Evaluation of the Korea-U.S.-Japan Summit: Japan's View

Yanghyun Cho

Professor at Korea National Diplomatic Academy

joyhis@mofa.go.kr​

President Yoon, President Biden, and Prime Minister Kishida held a talk in Camp David, which remarks as a historic event in three senses.

First, the holding of this exclusive trilateral talk means the actual beginning of cooperation between Korea, the U.S., and Japan. Under the agreement, if three countries hold ministerial-level meetings regarding diplomacy, military, industry, and security more than once a year, a strong consultative body responsible for 32% of the global economy will be created. The background of the United States' active institutionalization of multi-layered and comprehensive cooperation between the three countries is its intention to maintain the driving force and continuity of cooperation regardless of the regime change of each country.

Second, strengthening Korea-U.S.-Japan cooperation will contribute to the stabilization of Korea-Japan relations, which is a "weak link" in the trilateral relationship. The Korea-Japan history conflict has puzzled the U.S., the manager of the "Hub & Spoke" alliance. President Obama's role at the 2014 Hague Nuclear Summit was to mediate the Japanese Military Sexual Slavery issue between Korea and Japan. This year March, President Yoon made a breakthrough in improving Korea-Japan relations through the decision of the past issue, and President Biden was able to use it as a trigger to hold a Washington meeting. China's attempt to interrupt the alliance through hostility, economic incentives, and threats between Korea and Japan has become difficult.

Third, Korea-U.S.-Japan cooperation is a key mechanism of the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific multilateral solidarity, which is likely to surpass Quad or AUKUS, which has recently shown limitations in policy cooperation. The three countries agreed to jointly respond to North Korea's nuclear, missile, and human rights issues as well as security and humanitarian threats in the Indo-Pacific region and strengthen cooperation in economic security areas such as supply chains and emerging technologies. As a result, cooperation between South Korea, the U.S., and Japan has evolved into a consultative body that jointly responds to challenges, provocations, and threats from the Indo-Pacific beyond the Korean Peninsula. If the national strategies of the three countries are aligned through the Indo-Pacific, the U.S. can have an advantage in strategic competition with China. In the mid-long term, the realization of Korea-U.S.-Japan cooperation can be a historical event that changes the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region.

There is a view about the three country's agreement on regularized military drills as the emergence of a "military alliance" or "mini NATO." It is common for alliances, in a form of collective defense, to include an "automatic intervention" clause, whether bilateral or multilateral. According to the summit's performance report, the agreement between the three countries on security cooperation is in the category of "commitment" rather than "duty" under international or domestic law. In addition, what the three countries promised was rapid consultation on challenges or threats, not automatic intervention. Unlike the United States, Korea and Japan are cautious about a "trilateral alliance." The trilateral military exercise is to support the Korea-U.S. Alliance, and Japan-U.S. Alliance, not replacing it.

The institutionalization of Korea-U.S.-Japan cooperation is the result of the strong will of the United States. As the trilateral summit was held in Washington on an independent schedule, the Japanese government wanted to take time to review it. However, the Biden administration sought to institutionalize Korea-U.S.-Japan cooperation when there were leaders from Korea and Japan, who were friendly to the United States and rushed to hold a trilateral summit as the Korea-Japan history issue made its progress. South Korea and the U.S. are scheduled to hold elections next year, and Japan is also likely to dissolve the House of Representatives, which could affect cooperation between South Korea, the U.S., and Japan.

As South Korea has been cautious about including expressions in the summit's joint statement that could stimulate China, Japan expects to strengthen cooperation with South Korea, and the U.S. on policy toward China in the future. It is believed that the restoration of the expression "North Korea's denuclearization" instead of "denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula" is the result of the Yoon administration's strong policy against North Korea. Japan also considers the expansion of cooperation between South Korea, the U.S., and Japan beyond North Korea to the Indo-Pacific region for humanitarian cooperation as a result of the meeting. Until now, three countries have mainly discussed issues on the Korean Peninsula. With Russia's recent invasion of Ukraine, the importance of its Indo-Pacific and European allies has increased, and it is also necessary to discuss strengthening supply chains and maritime security in preparation for strategic competition with China.

At the same time, there is a strong voice in Japanese society that the U.S.-China's excessive confrontation should be avoided in consideration of economic relations with China and dialogue to ease tensions. As an extension, some argue that Korea and Japan should cooperate to strengthen communication between Korea, China, and Japan, as Korea too, has the same interests as Japan in that they want to avoid conflict with China.

Japan believes that building strategic cooperation with South Korea is advantageous for its security, but it is presumed to be less important compared to U.S., Australian, and Japanese cooperation due to historical issues and different strategic environments. In his Liberation Day speech, President Yoon emphasized the importance of a U.N. military base in Japan, but many Japanese people are concerned about Japan's involvement in the event of an emergency on the Korean Peninsula and are cautious about automatic intervention. At the Korea-Japan summit in May, President Yoon noted he would not exclude Japan's participation in the Nuclear Consultative Group (NCG) under discussion between South Korea and the U.S. However, Japanese society's response to this was closer to disconcerting than welcome. Unlike South Korea, which is free to discuss nuclear armament, Japan, a country that has been struck by nuclear weapons, was a taboo about nuclear armament. While promoting a motto "world without nuclear weapons", Japan relies on its security for extended deterrence provided by the U.S. In the case of nuclear sharing, sensitive reactions are amid in Japan, and it is not easy to proceed with cooperation at the same level as Korea and the U.S.

In order to sustain Korea-U.S.-Japan cooperation, stable management of Korea-Japan relations is most important. Since the normalization of diplomatic relations, Korea-Japan relations have repeatedly been "hot and cold" status, and there is still a spark due to historical issues. Japan's response to South Korea's demand to fill "half a cup" is yet to start. Nevertheless, the current approach of 'facing the past' and 'future cooperation' should be maintained. It is worth remembering that the basic purpose of the Daejung Kim-Obuchi Joint Declaration is that if Korea and Japan expand future cooperation, reconciliation of the past will be easier. Ahead of 2025, the 70th anniversary of the normalization of diplomatic relations between Korea and Japan, a new future vision that upgraded the joint declaration should be considered. Hence, efforts to alleviate excessive U.S.-China conflict with trilateral cooperation with Korea, Japan, and China are also important​.