Latest news with #JapanInstituteofInternationalAffairs
Korea Herald
3 days ago
- Politics
- Korea Herald
Will Seoul's leadership change disrupt warming ties with Tokyo?
Stability ahead — but mutual public trust still missing ingredient of Korea–Japan relations Bilateral relations between South Korea and Japan are unlikely to face a major upheaval after South Korea's new government is swiftly inaugurated next week, former vice foreign ministers from the two countries said Thursday, citing deeper public understanding and recognition of the ties' importance by the top two presidential contenders. Still, both emphasized that rebuilding public trust is essential for forging lasting, future-oriented relations at a time when strategic cooperation — from countering North Korean threats to addressing routing regional challenges — has never been more vital. Kenichiro Sasae, president of the Japan Institute of International Affairs and former Japanese vice foreign minister, offered an optimistic outlook for Seoul-Tokyo relations, ahead of South Korea's early presidential election on June 3. The focal point is on whether the incoming government will carry the baton forward in improving Seoul-Tokyo ties, as the two countries mark the 60th anniversary of normalized diplomatic relations this year. The liberal Democratic Party of Korea's presidential candidate, Rep. Lee Jae-myung, remains the front-runner and is widely expected to win. The outgoing administration of disgraced former President Yoon Suk Yeol of the conservative People Power Party had placed great emphasis on mending fences with Tokyo. 'Of course, if leadership changes, the details of the policy could change as well. But on that basis, I think what's most important is that, even if there is political change or instability, there should be a strong sense of mutual understanding and interaction between the peoples of both countries,' Sasae said in remarks in Japanese during a session at the Jeju Forum on Jeju Island. 'Over the last five, 10, even 20 years, I think there has been significant progress in this area,' he added, speaking at a session reflecting on the past and exploring visions for future cooperation between Seoul and Tokyo as the two countries mark the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations. People, not politics, lead ties Sasae highlighted active cultural exchanges — including pop culture and television dramas — as well as increasing people-to-people exchanges between the two countries as positive factors for bilateral ties. The number of travelers between South Korea and Japan surpassed 12 million in 2024 — including 3.22 million Japanese visitors to Korea and 8.82 million Korean visitors to Japan — the highest figure ever recorded, according to the Korea Tourism Organization and the Japan National Tourism Organization. 'The reason I bring this up is because, especially among younger generations, I feel there's a growing optimism that even if the political climate changes, the way Japanese and Korean people feel about each other won't be so easily swayed,' Sasae said. 'There are more and more people whose attitudes aren't dictated by shifts in government or politics.' Sasae also argued that Seoul and Tokyo should seek to strike the right balance between historical disputes stemming from Japan's colonial occupation of the Korean Peninsula from 1910 to 1945 and pending issues that require bilateral cooperation. 'I hope Korean politics will respond to this reality, and at the same time, as I mentioned earlier, I hope Japanese people will try to better understand the feelings and memories that are central to Koreans," Sasae said. 'We must continue to hold these feelings deeply in our hearts as we move forward and share them. It's about striking a balance between these two aspects.' Consistency expected, risks still lurk On the prospects for bilateral ties, Shin Kak-soo, deputy chair of the Seoul-based NEAR Foundation and a former vice foreign minister, said, 'Even if there is a change of government in South Korea, I don't think there's a high likelihood of major turbulence in Korea-Japan relations.' Shin noted that the People Power Party's candidate, Kim Moon-soo, emphasizes continuity, while Lee Jae-myung stresses pragmatic diplomacy. 'So I believe there will be a certain degree of consistency maintained,' Shin said. Yet Shin pointed out that disparities between Seoul and Tokyo in their actions on North Korea- and China-related issues — despite similar rhetoric — could pose a risk of turbulence in bilateral ties. 'What does concern me, however, is that there are significant differences between the two sides when it comes to responding to US-China tensions, addressing North Korea's nuclear threat and dealing with China's assertive diplomatic and security policies,' Shin said. "That's why I can't be entirely optimistic about Korea-Japan relations going forward. These are potential risk factors. In this regard, it's all the more necessary for Korea and Japan to engage in deeper strategic dialogue and communication." Shin said Seoul-Tokyo ties should not remain at the level of abstract cooperation. 'To minimize strategic uncertainty and volatility in Northeast Asia, East Asia and the Indo-Pacific, there is no alternative but for Korea and Japan to pursue strategic cooperation,' he said — a view echoed by Sasae. On historical disputes, Shin assessed, 'most of the major fires have been put out,' but said both sides 'should work together to put out remaining sparks,' given the possibility that lingering embers could flare up again. Public trust above new declarations Asked about the need for a new joint declaration to mark the 60th anniversary of diplomatic ties — following the historic 2008 declaration on building a new, future-oriented partnership — both agreed that what matters most is not another document, but restoring public trust. 'The most important thing, in my view, is restoring mutual trust between the people of Korea and Japan," Shin said. "Without greater understanding and restored trust, it will be extremely difficult for both countries, as they are both democracies." Echoing the sentiment, Sasae also underscored, 'the most important thing is to create an atmosphere where people feel, 'Yes, this is something we can achieve.'" "Unless there is trust between both sides, such cooperation is very difficult, no matter what's written on paper. That's why I think it is essential to make efforts to build up that trust first." dagyumji@
Yomiuri Shimbun
28-04-2025
- Business
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Former Ambassador to U.S.: Japan Must Prepare for Possible Post-Trump Reversal; Many Negotiation Issues Precede Trump
The Yomiuri Shimbun Japan Institute of International Affairs President Kenichiro Sasae speaks during an interview with The Yomiuri Shimbun on Thursday in Tokyo. Kenichiro Sasae, president of the Japan Institute of International Affairs, says Japan must keep hoisting the flag of multilateralism amid the current tariff turmoil and prepare a place for the United States if it decides to return to the established international order. The following is excerpted from an interview with Sasae conducted by Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer Kenta Kamimura. Many of the issues raised by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, such as non-tariff barriers on automobiles exported to Japan and the lack of openness of agricultural markets, are both old and new challenges between the two countries that precede the first Trump administration. The key issue in the current negotiations is not 'how to skillfully deflect America's demands.' Since the end of World War II, the United States has been at the center of the free trade system and the world order. Domestically, however, two competing views have always existed: an emphasis on free trade or an emphasis on employment. Depending on the administration, the balance of priorities can change. As the relative power of the United States since the 2000s has declined, the country has become less able to open its markets as generously as before. The Trump administration is operating with this in mind, and its strategic goal of revitalizing U.S. industry, particularly manufacturing, is clear. The trade imbalance between Japan and the United States in every field has been the subject of negotiations since the 1970s. Washington's basic philosophy has long been that 'the United States has fully opened its market, so Japan should do the same,' and Trump takes the same view. However, the second Trump administration has weaponized tariffs, using them not only for industrial protection but also to reduce the fiscal deficit. It is unclear whether the formula Japan has adopted based on past negotiations with the United States will be effective this time around, so it is necessary to take a strategic approach while keeping in mind the short-, medium-, and long-term implications. In the current negotiations, Japan's effort to resolve the automobile tariff issue first is correct. Just as Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has explained to Trump, it is also important for Japan to continue investing in the United States. Japan's stance of not taking an antagonistic approach toward Trump is also working in its favor. This is because the United States appears to want to achieve certain results with its ally Japan before dealing with China, which is the main target of its tariff measures. If proposals that are in line with Japan's national interests can be found, Japan should proceed with negotiations without hesitation. In the long term, it would be wise to keep in mind that a 'Trump-like approach' may persist even after his four-year term ends. This opportunity should be used to consider industrial reforms that Japan should have pursued on its own. Alongside Europe and Asia, Japan must continue to support multilateralism centered on the United Nations, as well as other global issues that would contribute to its national interests, even if the Trump administration turns its back on them. There may occur another reversal of opinion within the United States. It is Japan's role to prepare a seat for the United States should it decide to return to the established international order someday. Kenichiro Sasae Sasae is a graduate of the University of Tokyo's Faculty of Law. He joined the Foreign Ministry in 1974 and served in such roles as director general of the Asia and Oceania Bureau and vice minister. As ambassador to the United States from 2012 to 2018, he was a negotiator with the United States regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Sasae, 73, has been president of the Japan Institute of International Affairs since June 2018.
Japan Times
17-03-2025
- Politics
- Japan Times
Japan needs academic programs focused on territorial issues
Recently, while working on my upcoming academic article about the Senkaku Islands — specifically Japan's whole-of-government efforts in 1979 to survey and construct a heliport on Uotsuri Island — I realized that despite the government's attention to its territorial disputes with Russia, South Korea, China and Taiwan, Japan lacks a dedicated university or graduate program on territorial issues. This stands in contrast to Western countries, where such academic programs exist. Yes, there are both Japanese academics and foreign experts — including myself — in Japan who specialize in territorial disputes, whether involving this nation or other countries. Others focus on related aspects, such as international law or joint development. Some of these experts are affiliated with think tanks and institutes like the Japan Institute of International Affairs and the Sasakawa Peace Foundation in Tokyo, where their insights help inform both domestic and international audiences. However, there are no undergraduate or graduate programs that focus on territorial issues, and more specifically, cover aspects like history, security, international and maritime law, natural resources, marine life, economic development or diplomacy, among others. This should be both a surprise and a shame. It is surprising given Japan's situation. While many countries have border or territorial disputes with their neighbors — in fact, there are at least 150 active disputes worldwide — Japan faces issues with nearly all its neighbors, including Russia (the Northern Islands), South Korea (Takeshima) and both the People's Republic of China and Taiwan (the Senkaku Islands). In other words, the country is surrounded by territorial disputes and is a party to all of them. As such, it would benefit from an academic program allowing deeper examination of the problems and the exploration of international cases for comparative purposes. It is also a shame because the Japanese public in general is either unaware or indifferent to these disputes. In a recent Cabinet Office poll, for example, only 54% of those surveyed nationwide said they have a certain degree of knowledge about the Northern Territories issue. While this is better than the 35% who say they have heard of the dispute but know nothing about it, it's still a low number considering that Japan's territorial dispute with Russia over the Northern Islands is the nation's longest-running postwar issue. The program could possibly be named the Department (or Graduate School) of Territorial Disputes/Problems and be established within existing universities by bringing together current faculty from relevant fields, outside practitioners and scholars specializing in territorial disputes. It could take an interdisciplinary and international approach to the issue. Students, both undergraduate and graduate, especially those specializing in one of Japan's territorial disputes, would be expected to visit contested locations and the countries involved whenever possible, such as Russia, South Korea, China, or Taiwan. Ideally, they would also learn the languages of the parties to better understand debates and arguments in their original context. This would help them gain deeper insight into the other nation's stance. They would engage with local experts, activists and government officials, as well as those directly affected by a dispute, such as fishermen caught up in contentious maritime issues. Of course, understanding is not the same as acceptance. Unless a country's position was particularly weak, no country would want to refuse to engage such students eager to better understand the historic and contemporary stances of the parties in dispute or other factors. The program would, of course, accept international students as well to better enrich such discussions and dialogue. They could provide language assistance, much like their Japanese classmates could help them with reading Japanese language materials and adjusting to life in Japan. By sharing lessons from different countries and case studies, solutions could be found for current and future problems that arise. Currently, there are several international programs, such as those at Durham University and the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom, the University of Arizona in the United States, the University of Victoria in Canada, the University of Eastern Finland and the University of Geneva in Switzerland. However, these are primarily centers or research units within existing departments and some focus more on issues like migration that stem from territorial disputes rather than addressing territorial issues directly. A program in Japan, on the other hand, would be a first in Asia. Graduates of the program could pursue further academic study or careers in think tanks, foundations, governments or other international organizations. By Japan, a highly trusted global partner, taking the lead in establishing such a program, there should also be a positive public diplomacy effect. It would bring students from around the world together to examine territorial issues in a more objective and dispassionate manner. Furthermore, many graduates of the program would likely become future negotiators — and they may find themselves discussing issues and seeking solutions with their former classmates. This shared background could make it easier to reach resolutions. Obviously, the disputes are far more complex and difficult to resolve than described here, and therein lies why this program is so necessary. The urgency is heightened even more as tensions over territorial issues continue to rise. Robert D. Eldridge is a former political and public diplomacy adviser to the U.S. Marine Corps in Japan. He is also a recipient of the Ohira Masayoshi Foundation Award for his book, "The Origins of the U.S. Policy in the East China Sea Islands Dispute" (Routledge, 2014).
