US diplomats like to portray their nation’s allies in glowing terms. So the world should take note when they do not — such as when US Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman, at a recent conference in Washington on Asian security, publicly scolded South Korea for its seemingly endless vilification of Japan. According to Sherman, South Korea’s stance — reflected in its demand that Japan apologize, once again, for forcing Korean women to provide sexual services to the Imperial Army during World War II — has produced “paralysis, not progress.”
However, Sherman’s criticism could also be leveled against Japan. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has rarely missed an opportunity to provoke Japan’s Korean critics, whether by visiting Tokyo’s Yasukuni Shrine, where the “souls” of 14 “Class A” war criminals are interred, along with 30,304 Taiwanese killed in World War II, or embracing revisionist critiques of previous official apologies for Japanese aggression.
Instead of working together to help their US ally confront the challenges posed by a rising China and the North Korean nuclear threat, South Korea and Japan have allowed their rancor to stymie effective action. This seemingly endless tension has been frustrating — and worrying — US leaders for years, especially as it has undermined the US’ strategic “pivot” toward Asia.
Illustration: Yusha
Since US President Barack Obama announced the pivot five years ago, the US has been attempting to bolster its forces and alliances in Asia, thereby reinforcing its strategic role in a region that China is increasingly attempting to dominate. However, the relentless sniping by its two most important Asian allies has blocked the kind of concrete cooperation needed to help it achieve its main goals, including ensuring a durable, long-term military presence in the region.
Intelligence sharing is a case in point. In December last year, US officials, seeking to better their understanding of North Korea’s missile and nuclear programs — and enable commanders to react swiftly if potential threats materialize — announced a new information-sharing agreement with South Korea and Japan. However, the deal could be a script for a situation comedy: Japan and South Korea refuse to provide intelligence data to each other, leaving the US to play the middleman.
The US has accentuated the positive, calling the agreement an important step forward. However, although it does represent progress from 2012, when popular opposition in South Korea to the idea of military cooperation with Japan caused a similar agreement to collapse, the latest effort is inefficient, at best.
China has been eager to capitalize on the animosity between Japan and South Korea to undermine the US’ security interests in Asia. During a visit to South Korea in July last year, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) highlighted not only the two nation’s deepening economic relationship, but also their shared views regarding Japan’s wartime past. Other Chinese officials have picked up the theme, dropping hints that China’s 70th anniversary celebration of the end of World War II could exclude Japan — unless, that is, Japan is more contrite about its historic transgressions.
It is time for the US to tell its Asian allies to get over it. As the underwriter of both Japan’s and South Korea’s national defense, the US simply cannot allow their historical animosities to impede action to address urgent threats in this critical region.
The timing could not be better, as rising security fears are altering public perceptions. Recent opinion polls suggest that at least half of all South Koreans are worried enough about regional tensions to support closer military ties with Japan.
Indeed, the security risks facing Asia are only growing — exemplified in China’s move from military expansion to blatant assertiveness. Most notably, in the South and East China Seas, China has been staking its claim to disputed island territories, deploying advanced military hardware and aggressively patrolling an expanded security zone. Meanwhile, leaks from Chinese think tanks have suggested that if the North Korean regime collapses, China could well send troops to preserve the country’s stability.
Asia’s new security landscape places a premium on seamless cooperation among US allies — a prospect that the sustained bickering between South Korea and Japan calls into question. It could even be said that their longstanding dispute makes the US’ Asian alliance system worth less than the sum of its parts.
Repairing relations between South Korean and Japan could not be more urgent. Even with good will on both sides, it will take time to build a strong defense partnership. Effective military cooperation requires personal ties that take years to build, and, aside from some joint naval and air exercises, the two countries have little experience working together. Boosting technical interoperability also will take considerable time, though both countries maintain sophisticated defense forces with great potential to be linked together.
Effective cooperation will also require a broader scope for joint action — an imperative that is not reflected in the recent intelligence-sharing agreement. The risks to stability in Northeast Asia extend well beyond North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile programs, and a joint intelligence agenda should address them. How will the allies respond to the threat of a conventional military attack by — or instability in — North Korea? What if the North Korean regime collapses, and China does intervene militarily?
After spending the past six decades defending South Korea and Japan, the US has every reason — and plenty of leverage — to demand that its two long-time allies enhance their military cooperation. Simply focusing on the positive — the US’ classic approach to alliance diplomacy — is no longer enough.
Whatever their historical disagreements, South Korea and Japan both face serious risks in their immediate neighborhood. It is up to the US to ensure that they work together to protect themselves — and ensure long-term stability throughout Asia.
Kent Harrington, a former senior CIA analyst, was national intelligence officer for East Asia, chief of station in Asia, and served as the CIA’s director of public affairs.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The
RSS