Korea, China and Japan

By Bernard Rowan

I suggest that in order to continue her forward trajectory as a nation and as a force contributing to global, humane civilization, Korea must cultivate China and Japan as partners in the transcendence of vulgar nationalism.

In the last quarter of the 20th century, Japan’s economic sun was at its zenith, with many Western and non-Western businesses striving to imitate and clone Japanese business practices and management style. Korea was one of the “tiger” economies, moving to implement economic and financial reforms after the IMF crisis. By the end of the century, China was a phoenix rising from the ash heap of doctrinaire communism to embrace market mechanisms and jumpstart what may one day become the most powerful economic civilization ever known.

However, today we can say that Japan’s high period is now quite over, with many fearing economic instability and uncertainty, symbolizing a fading or at least phased national economy. Korea now must consider issues of distribution, in order to explore how to share the fruits of economic success and address frustrated relative expectations within segments of its population. China, too, will soon need to turn its face toward issues of economic justice within, as double-digit growth is not sustainable and the reliance on cheap exports, cheap labor, and an undervalued yuan begins to meet its limit.

It is not surprising that in this era of global recession, slowdown, and uncertainty, there arises in each nation the tendency to “go native” around flash foreign policy issues. Long ago, Robert Dallek wrote of this tendency in American foreign policy in the book, "The American Style of Foreign Policy. ” In Japan, China, and Korea, national interest groups, national political parties, and national and local leaders use the confluence of economic stasis and geographic context to stake out one-sided positions on territorial disputes, most recently concerning the Dokdo/Liancourt Rocks, Senkaku Islands/Diaoyudao Islands/Diaoyutai Islands, and Ieodo/Socotra Rocks.

Korea has known the necessity to work against mere obeisance to naked national interest for some time. History ingrains images of the abuses of power committed by Japan upon Korea or the more recent false Northeast Project of China to rationalize its own national culture by ignoring the Korean people of China and the Korean peoples who formed significant stretches of Manchurian history (The Korea Times, Aug. 6, 2012). Nonetheless, Koreans should consider carefully the following argument: at the end of the day, the path of harmony, peace, and prosperity for the Korean nation is joined to those of Japan and China as partners.

Why should Korea flirt with or court the practice of polarization and escalation of words wars in this context? National pride, the ethical conclusions of historical investigation, or the memory of past abuses? Of course, Korea can pursue this route. America has done so in many cases. Korea has every right to do so.

But there is a better way. The logic of advanced nations begs the transcendence of traditional realism or typical nationalist self-understandings. The history of Korea has included a syncretism in philosophical and political understandings that entails working with and between other powers ― not insisting on fealty to uniform, univocal nationalism at all costs.

Korea’s continued advancement should postulate a new paradigm that forms an antithesis to crude expressions of nationalism. It should propose that nations with historical claims to disputed territories such as Dokdo or Ieodo work together to develop the resources surrounding them. Charting international cooperation enterprises and regimes between what otherwise are called “countries in dispute” is a much needed shift in international behavior. For Korea to urge that Japan and China join in transcending defensive nationalisms of the moment would evince her power as a force for global cooperation and mutual self-interest. Likewise, to form an international research project with China and Japan (and Russia and Mongolia) to create products of scholarship that tell the real stories of Manchuria would evince the path to international understanding of truth in history. History should not be written by the presumptively victorious alone or unto themselves.

In your history, people of Korea look to the thread of harmony that describes your country’s co-existence with other neighboring nations. It is this thread, with its broader fundament in political and ethical openness, which constitutes one of Korea’s greatest strengths as a people and nation. And while this openness should become the sine qua non of humane interaction in the future, it is a cultural treasure that you already have in my opinion. Use it now and for the good of Korea’s advancement in this century and beyond. And in doing so, you will continue to aid the world and other nations in the positive development of international relations.

Bernard Rowan is director of assessment and program quality, professor of political science and coordinator of international studies at Chicago State University, where he has taught for 19 years.