Entry details

Curzon
Author

Curzon

Date

June 20th, 2005

Tags

, , ,

Comments

9 Comments so far.
Add yours.

The Face of Diplomatic War

I always wondered what Roh’s long-promised diplomatic war would look like. Now, the wait is over. My translation of his key quotes from the recent Roh-Koizumi summit from this Mainichi Shinbun article are below.

“When we [Koreans] hear Koizumi’s explanation, it sounds as if he is justifying the past. This is just the objective reality… We hear reports that LDP supports the textbook because they are trying to boost their popularity with their core supporters. “

And just in case you had any hope for that joint history project between Japanese and Korean historians:

“No matter how many pictures are taken of Koizumi and myself, no matter how many joint talks we hold, the issue of recognizing history remains a fundamental problem that will not disappear, which means that mutual mistrust between our two nations will also not disappear.”

What was that about doing things for the sole purpose of boosting popularity with core supporters? Roh needs to go and enroll in International Relations 101 and brush up on his manners. To quote this editorial in the Korea Times:

In bilateral diplomacy, one country cannot always push through its demands in exclusion of the other’s position. Korea has said enough about what it sees as Japan’s historical provocations. Sometimes, it is better to control voices and manage the conflicts in a more mature way, leaving the judgment to an objective international community.

Hell yeah.

Three cheers for 2005, the year of Japan-Korea Friendship! President Roh, I knew you wouldn’t let us down.

NOTE: Also reported in the blogosphere at Plunge.

ALSO: The solution to this bilateral mess? To quote the Marmot’s employer: only time will heal the rift…

Comments to this entry

Plunge
June 20, 2005
5:07 pm
Yeah, a completely worthless meeting. Japan and Korea should wait for new leaders then try again.
Kenneth
June 20, 2005
5:57 pm
At times like these I recall the old Roman Maxim: Divide and conquer. Quite simply if there is a baseline of antagonism between all of America's allies they are unlikely to unite and form a bloc or a potential counterweight to American power, while still doing their jobs as allies. But, that's just me.
Kushibo
June 20, 2005
10:52 pm
I see your point, Kenneth, but in the case of Japan and Korea, both of whom know (when reasoning things through) that their own true security has been and will be based on alliance with a democratic United States, having these two be friends with each other strengthens the alliance with the US rather than weakens it.

More to the point: if two or more successive leftist regimes come to pass in Korea, while at the same time there are right-wing regimes such as Koizumi's (i.e., those that blatantly thumb their nose at the feelings of the once-conquered and brutalized), South Korea may actually break off from the alliance.

This would be a case of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, but for leftist students who either didn't go to college to learn about history and diplomatic relations, or mostly read Karl Marx and Bruce Cumings, this would be what they think is the proper course.

Moderates and conservatives and pragmatic leftists in Korea, moderates, liberals, and pragmatic rightists in Japan, and the United States, need to tread lightly right now to preserve this alliance and avoid a real shitstorm later on.
Plunge
June 21, 2005
12:40 am
Exactly right. It's a time for everyone to take a deep breath and step back from the situation for a while.
Kushibo
June 21, 2005
12:49 am
I had meant to say: This would be a case of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, but for leftist politicians who either didn't go to college to learn about history and diplomatic relations, or mostly read Karl Marx and Bruce Cumings, this would be what they think is the proper course.
Curzon
June 21, 2005
1:27 am
Great comments all.

In Japan, the number 1 choice for Koizumi's successor (when he steps down next year) is Shinzo Abe. I love Abe. He's fluent in English, a close buddy of Cheney, and probably the only possible PM who would be better for the Japan-US alliance than Koizumi. "From today's New York Times:":http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/20/international/asia/20seoul.html

"If Koizumi's successor will be more flexible, then we may have better cooperation between Japan, China and Korea," said Kim Woo Sang, a political scientist at Yonsei University here. "But the future leadership may be even less flexible. There are people like Shinzo Abe, who may become prime minister. He will be even tougher."


So there's the problem with Japan. What about in Korea? Would a GNP president really be that different? Roh certainly seems to be in a far more precarious position than Koizumi, but I see no evidence that another party or leader in Korea would be that much different.

The evidence? 50% of Japanese oppose Koizumi's official Yasukuni visits, which would give a more moderate Japanese PM the political support to soften his stance. But 80%+ of Koreans think Japan should shut up about Takeshima/Dokto, the history textbook, and have a generally crappy view about Japan in general. And then there's always "this education for the young.":http://aog.2y.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=1558
Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace
June 21, 2005
1:54 am
If the protagonists wont stand back and take several deep breaths, it becomes even more urgent for the US to radically reevaluate its policy of troops in South Korea. (i.e. withdraw them) But would that encourage the Japanese to demand they be withdrawn from Okinawa too? Would that be a sensible thing to do?
Simon World
June 21, 2005
2:27 am
Daily linklets 21st June

The I got to Manila airport 2 hours early edition: Harry cracks me up. How and why Wanchai's sex trade remains strong. Hong Kong's property addiciton and the lies told in its name. ESWN discusses income inequality in China. He echoes my point: The tr...
Kushibo
June 21, 2005
2:50 am
Curzon asked whether a right-wing ROK president would be any better...

Well, Roh's problem is not just his party but also his utter lack of common sense about foreign relations. It's possible for a right-leaning Hannara Party or left-leaning Uri Party leader to express dismay about Yasukuni visits or Tokto without resorting to "diplomatic war."

Roh Moohyun trashed the efforts of his predecessor, the left-leaning but often pragmatic Kim Daejung, who tried to put historical differences behind Seoul and Tokyo.

As for those posters, after several discussions with a number of people, I'm beginning to realize a lot of people find it quite overboard and that it stinks of the extreme left-wing, once outlawed Chonkyojo's handiwork.