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 an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday was handcuffed and escorted by police to the Taipei Detention Center, after the Taipei District Court ordered that he be detained and held incommunicado for suspected corruption during his tenure as Taipei mayor. The ruling reversed an earlier decision by the same court on Monday last week that ordered Ko’s release without bail. That decision was appealed by prosecutors on Wednesday, leading the High Court to conclude that Ko had been “actively involved” in the alleged corruption and it ordered the district court to hold a second detention hearing. Video clips
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) arrest is a significant development. He could have become president or vice president on a shared TPP-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) ticket and could have stood again in 2028. If he is found guilty, there would be little chance of that, but what of his party? What about the third force in Taiwanese politics? What does this mean for the disenfranchised young people who he attracted, and what does it mean for his ambitious and ideologically fickle right-hand man, TPP caucus leader Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌)? Ko and Huang have been appealing to that
RSS