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
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS