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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS