Breathing life into Northeast Asia alliances
Listen
After the May 2024 China–Japan–South Korea trilateral summit in Seoul, some may be disappointed that the summit amounted to a diplomatic gesture rather than a forum for serious progress. But given the complex dynamics in Northeast Asia and the ongoing US–China rivalry, the summit’s emphasis on cooperation could pave the way for more stable relations between the three countries.
The joint agreement from the summit emphasised six key areas — people-to-people exchanges, sustainable development, economic cooperation, public health, technology cooperation and disaster relief. While the summit didn’t delve into more sensitive issues, this may be the most effective way forward for maintaining cooperative relations between South Korea, Japan and China.
In the context of ongoing US–China competition, both South Korea and Japan find themselves navigating a complex relationship with China. As South Korea’s largest trading partner and a key market for Japanese exports, China’s economic influence is critical. Conflict in areas like the Taiwan Strait could severely impact the economies of South Korea and Japan. Maintaining open lines of communication with China is not merely advantageous — it is essential to mitigate potential conflict and safeguard economic stability.
The past decade has been tumultuous for South Korea, Japan and China. Chinese assertive rhetoric following South Korea’s THAAD missile system deployment and Japan’s dispute surrounding the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands have fuelled public and political antagonism towards China. Meanwhile, the geopolitical significance of the US–South Korea–Japan alliance was underscored by the 2023 Camp David summit.
While South Korea and Japan should consider the US–South Korea–Japan alliance as the primary geopolitical framework in Northeast Asia, they should also view trilateral cooperation between China, South Korea and Japan as a complementary secondary axis. The interdependence between the three Northeast Asian countries makes it impossible to view each other solely as adversaries. It is unrealistic to expect consistent warm relations among the three nations, but aiming for a medium temperature, rather than a cold one, would be a pragmatic approach.
South Korea and Japan find themselves in a challenging position between the United States and China, making people-to-people ties crucial — particularly those centred around private industry in various non-sensitive fields. The 2024 summit provided a valuable platform to enhance communication.
The summit pushed forward the revival of talks on the South Korea–Japan–China free trade agreement. Given this, the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA) model could serve as an example for enhancing economic and social connections between countries that rely heavily on each other economically but differ in economic size.
North American cooperation relies on the intertwined economies of the United States, Canada and Mexico, where the US economy is the largest by far. The success of the USMCA model shows that recognising and aligning national interests can lead to win-win outcomes. Canada and Mexico got better access to the massive US market, boosting their economies, while the United States benefited from an expanded market and cheaper production costs.
USMCA also significantly contributed to people-to-people exchange by facilitating mobility and building robust networks across the region. Its robust dispute settlement system contributed to stable rules and norms by reducing trade and investment risk.
The agreement also opened up cooperation in non-economic areas. For instance, the three nations have created a coordinated approach to health security to deal with the threat of disease outbreaks and have institutionalised the North American Leaders’ Summit, which has broadened its discussions to include issues such as climate change and migration.
The economic landscape in Northeast Asia is uniquely shaped by China’s dominance, similar to the United States’ role in North America. This presents both challenges and opportunities. While economic dependence might be a concern, South Korean and Japanese policymakers need to carefully examine the benefits of engaging with China. It is essential to create a framework that protects intellectual property and encourages sustainable business practices.
A trilateral trade commission, similar to the one in the USMCA model, could help manage these issues. Such mechanisms could also boost digital trade and support small and medium enterprises.
Beyond economic mechanisms, structured educational exchange programs could be impactful. These initiatives could involve student and faculty exchanges, joint research projects and the establishment of satellite campuses. Tourism and cultural exchanges also serve as vital platforms for deepening mutual understanding and respect.
Of course, there are significant distinctions between the two regions that complicate the direct application of the USMCA framework in Northeast Asia. There are entrenched historical disputes and political conflicts, such as the territorial controversies over the Dokdo/Takeshima and Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands and issues related to comfort women.
Initiating economic cooperation in areas less sensitive to political conflict could serve as an effective approach, mirroring the early stages of integration in North America. This could involve the harmonisation of regulatory frameworks and the promotion of cross-border investments, enhancing the flexibility of trade and fostering people-to-people exchange.
The May 2024 summit played a crucial role in furthering cooperation amid complex geopolitical tensions. By borrowing from the USMCA’s focus on private industry cooperation, people-to-people exchange and institutional mechanisms, the three countries can use this opportunity to build a resilient framework that contributes to long-term regional stability.
Chan Mo Ku is former military officer at the Republic of Korea–United States Combined Forces Command and a Master of Arts candidate at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. He also worked at the Wilson Center as a Joint Intern between the Canada and Korea teams.