middle East burden-sharing, experts say

U.S. President Donald Trump meets with Japanese Prime Minster Sanae Takaichi in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., Thursday. UPI-Yonhap

Korean political and security experts are urging Seoul to stake out a clear position on stabilizing the situation in the Middle East, following Thursday’s U.S.-Japan summit (local time), warning that being seen as less cooperative than Tokyo could invite consequences from Washington.

During the 90-minute meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, Trump raised the issue of the Strait of Hormuz, pointing out that Japan secures more than 90 percent of its oil through the maritime passage and arguing that such dependence gives Tokyo sufficient justification to take a more active role in securing it.

Trump also praised Japan’s contributions to regional and global security while differentiating it from NATO, urging Japan to “step up” for the U.S. in stabilizing the Middle East.

“I expect Japan to step up because, you know, we have that kind of ⁠relationship and we step up for Japan,” Trump said. “I think it’s appropriate that people step up.”

Takaichi expressed agreement on the importance of securing the Strait of Hormuz, but adopted a cautious stance regarding the potential deployment of Japanese naval forces. She emphasized that any action would remain within the limits of Japan’s legal framework, signaling restraint.

Japanese media coverage of the summit has emphasized significant legal hurdles, noting that it would be difficult to classify the current situation involving Iran as a “threat to national survival,” a condition required under Japanese law to exercise collective self-defense.

U.S. President Donald Trump makes remarks as he hosts a dinner with Japanese Prime Minster Sanae Takaichi in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday (local time). EPA-Yonhap

Political commentator Lee Jong-keun said Korea has no choice but to closely monitor Japan’s moves as a key U.S. ally in East Asia, and there is a need to align to some extent.

“Even on tariff issues, the outcomes of U.S.-Japan negotiations have affected us,” Lee told The Korea Times Friday. “The U.S. is creating a structure in which Japan and Korea are placed on a similar level and made to compete, allowing the U.S. to maximize its interests.”

He explained that had Japan readily accepted U.S. demands on the Middle East, as in past tariff negotiations, it could have increased pressure on Korea. However, Takaichi appears to be avoiding deployment by maintaining deliberate ambiguity in a situation where she could be forced to bear significant risks.

“Despite being a hard-line conservative, Takaichi invoked the constitutional structure she has long sought to revise, and used it as a shield to take a cautious position on troop deployment,” Lee said.

“To ease pressure from the U.S., I personally think it is important for Korea to adopt at least a similar stance to Japan. The appropriate approach would be to watch how Trump continues to pressure Japan and make a decision afterward. If Japan had taken a stronger position, we might have had to raise our level in response, but since it is exercising restraint, it would be premature for us to take the lead.”

In contrast, Yang Uk, a research fellow at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies and adjunct professor at Hannam University’s Graduate School of National Defense Strategy, called for a more proactive approach from Seoul.

“I believe Korea should demonstrate clearer goodwill toward the U.S.,” Yang told The Korea Times Friday. “We need to show a forward-leaning posture, making it clear that Korea is working alongside the U.S. and is willing to provide support within our capabilities,” he said, arguing that Seoul should visibly back the alliance to avoid potential disadvantages.

Yang added that Korea could face economic pressure from Washington, including measures such as “Super 301,” an escalation of wide-ranging investigations and trade sanctions against other countries based on authority granted by Section 301, noting that the Trump administration tends to view security and economic issues as part of a broader package deal.