proposal

The Yoon Suk-yeol Administration and the ROK-Japan Relations:
How the Yoon Administration Addresses the History Problem?

CHOI, Eunmi

1. The inauguration of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration and shifts in the ROK-Japan relations.

The inauguration of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration in May 2022 marked a new transition in the ROK-Japan relations. The bilateral ties had been ever-worsening since; South Korean Supreme Court's decision on the wartime forced labor; 2018 disputes over Korea's radar lock-on and low-altitude flight of Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF); Korea's anti-Japanese sentiment, boycotting trip to Japan and Japanese products in response to Japan's export control against South Korea in 2019; and disintegration of the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA). Together with the outbreak of COVID-19, disconnecting people-to-people exchanges, there seemed to be no exit from the quandary.

In the meantime, there were shifts from Abe to Suga and Suga to Kishida Cabinet, while in South Korea, President Moon Jae-in was succeeded by President Yoon Suk-yeol, marking a fresh start in bilateral relations. As president-elect, Yoon Suk-yeol stressed the significance of the ROK-Japan relations1 and so the Presidential Transition Committee took active steps by sending "Korea-Japan Policy Consultative Delegation" to Japan (April 24-28, 2022). Prime Minister Kishida met with the delegation members and raised expectations for working towards forward looking relations by noting that "There is no time to waste to improve ties between Japan and South Korea."2 About a year later, on March 6, 2023, there was an exponential growth in mutual exchanges when the South Korean government proposed a resolution to the South Korean Supreme Court's decision on the forced labor issue, which had been the most pending issue between the two countries since 2018. What made the Yoon administration to improve the relationship in such a swift manner?

2. Why Now?

There was a widespread repercussion across South Korea when the South Korean government announced measures to resolve the associated legal problems derived from the Supreme Court's October 2018 ruling on the forced labor issue. It was hard for Korean public to accept third-party reimbursement in which the Korean "Foundation for Victims of Forced Mobilization by Imperial Japan" compensate3 on behalf of the complicit Japanese companies. The plan was particularly met with strong backlash when President Yoon announced to compensate without claiming any payment from the Japanese companies. The South Korean government taking the lead on behalf of the defendants, without any apologies or compensation from the companies, left a widespread sentiment of humiliation. The fact that 4 out of 15 plaintiffs who had received final judgments refused to accept the government's proposal raised criticism that the South Korean government ignored the victims' voices. Nevertheless, the government has maintained the proposal up until now. What made the South Korean government hastily resolve the forced labor issue? Wait, was it even hasty?

Background of the proposal: Japan's Significance to South Korea

The reasons why the Yoon administration prioritized the framework for a resolution of the forced labor issue over other diplomatic matters include: 1) the growing need to improve the ROK-Japan relations for trilateral relations with the U.S.; 2) that the resolution of this issue harmonizes with the Yoon administration's foreign policy direction; 3) damages caused by the deterioration of the bilateral relationship; and 4) the urgency to resolve the issue.

First, amidst growing nuclear threat from North Korea, it was inevitable to revamp the ROK-Japan relations to advance trilateral relations with the United States. At the time of inauguration of the Yoon administration, the regional instability was intensified with North Korea's nuclear threats and growing anxiety within the Korean Peninsula. North Korea's missile tests sharply increased: twice in 2020, eight in 2021, and over 60 in 2022. Pyongyang officially admitted to possessing nuclear weapons at the Supreme People's Assembly, adopting a decree that outlines the principles for their use. While there was an urgent need to advance trilateral cooperation to address North Korea problems, the chronic instability of the ROK-Japan relations had been a hindrance. It was quintessential to restore the bilateral relations to consolidate trilateral partnerships with the U.S. and address the North Korean nuclear threats.

Moreover, we should note the foreign policy direction of the Yoon administration amid the U.S.-China confrontation and the increasing fluidity of the global order. In the midst of the intensifying the U.S.-China rivalry, South Korea has often stood at a diplomatic crossroads, facing situations where 'strategic ambiguity' was on the threshold. Consequently, South Korea was inevitably concerned of its diplomatic position. Based on common values and norms, the Yoon administration's foreign policy and security vision aim to expand South Korea's role in the international community as a global pivotal state that contributes to freedom, peace, and prosperity. To realize this goal, South Korea had to promote diplomatic activities to strengthen its alignment with friendly countries and allies that share values of freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. South Korean foreign policy traditionally focused on North Korea and Northeast Asia, emphasizing the relations with the four neighboring powers: the United States, Japan, China, and Russia. Moving forward, South Korea should broaden its perspective to include Indo-Pacific region, expand its outreach, and emphasize its role in the international community by aligning and maintaining stable relations with countries that share the same values. From this viewpoint, the Yoon administration's foreign policy is ‘strategic clarity' between the U.S. and China. In this context, refining bilateral relations with Japan that shares the same values of freedom, democracy, and human rights was crucial. Conflicts with Japan have posed many challenges for South Korea in determining its foreign policy direction, implementing policy measures, and developing multilateral cooperation such as ROK-U.S.-Japan, and ROK-Japan-China partnerships. It is not an exaggeration to say that the ROK-Japan conflict has been the cause of multiple issues.

In addition, the resolution of the forced labor issue aimed to mitigate practical damage caused by the deterioration of bilateral relations. Since 2019, the abrupt deterioration of bilateral relations has led to a decline in people-to-people exchanges, including boycotts of Japanese products and trips to Japan, as well as massive interruptions in intergovernmental, regional, and scholarly exchanges. Businesses related to travel and tourism were directly impacted, and other industries also suffered from direct and indirect damages, causing psychological and material harm to the people of both countries. The increasing instability and unpredictability of the ROK-Japan relations have resulted in a regression in business exchanges and investment. As the conflict resulted in practical damage, there was widespread consensus that further harm is no longer tolerable.

Last but not least, there was an urgency to address the forced labor issue. The South Korean Supreme Court's ruling on the forced labor issue has received attention in 2018 as a pending issue between the two countries, but the litigation on the issue dates back to the 1990s. Indeed, it is taking more than four years since the 2018 Supreme Court's ruling and took more than 30 years since the 1990s when the litigation started. With the lapse of time, many of the victims died and their resentment was passed on to their families and offsprings. After decades of legal strife, the victims won their cases, but it is unlikely that they will receive compensation from the defendant Japanese companies. The surviving victims and their families are now elderly and running out of time. Thus, the nature of the forced labor issue that required the quickest measures prompted the South Korean government to propose the resolution. In this sense, it would not be accurate to say that the South Korean government was hasty in seeking for a resolution.

3. What has changed? - from restoration and resumption to new cooperation

The ROK-Japan relations have undergone major changes over the past year, beginning with President Yoon Suk-yeol's visit to Japan, following the South Korean government's proposed resolution to the forced labor issue. In particular, there was a resumption of shuttle diplomacy between the two leaders (President Yoon's visit to Japan in March 2023 and Prime Minister Kishida's visit to South Korea in May 2023). Japan lifted export control on South Korea, and the two countries put each other back on their "white list" of trusted trading partners. Furthermore, high-level intergovernmental meetings on economy, culture, finance, and defense, which had long been in hiatus, were revived. A new economic security dialogue has commenced, with both countries affirming their cooperation and communication on global challenges such as health, supply chains, and climate change as part of their Indo-Pacific strategies. In August 2023, ROK, the United States, and Japan held their first trilateral meeting, adopting three documents―"The Spirit of Camp David," "Camp David Principles," and "Commitment to Consult among Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States." As a result, the leaders of South Korea and Japan had seven talks in 2023 through various multilateral conferences, maintaining momentum to further develop bilateral relations.

4. How is the Yoon administration tackling the history problem? – from negligence to resolution

Despite numerous improvements in ROK-Japan relations over the past year, unresolved questions still loom large. What should be done to the forced labor victims (or their families) who do not accept the proposed resolution? What happens if the "Foundation for Victims of Forced Mobilization by Imperial Japan" runs short of funds? More fundamentally, how should the history problem be addressed? How about the apologies and remorse that the victims have demanded for decades?

Answers can be inferred from President Yoon's responses to questions about ROK-Japan relations at the "Yoon Administration's Two-Year National Report and Press Conference" on May 9, 2024. President Yoon stated, "We must consider future of our nations and what we should do for future generations … Various pending issues or past history could pose challenges, but with a clear goal in mind, we should maintain perseverance in pursuing our objectives."4 After the Press Conference, a flood of criticism followed: "Is it the past history problems that obstruct bilateral relations?" "Why should the victim country have to endure?" "What has Japan, the perpetrator country, done in the past year or so while South Korea, the victim country, has been patient?"

It is not that Japan did not make efforts to improve the bilateral relations. However, from South Korean viewpoint, (1) the defendant Japanese companies took no action while the South Korean government proposed a resolution the issue, (2) the Fukushima contaminated water (also known as ‘(Fukushima Daiichi) ALPS treated water') has been released into the sea regardless of increasing concerns, (3) the right-wing slant in Japanese history textbooks has become more evident, and (4) Japan still claims Dokdo (Japan call it ‘Takeshima') as its own territory. On top of these, the recent ‘Line Yahoo incident' heightened perception that Japan attempts to snatch one of South Korea's global companies. The "half empty cup"5 emphasized by the South Korean government in proposing the resolution to the forced labor issue remains unfilled by Japan. Notwithstanding, the South Korean government is calling for perseverance to its public.

Despite negative public opinion, the Yoon administration's Japan policy aimed to accept Japan as a partner and to promote cooperation within a bilateral framework. The bilateral conflicts harm national interests of both countries, making restoration of the ROK-Japan relations indispensable. In this process, the approach involved pursuing all feasible actions under the President's authority while addressing unavoidable historical disputes. The traditional ‘two-track approach' of separating history problem from future-oriented cooperation amounted to little more than rhetoric. It was a lesson from South Korea's past Japan policy and the outcome of bilateral relations that demonstrated the impracticality of such an approach.

Given the decades-long dispute between the two countries over history and their divergent historical perspectives, a fundamental resolution of the historical issue is anything but possible in the short time. In South Korea's political system under the single-term presidency, the actions a President can take during their five-year term are limited. Therefore, the Yoon administration focused on ‘resolving the issue' instead of ‘neglecting the conflict.' In other words, the Yoon administration was to address current issues such as the forced labor issue sparked by the Supreme Court's ruling,6 while managing longstanding disputes such as those concerning Japanese history textbooks. Regarding apologies and remorse from Japan, South Korea expects these not as a demand or request from Korea, but as a result of Japan's thoughtful self-reflection.

5. Remaining issues and future challenges

The direction of the Yoon administration's Japan policy can be viewed as a realistic approach, given the fundamental difficulties of the historical issues and the time available to the President. However, this approach is seen as myopic, as it overlooks the exploration of the root causes of the historical conflicts, fails to bridge perception gaps, and lacks a concrete action plan for seeking self-reflective apologies from Japan. Above all, the Yoon administration pursued foreign policy shifts toward Japan without national consensus, which risks reigniting conflicts with Japan should the government lose momentum.

Thanks to the adamant determination of leaders and governments of two countries many partnerships have been restored for the past year, promoting new cooperation and ultimate rehabilitation of bilateral relations. However, many problems remain unresolved. Some victims of the forced labor issue oppose the South Korean government's resolution and some victims of wartime sexual slavery refuse the 2015 agreement reached between the two governments. More importantly, majority of South Koreans do not think that these issues have been resolved. Discharging contaminated (‘ALPS treated') water from the nuclear plant in Fukushima is a potential conflict, while the registration of Sado mine to UNESCO and the continental shelf agreement are upcoming conflicts. Issues with Japanese history textbook and Dokdo (‘Fukushima') are ongoing sources of conflict. In this sense, the ROK-Japan relations continue to be unstable. The ‘Line-Yahoo incident' well exemplifies sensitivity, instability, and volatility inherent in ROK-Japan relations. In the end, more efforts are needed than ever.

It is important to note, however, that the goodwill and intimacy with growing mutual exchanges are positive elements supporting bilateral relations. Those elements serve as a buffer that eases impact of those tensions and work as facilitators that expedite recovery amid the current instability. Although it is hard to be optimistic about the future of the ROK-Japan relations, it is of utmost importance for both countries to boost efforts to maintain the current momentum of progress.

(The Asan Institute for Policy Studies, Research Fellow)

proposal
current topics
letter