top of page
Sejin Oh

Korea's Dilemma of the Past and Future Relationship with Japan


Yasuyuki Kiriake/Jiji Press


While this may sound impossible, Korea should choose both — past and future—to solve the dilemma they currently face.


In 2018, the South Korean Supreme Court ruled that several Japanese companies must compensate 15 Korean victims who were forced to work during the Japanese occupation from 1910 until Korea’s independence in 1945 with Japan’s defeat from the WWII.


A few months later, Japan removed South Korea from the ‘whitelist’ for preferential trading. In August 2019, Japan announced that it would impose export restrictions on its electronics sector, which major South Korean companies like Samsung and LG heavily rely on making semiconductor chips.


The Japanese government officially stated that the actions were taken due to the South Korean government not complying with export controls and regulations, and ignoring the Japanese government's request to hold export control talks for three years. However, many experts regarded Japan’s whitelist’ removal as a retaliation to the Supreme Court of South Korea’s decision about the 15 victims.


As a response, Seoul decided to end the country's intelligence-sharing pact because of the decision and removed Japan from the so-called Korean ‘whitelist’. Moreover, Korean consumers boycotted Japanese products such as beer, clothes, and cars.


The economic and political relationship between Japan and Korea was strained for the past few years until 2023 March, when South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol proposed a "third-party compensation" method for the victims. This proposed solution involves the South Korean government setting up a fund under the Ministry of the Interior and Safety to compensate the victims rather than Japanese companies compensating them directly. The Korean government would raise money for the fund through donations from Korean companies that benefited from the 1965 Korea-Japan Claims Agreement, such as POSCO. Under the agreement, the Japanese government actually granted $300 million under the name “IndependenceCongratulation” for settling “[the] problem concerning property, rights and interests of the two contracting parties and their nationals.”


Foreign Minister Park Jin announced that this new compensation method is the Yoon administration's determination to move towards a more future-oriented Korea-Japan relationship.


Following the announcement, 10 out of the 15 victims who were ruled to be compensated accepted the President's solution.


However, the Korean government also faced resentment from the remaining victims, as well as an immediate backlash from the public. Many viewed the solution as a way for the real perpetrators of the atrocities during the Japanese occupation to escape accountability. They criticized the government for protecting Japanese companies instead of the country's citizens.

For instance, a poll conducted by Gallup Korea found that 6 out of 10 Koreans oppose the "third-party compensation" method. Among the respondents, 59% opposed the third-party compensation plan because it did not include a sincere apology or direct compensation from Japan. On the other hand, only 35% of respondents supported the third-party payment plan for the sake of Korea-Japan relations and the national interest. The Yoon administration's approval rating also dropped in the following weeks.


Why did the Korean government make this decision despite domestic backlash?


The reason can be found in the term "future-oriented" used by the Foreign Minister in this announcement.


According to statistics from the Korea International Trade Association, Japan imports 5% of Korean exports, and Japanese products make up 9% of Korean imports. This makes Japan Korea's third-largest trading partner and especially a huge supplier of key materials for semiconductors.


In 2018, Korea was highly dependent on imports from Japan, as it imported 46 percent of its supply from there. However, imports from Japan plummeted in July 2019 when the Japanese government imposed an export curb on Korea. Korea’s imports of hydrogen fluoride from Japan stood at 3,026 tons in June 2019 but dropped to one-sixth the amount — 529.9 tons — in July, and finally 0.3 tons in October 2019.


After President Yoon’s announcement of the compensation plan and his meeting with Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, Korea’s imports of hydrogen fluoride exceeded 1,000 tons for the first time since Japan’s economic retaliation against Korea in 2019. This can be seen that re-establishing trade, something that can economically benefit both sides of the deal, was valued by the ‘future oriented’ plan.


In addition to the economic relationship with Japan, Korea and Japan are both crucial East Asian allies of the United States, who are capable of countering Russia and China's growing influence in the region. President Biden has commended Prime Minister Kishida and President Yoon on their recent efforts to improve bilateral ties. Some have analyzed that President Yoon's solution resulted from pressure from Washington, for Korea to increase effective political cooperation with Japan. Therefore, the proposed solution was undoubtedly a difficult but necessary one for Korea to restore the strained relationship with Japan as well as the damaged economy.


Nonetheless, the historical conflict is still yet to be resolved. This can largely be attributed to Korea and Japan holding conflicting perspectives on the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1910, during which Imperial Japan annexed the Korean Empire (which South Korea claims to have succeeded). Japan argues that the Japanese government legally annexed Korea under international law. On the other hand, Korea claims that because Emperor Sunjong refused to sign the treaty the treaty is illegitimate and illegal. For Korea, acknowledging the legality of Japan's occupation would mean denying the country's foundation, given its core values. The Korean constitution states that the country "inherits the noble spirit of the 3.1 Independence Movement," a nationwide uprising against Japanese colonial rule in Korea. The movement was evidence that Koreans did not accept Japan occupation, which they believed was illegitimate. Therefore, Korea cannot step back in the historical dispute. This is also a major reason why many Koreans disagree with the new compensation method, as the Japanese government’s actions and words are still aligned with their past argument that the occupation was legal.


Thus, Korea faces a dilemma between the past and the future. If Korea chooses to focus on the past and continues to make decisions based on past disputes, it may harm the relationship and trade with Japan. On the other hand, choosing the future and conceding to Japan's argument may weaken the legitimacy of the country's foundation.


While this may sound impossible, The right answer to this dilemma lies in choosing both.

Given the interconnectedness of a country's past and future, solving such a dilemma is inherently challenging. In that sense, President Yoon's "third-party compensation" method was not a wise decision. It was a hastily made decision that revealed the Korean government's desperation to restore the relationship with Japan without considering public opinion, resulting in a case where Korea gave up its own foundational values and sovereignty by giving the Japanese companies impunity.


So, what direction should South Korea take?

First and foremost, effective communication between the government and its citizens is crucial. The Yoon administration failed to discuss the "third-party compensation" solution with the public and did not seek the victims' consent before making the decision. It was another instance where the government failed to represent the people of its country truly. The Korean government must consider feedback from both the public and experts in the field.

Secondly, there needs to be an increase in private-sector exchanges between the two countries. Currently, debates on sensitive topics only occur within the domestic politics of each country, creating echo chambers that further divide the nations and foster radical opinions. More effort must be made to genuinely listen to the other side's argument. Experts should have opportunities to exchange thoughts on sensitive topics and actively debate pressing matters beyond superficial interactions between governments. Additionally, students should have the opportunity to interact with each other to better understand different perspectives and educate the youth, so the next generation remember the past and continue the open discourse. Historical problems should be brought to the surface and discussed bilaterally instead of being confined to domestic discourse, with each side clinging to their arguments. Especially, such communication will prevent misassumption of other’s actions and help solve disputes peacefully.


Finally, the Korean government must find a way to ensure that historical issues do not hinder economic and other strategic cooperation for the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region. Despite their fundamentally different stances on historical issues, both countries share liberal values of peace and democracy. Therefore, Korea should actively seek middle ground to maintain a stable relationship with japan while negotiating to effectively resolve the historical grievances.


In conclusion, neither the national identity of the past nor the national interest in the future should be sacrificed. The Korean government must take a long-term approach to the dilemma with Japan that they currently face and strive to find a balanced solution. While the "third-party compensation" method proposed by President Yoon Suk-yeol may have been a hasty decision that lacked proper public consultation and resulted in concerns about sovereignty, it highlights the urgent need for effective communication and citizen engagement between Korean and Japan .

Works Cited

Choe, S.-H. (2018, November 29). South Korean Court Orders Mitsubishi of Japan to Pay for Forced Wartime Labor. The New York Times. Retrieved August 12, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/29/world/asia/south-korea-wartime-compensation-japan.html.


Choi, E. (2022). (rep.). 한국과 일본, 우리는 서로에게 무엇인가: 한국과 일본의 상호인식과 한일관계 [Korea and Japan: Our Mutual Perception and the Korea-Japan Relationship]. Asan Institute for Policy Studies. Retrieved June 25, 2023, from https://www.asaninst.org/contents/한국과-일본-우리는-서로에게-무엇인가-한국과-일본/.


Ju, J. (2020, October 23). The Japan-Korea Dispute Over the 1965 Agreement. The Diplomat. Retrieved August 12, 2022, from https://thediplomat.com/2020/10/the-japan-korea-dispute-over-the-1965-agreement/.


Kyodo, J. (2023, March 11). Survey finds 60% of South Koreans oppose Japan wartime labor dispute resolution. The Japan Times. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2023/03/11/national/politics-diplomacy/japan-south-korea-wartime-labor-public-opinion-polls/


Lee, H. Y. (2023, March 6). 한국, 강제징용 해법 발표...윤석열 대통령 “미래지향적 결단...한일관계 새 시대” [South Korea Announces Forced Labor Solution... President Yoon Suk-yeol “Future-oriented Decision... New Era of Korea-Japan Relations”]. VOA. https://www.voakorea.com/a/6991355.html


Maizland, L. (2019, August 5). The Japan-South Korea Trade Dispute: What to Know. Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved August 12, 2022, from https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/japan-south-korea-trade-dispute-what-know


Readout of President Biden’s Meeting with Prime Minister Kishida Fumio of Japan and President Yoon Suk Yeol of the Republic of Korea. (2023, May 21). The White House. Retrieved June 25, 2023, from https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/05/21/readout-of-president-bidens-meeting-with-prime-minister-kishida-fumio-of-japan-and-president-yoon-suk-yeol-of-the-republic-of-korea/.


South Korea hits back at Japan in WW2 dispute. (2019, August 12). BBC News. Retrieved August 12, 2022, from https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49317461.


Yamaguchi, M., & Kim, T.-H. (2023, March 14). Japan, S. Korea Summit must overcome history to renew ties. AP NEWS. https://apnews.com/article/japan-south-korea-summit-what-to-know-e4dc91a1405a0b71461b2ff2642dd12a


서울신문 [Seoul Shinmun]. (2023, March 14). “尹정부 강제동원 해법 너무 충격” 목소리 낸 서울대 교수 [A Seoul National University professor expressed his shock at the Yoon adminidation’s forced labor solution]. 서울신문 [Seoul Shinmun]. https://www.seoul.co.kr/news/newsView.php?id=20230314500178


60 views

コメント


bottom of page